[RWP] May I suggest a change.

[Scott Chesworth]

Hmmm, I'm in favour of the idea because it's less keystrokes
sometimes. Then again I'm against the idea because items are an
integral part of Reaper's design, and for the most part I think
sticking to standards in products like this should be the way to go.

In other words, a toggle setting would be ideal, that's if it can be done.

Scott

On 9/17/10, Monkey Pusher <monkeypusher69 at gmail.com> wrote:
> ok true i can see now why that would be useful. I wonder if it would
> be possible to toggle that option on and off?
>
> On 9/17/10, Derek Lane <derek at pdaudio.net> wrote:
>> I like the navigation by items being an option because it helps when
>> trying
>> to synk files of different tempos, or see where punchins were without
>> having
>> to set marks.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Monkey Pusher" <monkeypusher69 at gmail.com>
>> To: "Reapers Without Peepers" <rwp at reaaccess.com>
>> Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 1:59 PM
>> Subject: [RWP] May I suggest a change.
>>
>>
>>> ok so just throwing this out there and curious to know what others
>>> think as well.So the process of selecting an item in reaper with
>>> reaaccess is  use up or down arrows to select a track, then ctrl +
>>> left or right arrows to navigate to the item you want, then ctrl +
>>> shift + [ & ] to set the start and end points  then you can cut copy
>>> paste or delete.. I was wonder if it would be possible to re work it
>>> to where you can skip the ctrl + left or right arrow to select the
>>> item. For example. the up and down arrow will select an entire track,
>>> then  one would use the ctrl + shift +[ &] to  set the selection thus
>>> making only the area  in between the start and end points selected
>>> instead of the entire track. iT seems this would save an extra step,
>>> What do you guys think. For me who work mostly with music when editing
>>> like a 3 to 5 minute song it can get quite tedius going through all
>>> those steps and my suggestion seems like it would streamline the
>>> process. Would it for your workflows or not? Curious to hear what
>>> others think.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RWP mailing list
>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RWP mailing list
>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RWP mailing list
> RWP at reaaccess.com
> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>