OTR v2.3.05 Update Released (January 4, 2024) ! Orchestral Template For Reaper Release Thread

[storyteller]

Personally, I think it is much more helpful seeing the envelope icon on the horizontal track. Its easy to not realize a track, out of hundreds, is on write and you start messing with things. Its odd, because on the default reaper theme, you are able to see the envelope mode in horizontal tracks without having to "increase the track height" as you say:




BTW: I just pre-ordered!

Oh. Hang on. Let me clarify. In the default OTR theme (which is based off of the Reaper 4.0 default theme), the tracks use the "global layout default" track type. Since OTR uses up a lot of text space, I chose a greater text area layout as the default versus something with more buttons. Those are all easily changeable though. So, you can certainly change the OTR theme to another one that has that icon on the narrow view of the track.

I assumed you meant the default layout with OTR. Sorry about the misunderstanding. Also, other themes may have different buttons and such in places you might find useful. For some reason, the default Reaper 5.0 theme removed the large text areas, or I would have based the theme off of that one actually. All of the color and such should be retained when you change themes.

 

[jemu999]

Oh. Hang on. Let me clarify. In the default OTR theme (which is based off of the Reaper 4.0 default theme), the tracks use the "global layout default" track type. Since OTR uses up a lot of text space, I chose a greater text area layout as the default versus something with more buttons. Those are all easily changeable though. So, you can certainly change the OTR theme to another one that has that icon on the narrow view of the track.

I assumed you meant the default layout with OTR. Sorry about the misunderstanding. Also, other themes may have different buttons and such in places you might find useful. For some reason, the default Reaper 5.0 theme removed the large text areas, or I would have based the theme off of that one actually. All of the color and such should be retained when you change themes.

Ok, I see. So yes, my picture is based off of Reaper 5.0 default theme, where as OTR is based off of 4.0. Crap.

So... Storyteller... with all of your Reaper wisdom... is there absolutely no way to modify the "global layout default" by adding the envelope icon there??? I understand the need for longer text space, which we definitely need. However, there is still space to add the envelope icon...
?
?

 

[storyteller]

Ok, I see. So yes, my picture is based off of Reaper 5.0 default theme, where as OTR is based off of 4.0. Crap.

So... Storyteller... with all of your Reaper wisdom... is there absolutely no way to modify the "global layout default" by adding the envelope icon there??? I understand the need for longer text space, which we definitely need. However, there is still space to add the envelope icon...
?
?

Pretty much everything is able to be modded theme-wise in Reaper but I haven't dug deeply into theme editing. It is kind of its own separate animal. But with that said, I'll be happy to look into it as soon as I get the opportunity. If there is something that can benefit everyone's workflow, then of course it is something I want to explore.

As for the extra space, all of the images and videos thus far have been captured on an iMac 5k display (effectively 2.5k with twice the pixel count). So you have to consider lower resolutions are going to lose some of that extra text space too. Adding buttons may not be the answer (but maybe..not sure yet), so possibly a separate theme that substitutes something out on the default layout may be a better approach. Just thinking out loud. I'll have to look into it and see the lay of the land first.

 

[Rasmus Hartvig]

This is all very intriguing, and coming at the exact moment when I'm in the process of ditching Cubase for Reaper.

Here's my most pressing question: I've been using Reaper for years doing sound design, and over time I've built custom scripts and actions, and have come to be very dependent on SWS contextual toolbars (and ReaPack).
Will OTR work nicely alongside my own customizations, or will I have to surrender - so to speak - to it's specific paradigm?

 

[gregh]

This is all very intriguing, and coming at the exact moment when I'm in the process of ditching Cubase for Reaper.

Here's my most pressing question: I've been using Reaper for years doing sound design, and over time I've built custom scripts and actions, and have come to be very dependent on SWS contextual toolbars (and ReaPack).
Will OTR work nicely alongside my own customizations, or will I have to surrender - so to speak - to it's specific paradigm?

I can't respond as if storyteller but I have recently discovered the power of the Reaper portable install. This means you can have multiple independent versions of Reaper all running at the same time but with utterly different configurations. You could have a stock OTR version and your current customised version and another version where you test out your favourite customisations with OTR until it works as you want (or maybe doesn't). You can cut and paste between these versions.
I was going to leave Reaper because I was sick of having to reconfigure and adjust according to updates or project demand and was worried about scripts getting broken and so on. But now I can get a Reaper version for particular tasks and just keep it as is, never update anything. Plus have other versions that do get updated etc etc.
May be irrelevant to you but thought I would mention this in case it was useful

 

[Rasmus Hartvig]

I have recently discovered the power of the Reaper portable install. This means you can have multiple independent versions of Reaper all running at the same time but with utterly different configurations.

Yeah, portable install is great and it's how I'm using Reaper now. It would however be cumbersome to maintain multiple Reaper installs, not to mention vastly different workflows and hotkeys. But I guess there would be some way to share some settings across installs (junctions / symlinks). Hopefully @storyteller can shed some light on how deep the OTR "take over" goes.

 

[gregh]

Yeah, portable install is great and it's how I'm using Reaper now. It would however be cumbersome to maintain multiple Reaper installs, not to mention vastly different workflows and hotkeys. But I guess there would be some way to share some settings across installs (junctions / symlinks). Hopefully @storyteller can shed some light on how deep the OTR "take over" goes.

yeah I can see that - for me I have many different types of project (working with artists on various installations / video art / develop Kontakt instrument etc) and it is not possible to have a single Reaper version that doesn't end up falling apart - in my own mind if nowhere else

 

[storyteller]

This is all very intriguing, and coming at the exact moment when I'm in the process of ditching Cubase for Reaper.

Here's my most pressing question: I've been using Reaper for years doing sound design, and over time I've built custom scripts and actions, and have come to be very dependent on SWS contextual toolbars (and ReaPack).
Will OTR work nicely alongside my own customizations, or will I have to surrender - so to speak - to it's specific paradigm?

OTR will arrive preconfigured on install. All you have to do (on OS X), is drag the folder from the DMG installer to Applications. On Windows, one it is unzipped, you just move the folder where-ever you would like. Essentially OTR is a self-contained portable install of Reaper + all of the OTR customizations. It is already setup and preconfigured to work with SWS & Reapack.

So what that means is that OTR will operate independently of any current Reaper installs. If you want to add your mods to OTR, then all you would do is add them to the OTR install in the same way you added them to your current Reaper install. Depending on what you've added, everything should work as expected.

Hope that helps! OTR won't march in and have a hostile takeover of your pre-existing setup

 

[storyteller]

Yeah, portable install is great and it's how I'm using Reaper now. It would however be cumbersome to maintain multiple Reaper installs, not to mention vastly different workflows and hotkeys. But I guess there would be some way to share some settings across installs (junctions / symlinks). Hopefully @storyteller can shed some light on how deep the OTR "take over" goes.

I explored using symlinks/etc, but Reaper does not play well with those. If the file is not physically located where it expects it, Reaper becomes somewhat split-personality in how it reacts. For example, aliases are ignored. Symlinks can cause half of Reaper's brain to think certain files are there, and half of it to see a symlink as a tiny blob of data that doesn't mean anything to Reaper. So what you end up with in the various ways of trying to ghost files between locations is Reaper behaving erratically and potentially even not recognizing the entire user configuration. Strange, I know. But, that is what it does. I really, really wanted to create a solution for multi-install management with the launch of OTR (to be able to give to the entire Reaper community) - I spent a long time down that rabbit hole - but it just wasn't feasible within the launch period. I'm guessing that is why it hasn't natively been added by the Reaper devs either yet.

If someone wanted to create the solution...(this get's a little technical in explanation)
For all portable installs to work harmoniously together (as it stands today), there would have to be a separate app that would copy each Reaper install's user data, compile them all into a unified version, then copy the unified version to a "master" Reaper install that would reflect all of the versions together. At that point, it would also have to have some sort of a user interface so the user could pick which appearance would be the default, which menus to use, which buttons to have on custom menus, etc. Then it would have to manage conflicts with third parties, like SWS. For example, if one version used "auto color" in SWS and another used "auto icon," you'd have to pick between the two since, chances are, they would not play well together. But the biggest hurdle after that solution is created (which would already be A LOT of work) is that Apple requires apps to be "sandboxed" so things like what I just described are impossible to do programmatically without making the user copy/paste from all of the Reaper install locations...especially the Library/App Support folder that Reaper uses on default installs (not portable installs).

I know that explanation is long winded, but for the technically minded, I hope it sheds some light on why this could or (would not) be possible. If it were just script management, then that is a lot easier to duplicate between projects programmatically (like ReaPack, but with your individual scripts loaded to Github). But that is still not a full solution.

 

[storyteller]

New video posted demonstrating OTR's "Cue Manager" which is how OTR natively handles sub-projects within its workflow. I think you'll find it as a great method to begin sketches on a feature film, but also as a great way to manage all of the cues as they get completed along the way.

Hope you enjoy.



Also - just a side note, I should be posting the TrackPack listings this weekend. I'll probably make a video on those as well when I get a chance. The final tally for the 11 TrackPacks consists of over 1600 total tracks (some articulation based, but most are single lane VIs with drum kits being pre-setup with the outputs mapped for multichannel mixing within OTR). All of these can be added to a session at the push of a button. HOWEVER - I want to stress this... It may sound exciting to build a 1000+ track template because ... well, with OTR+Reaper, it is easy to do. But, the best way - and most efficient way - to handle your workflow is not to load in everything and try to save a monster template. That's why TrackPacks exist The way to handle your template creation for your sessions is to create the basic instrumentations you use regularly and then use the pre-made TrackPacks or create your own TrackPacks to load in the extra stuff with only a right click. It is an entirely different concept to how other DAWs handle this problem. Take advantage of the simplicity of a Template, knowing that it can be as complex as you want it to be when the time comes.

 

[jemu999]

New video posted demonstrating OTR's "Cue Manager" which is how OTR natively handles sub-projects within its workflow. I think you'll find it as a great method to begin sketches on a feature film, but also as a great way to manage all of the cues as they get completed along the way.

Hope you enjoy.

Very good video, thanks! Subprojects are definitely something very useful in film scoring, which, at least for my needs, is very important. I do have a question though. Does OTR include any useful scripts or custom elements as it pertains to Reaper's tempo mapping??

In anticipation of OTR's release, I have been experimenting with Reaper, and I must say, that the way Reaper uses tempo mapping leaves a lot to be desired, IMO. Very frustrating in fact. (I don't want to go into details here and derail this OTR thread) But obviously, tempo mapping is critical in aligning music to film when scoring. Curious if OTR addresses this in anyway?

*Edit: Does OTR include these???? https://wiki.cockos.com/wiki/index.php/Tempo_manipulation_with_SWS

Thanks storyteller!

 

[just2high]

Interesting way of incorporating subprojects into the workflow, I'm curious though, why go through the trouble of creating a separate project from the sketch? What's different from the main OTR template that keeps you from just saving the entire base OTR stack as a track template and inserting it below the sketch tracks?

 

[Sekkle]

Thanks for the video on sub projects Storyteller!

As just2high mentioned rather than using sketches could we just jump straight in with the full OTR template for each cue and sketch in them directly? It would save time as I tend to sketch with different instruments and sounds depending on whats needed. I tend to mix as I sketch/compose too so it would make sense to just go direct to OTR.

The one other thing I have been looking into is the way Reaper handles tempo mapping, grid warping etc. Similarly to tojemu999 this is one function that's really going to determine if I can use Reaper for scoring to picture. I think SWS has what I need (from what I could read online) and from my understanding this will be included in OTR. The time warp function in Cubase is pretty essential and if Reaper can manage something like this along with sub projects and everything you have created in OTR it could well be the ultimate system.

I've been imagining of the possibilities of sub projects over the last few days as I have been juggling multiple cues in a Cubase project..

 

[storyteller]

Does OTR include these???? https://wiki.cockos.com/wiki/index.php/Tempo_manipulation_with_SWS

Thanks storyteller!

You're welcome! Making videos to show off OTR is fun. It is all about shortcuts and that is what sets OTR apart from other DAW workflows. So, in the spirit of that, I made a video to answer your question. The short answer, though, is YES.

 

[storyteller]

Interesting way of incorporating subprojects into the workflow, I'm curious though, why go through the trouble of creating a separate project from the sketch? What's different from the main OTR template that keeps you from just saving the entire base OTR stack as a track template and inserting it below the sketch tracks?

Thanks for the video on sub projects Storyteller!

As just2high mentioned rather than using sketches could we just jump straight in with the full OTR template for each cue and sketch in them directly? It would save time as I tend to sketch with different instruments and sounds depending on whats needed. I tend to mix as I sketch/compose too so it would make sense to just go direct to OTR.

So these are both good questions and I think addressing them together is the best way to answer it.... because honestly, I wanted to make it one step as well (and perhaps in the future there will be a way). However, there are a number of reasons that OTR can not insert the stack of tracks that make up each template.

The first reason is just out of precaution for user-error. Assuming everything could technically work, the templated "TrackPack" version of OTR would always need to be inserted into a blank template only. This is because OTR uses the index of certain "controller tracks" to perform some functions. Could it have been programmed differently to accommodate uses like the one described with subprojects and use logic other than required track indexes? Yep. That was the first thing I did actually. However, it could potentially negatively affect the performance on large templates if the user got "drag happy" with some of the "controller" tracks when certain OTR processes are run. So instead, of allowing the potential for it to cause performance issues, I chose a "don't move or re-name the tracks with a lock icon on the track and it won't break" method. It is part of the one single golden rule of OTR to make sure everything works while allowing the user the freedom to do nearly anything they desire. BUT...all of that said... there are technically other reasons it cannot be implemented... yet.

The second reason is actually the real reason why it cannot be done. OTR uses a pre-configured set of tracks that are initially hidden from view. Some of these tracks (like the FX and VCA sections) are hidden by default. To save a "Track Template" each parent track in a project must be visible. And while having the FX and VCA sections visible by default may be a great compromise with this option, there are also required "hidden" tracks that would have to be made visible which would make inserting the project for the first time more work with trying to hide everything appropriately than it is worth......But there is still a solution available at OTR's launch that is an even better approach and will not have the potential for user error....

If you want to use OTR projects from the start (instead of creating a Cue Sketcher from within the Cue Manager), all you have to do is go ahead and create a blank project folder that will serve as your cue template for all future projects. Inside of this folder, add X# of blank OTR Cue projects and a blank Cue Manager project. This will serve as your Master project template. Now, when you receive your film/video from your client, simply copy this template folder to a new location, add your video into the folder. Click on the Cue Manager project and choose Insert->Media->[Your Subproject Cue Here] instead of choosing Insert->Create New Subproject. This would actually shortcut the whole process start-to-finish.

 

[just2high]

So these are both good questions and I think addressing them together is the best way to answer it.... because honestly, I wanted to make it one step as well (and perhaps in the future there will be a way). However, there are a number of reasons that OTR can not insert the stack of tracks that make up each template.

The first reason is just out of precaution for user-error. Assuming everything could technically work, the templated "TrackPack" version of OTR would always need to be inserted into a blank template only. This is because OTR uses the index of certain "controller tracks" to perform some functions. Could it have been programmed differently to accommodate uses like the one described with subprojects and use logic other than required track indexes? Yep. That was the first thing I did actually. However, it could potentially negatively affect the performance on large templates if the user got "drag happy" with some of the "controller" tracks when certain OTR processes are run. So instead, of allowing the potential for it to cause performance issues, I chose a "don't move or re-name the tracks with a lock icon on the track and it won't break" method. It is part of the one single golden rule of OTR to make sure everything works while allowing the user the freedom to do nearly anything they desire. BUT...all of that said... there are technically other reasons it cannot be implemented... yet.

The second reason is actually the real reason why it cannot be done. OTR uses a pre-configured set of tracks that are initially hidden from view. Some of these tracks (like the FX and VCA sections) are hidden by default. To save a "Track Template" each parent track in a project must be visible. And while having the FX and VCA sections visible by default may be a great compromise with this option, there are also required "hidden" tracks that would have to be made visible which would make inserting the project for the first time more work with trying to hide everything appropriately than it is worth......But there is still a solution available at OTR's launch that is an even better approach and will not have the potential for user error....

If you want to use OTR projects from the start (instead of creating a Cue Sketcher from within the Cue Manager), all you have to do is go ahead and create a blank project folder that will serve as your cue template for all future projects. Inside of this folder, add X# of blank OTR Cue projects and a blank Cue Manager project. This will serve as your Master project template. Now, when you receive your film/video from your client, simply copy this template folder to a new location, add your video into the folder. Click on the Cue Manager project and choose Insert->Media->[Your Subproject Cue Here] instead of choosing Insert->Create New Subproject. This would actually shortcut the whole process start-to-finish.

Yeah this method 2 makes more sense to me. I generally spot then write in a notation program and just import midi. Even if I do a sketch in reaper its part of a full template so I can just transfer stuff over directly.

 

[Sekkle]

Thanks Storyteller. That's a great method for using the subprojects and also the time warp video was a good help in explaining how it works too.

 

[gregh]

Hi Jonathan / Storyteller - have you thought about how you are going to go about support? You are running multiple forums at the moment, do you think you will continue that or focus in on one forum in particular? I am loving your videos so I imagine most support will be - hey have a look at this video - but other stuff might be more along the lines of - sorry that is not possible - or, great idea I will see if I can do that etc etc

 

[storyteller]

Hi Johnathan / Storyteller - have you thought about how you are going to go about support? You are running multiple forums at the moment, do you think you will continue that or focus in on one forum in particular? I am loving your videos so I imagine most support will be - hey have a look at this video - but other stuff might be more along the lines of - sorry that is not possible - or, great idea I will see if I can do that etc etc

Thanks for the feedback on the videos! I think seeing things in action is often the easiest way to demonstrate "how to" topics - especially in something like software. As for support, the best way would be to contact me through [email protected] With that said, I will continue to be active both here and on the Cockos/Reaper board. I'm certainly more active here than on the Reaper board. I imagine users will be sharing their experiences in both places though. I'm also just a PM away here on VIC. You can check my history and see I've been consistently active over the last year since I joined. And you can always tag me in a thread if a discussion could benefit from my attention.

 

[storyteller]

Just a kind reminder to everyone. There are under 24hrs left to take advantage of the pre-order bundle and sale price for OTR. After the official release tomorrow, prices will be set at normal, retail pricing and the bonus 11 TrackPacks included the preorder bundle with OTR will only be available as separate purchases to OTR.