<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23536">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>For instance, when assigning midi channels to a
soft synth, I always use assign receives to all, or whatever that's called, and
it's done.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=patrick@pdaudio.net href="mailto:patrick@pdaudio.net">Patrick
Perdue</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=rwp@reaaccess.com
href="mailto:rwp@reaaccess.com">Reapers Without Peepers</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, December 07, 2013 6:54
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [RWP] sends and Receives in
the latest version of reaper?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Yes, a send is just a receive in reverse. Where it makes sense
to use receives rather than sends is more down to work-flow and efficiency.
The result is really the same.<BR>It's much faster, for example, to set a
bunch of receivs to a common destination track than it is to move to each
individual track and route sends from each track to your
destination.<BR><BR>On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:22 AM, Indigo <<A
href="mailto:33indigo@charter.net">33indigo@charter.net</A>>
wrote:<BR><BR>> I welcome correction, but I believe a send from track 1 to
track 2 does the same thing as a receive placed on track 2 that brings data
from track 1.<BR>> I don't think there's any advantage of creating both,
only one will do.<BR>> <BR>> On 12/7/2013 2:32 AM, trahern culver
wrote:<BR>>> thanks man so am i rite in thinking that if i set up a send
on track 1 to go to track 2 i would not have to set up a receive on track
2?<BR>>> <BR>>> also am i rite in thinking that if i wanted to
send track 1 to track 2 i would set up the send on track one and not track 2?
kind regards trey.<BR>>>
_______________________________________________<BR>>> RWP mailing
list<BR>>> <A
href="mailto:RWP@reaaccess.com">RWP@reaaccess.com</A><BR>>> <A
href="http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com">http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com</A><BR>>>
<BR>> <BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> RWP
mailing list<BR>> <A
href="mailto:RWP@reaaccess.com">RWP@reaaccess.com</A><BR>> <A
href="http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com">http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com</A><BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>RWP
mailing list<BR><A href="mailto:RWP@reaaccess.com">RWP@reaaccess.com</A><BR><A
href="http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com">http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com</A></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>