[RWP] Audio slates in Reaper, is there any point?

[Jim Snowbarger]

Like most, I would guess, I say use whatever  allows you to concentrate on 
the creative process, and focus less on the mechanics.   With society's 
endless enfatuation with technology, there is a terrible tendancy to allow 
the tool to shape the creative content.  I object.
The creative content should drive the use of the tool.  From that 
standpoint, whatever tool requires less patience and thinking on my part, 
will be best at getting out of the way.   In my life, over 40 years of being 
a wannabee musician, I have had the increasing sense that the tools, the 
technology, is taking the humanity out of music.

And then, if you are a jobber, and people are paying you by the hour, the 
client will be happiest if you are not spending valuable minutes screwing 
around with your gadgets, and struggling with your accessibility.  So, easy 
is important.  Way more important than being on the bleeding edge.
Just my two cents.




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jes" <jessmith at samobile.net>
To: "Reapers Without Peepers" <rwp at reaaccess.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: [RWP] Audio slates in Reaper, is there any point?


>I looked at that post about the Behringer BCF 2000. So should we, as blind 
>people, just throw out all analog hardware, and just use digital mixers, 
>effects processors, etc.?
>
>
> Jes
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 14, 2014, at 10:42 PM, John Schucker <gwynn at tds.net> wrote:
>>
>> I have no idea why people think daws are special. A daw is basically 
>> replacing your tape machine. OK, a lot of other stuff too, once you get 
>> into processing with plugins. But my point is, even though you can get a 
>> hell of a lot more tracks in than 24 or 47 or whatever analog deck X 
>> supports, tracking is tracking.
>>
>> My point being, if it made sense to do that sort of thing with analog 
>> recordings, it probably makes sense to do it in a daw, for precisely the 
>> same reasons. You might say, well we don't need that kind of 
>> organization, because we can just label tracks or clips or whatever, but 
>> that doesn't really matter. You're still doing the same thing, just not 
>> in audio. Of course if you don't record with takes and just redo your 
>> stuff until you get it the way you like it, overwriting/undoing the 
>> previous take(s), then of course it doesn't make any sense, as you don't 
>> have multiple takes to choose from. You might also reduce the number of 
>> takes and mixes, e.g. if you can immediately reject a take/mix. That's 
>> maybe a difference we have, if we're recording for ourselves we can make 
>> those decisions, whereas if you're recording for somebody else, in theory 
>> they get to judge the takes/mixes, or at least have some input.
>>
>> That's why I don't get some of these people who feel you can just do any 
>> old thing and fix it later with EQ and effects and all in the daw. Nuh 
>> uh, I say. You still gotta be a decent musician. You still gotta play. 
>> Similarly, a compressor plug is till a compressor, tracking is still 
>> tracking, EQ is still EQ, and so on. I'm sure daws have given us effects 
>> unique to them, or at least, if nothing totally new, then new ways to 
>> manipulate something like reverb. But at bottom, a daw is just doing the 
>> exact same job as the hardware it replaced. So my assumption is, if it 
>> made sense then, it still makes sense now, until proven otherwise. And 
>> that generally works pretty well, because honestly, way less has changed 
>> with daws than some people think. I mean in terms of what you're actually 
>> doing with recording and all of that, the basic stuff. That's why I like 
>> this site, it cuts through a lot of the bullshit. And, agree or disagree 
>> with him, at least he's speaking from experience. Tak
> e, for i
> nstance, his post on the Behringer BCF-2000.
>>
>> http://www.recordingreview.com/blog/
>>
>>> On 7/14/2014 8:14 PM, Jes wrote:
>>> Hey guys.
>>> So, I am quite fascinated with analog studios and listening to outtakes. 
>>> Often the engineers in the control room would announce an audio slate 
>>> before a take began. IE, Smith take 1, take 2, take 15, etc. Is there 
>>> any point in doing that anymore with daws? If so, why?
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>