[Rwp] OSARA keymap

[Chris Belle]

Reaccess was a good thing, but I'm taking the attitude of this is a new 
tool being developed,
so time to move on and take advantage of how the new thing can work 
better rather than always getting hung up on what the old thing did.

Of course if someone did that to me with sonar, I'd scream bloody 
murder, so I guess it just depends on who you are and what you're used 
to 'grin'.

So far, I'm really liking the new thing, and it seems a whole lot more 
reliable and less quirky than poor old reaccess.


On 2/23/2015 12:03 PM, Derek Lane via RWP wrote:
> I wonder if there is a way to compare reapers default action list, 
> with that when reaaccess is added?
> That would make life easier, I would think because we wouldn't have to 
> play "find that action"
> As a community we could prioritise things we wanted from that list.
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Teh via RWP" 
> <rwp at bluegrasspals.com>
> To: "Reapers Without Peepers" <rwp at bluegrasspals.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 5:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [Rwp] OSARA keymap
>
>
>> FWIW, I agree with most of this: single keys for common actions and 
>> reuse of the key with modifiers for... well... modifications of that 
>> concept. I personally find modifiers very quick to hit--much faster 
>> than hitting function keys. (In Sonar, set selection start and end 
>> are mapped to f9 and f10, and even after years of use, I still find 
>> this tedious on laptop keyboards, which are all I use these days.) 
>> However, I accept that others find modifiers as tedious as I do 
>> function keys. What I don't accept is that function keys are better 
>> than modified keys for mute, solo and arm. You can argue I'd "get use 
>> to it eventually", but I can equally argue the same for modified 
>> keys. There's also no easy way for a newcomer to remember this, which 
>> is very bad for such common actions. Unfortunately, that leaves us 
>> with changing the bindings for split, marker, etc.
>>
>> Concerning compatibility, I am of course very keen to copy the best 
>> from ReaAccess; that just makes sense. However, I will not simply do 
>> something just because ReaAccess did it if there is a better way. One 
>> has to learn the best from the past, but one should also always seek 
>> to improve beyond it.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jamie
>>
>> On 23/02/2015 7:36 PM, Scott Chesworth via RWP wrote:
>>> Hi John,
>>>
>>> Functions to import and export keymaps already exists in Reaper, so
>>> that's good news for anyone who wants to maintain a separate map.
>>>
>>> I see a few things about these common functions requiring more than
>>> single keys that'd make usability clunky:
>>>
>>> First, I find it hard to imagine how some of the current power users
>>> would be able to work at the pace they've built up if they had to hold
>>> down modifiers before some common functions and not others. You could
>>> argue that they're power users, they can just maintain their own
>>> mappings, but bigger picture, are we not trying to find something
>>> agreeable to most to lessen the amount of questions that'd need to be
>>> asked when someone is having a problem, and also pave the way for
>>> newbies to become power users who can work at this speed in the
>>> future?
>>>
>>> Second, the concept of common functions being bound to single
>>> unmodified keys, then bringing in the modifiers to carry out more
>>> global commands such as to unmute all tracks or announce which tracks
>>> are current muted throughout the project seems pretty elegant here,
>>> can't really think why anyone would want to hold down three keys to
>>> mute something when they could just hit one, and the three key combo
>>> is bound to something that's related, but used less often throughout a
>>> session.
>>>
>>> Third, requiring a control surface to be able to work at a decent pace
>>> just isn't a good thing fullstop, especially not in a DAW like Reaper
>>> where the price and footprint is kept intentionally low. There are
>>> fairly cheap single strip surfaces etc, but having owned a few, I
>>> found them clunky and slow to use for anything beyond very specific
>>> tasks, and unless OSARA is different, the amount of speech feedback
>>> you get by default when using a surface is practically none. The
>>> latter doesn't bother me really as I come from a Pro Tools background
>>> where that's always been the case, but I've seen plenty of Sonar users
>>> go goggle-eyed over how little the computer talks to Tools users, so I
>>> don't think that'd be met well by most users.
>>>
>>> FWIW, I'd grudgingly give up on the crusade for function keys being
>>> involved if we moved Mute, Solo and Arm to M, S and A respectively,
>>> because it'd be another parallel between the Reaper and Pro Tools
>>> keymaps that'd make my life easier in the long run, but i'd bet losing
>>> their instinctive muscle memory for markers and splitting items would
>>> cause fits of rage in some of the more accomplished editors. IMHO, the
>>> more parallels between DAWs the better, and with Pro Tools still being
>>> something of an industry standard, that makes a lot of sense. Trouble
>>> is, Tools is a long way away from being widely used by screen reader
>>> users, so I doubt my opinion will be shared by most people.
>>>
>>> Sorry to disagree over pretty much everything :)
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> James Teh
>> Email/MSN Messenger/Jabber: jamie at jantrid.net
>> Web site: http://www.jantrid.net/
>> Twitter: jcsteh
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RWP mailing list
>> RWP at bluegrasspals.com
>> http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RWP mailing list
> RWP at bluegrasspals.com
> http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp
>