My problem with Reaper's automation

Hi all, I know this has been discussed to death, by just my 2 cents: The reason I find automation in Reaper confusing and counter-intuitive is that: 1. In Read mode, there is no visual feedback from the changes to the trim fader: Right click on the fader and change the trim value and you get absolutely no visual feedback! So it's very easy to get confused and make mistakes. 2. In the Trim/Read mode, it's the exact opposite: There is visual feedback for the trim changes, but no visual feedback for the envelope changes (the faders don't move)! This also causes a lot of confusion. Personally, I think the easiest thing is to just have an option for disabling the trim fader in Read mode. So when one right clicks on the volume fader, there's no option for changing the trim value and everything has to be drawn with the envelope.

To be honest I really don't understand your problem? Could you elaborate some more? I mean your pointer number 1 (no visuals for the trim in read mode). The rclick small fader IS the trim fader - so there is your visual feedback. Or what do you mean, am I missing something crucial? And for the pointer number 2: If you're using volume envelopes just stay in read mode after you've created/recorded the envelope - no need to go back to trim after that, or? Thus you'll always see your "moving faders" and if you're in need for it, you can adjust the trim with rclick (and see the visual feedback). I don't see the problem really? You do realize that the read (+ other modes, excluding trim/read) and the trim/read fader are independent faders? Read -> trim/read -> master.

Ah, fair enough, I understand now. I think it comes down to personal preferences here. I find the current system exceptionally great. I've always mixed (in another DAWs) with various trim plugins as inserts so that I have a good static mix when all faders are at zero (using the trims to mix instead of the channel faders). Then I've automated everything centering on that zero point. Benefits are that I can see all the time wich fader has automation going on and wether it's positive or negative. Also, it's exeptionally easy to "preview" something: just push the fader up and do your thing and then put it back to zero where you know the prefect static spot for the track exsists. In Reaper this dual fader system is just prefect for me when reproducing such workflow. Also the trim is actually after the "volume fader" making it more natural (for me) to trim channel volume changes (e.g. it's not before inserts/sends and cause all sort of problems). So, in Reaper, my workflow is this: I just mix with trim/read faders until I have static mix I like. Then I switch to read mode/faders for my automation (and my "read faders" are at zero this time). Thus I get exactly the same behaviour as I would with my trim plugin madness, though this time with less hassle (at least for me heh). Also I'm using different colors for different modes so I know if some fader has automation or not and thus I can use the trim/read fader if I need to "globally" boost/cut the volume of the track. I've never had a problem/confusion with different fader types. Yours, Kainz

Well don't get me wrong, I too find Reaper's automation extremely powerful and flexible. I guess my only problem is that the trim fader is not visual all the time in Read mode. (and I'm not a big fan of the Trim/Read mode) How about this? When arming a volume envelope in Read mode, there's a second volume fader added just underneath the track volume fader. So instead of having two faders for one function, why not change one of them to the trim fader?

I don't understand your post either! I tried what you mentioned and it doesn't work for me. So let me rephrase: In READ MODE: - Nothing Armed: There's only one fader, regardless of the left or right click. - Volume Armed: The track fader remains the volume fader, however right clicking on it brings up the trim fader. At the same time, there's a new fader created just below the track (unless you've chosen the option to having the envelopes on your waveform) which acts exactly like the volume fader. Therefore, there are two permanently visual volume faders and no visual trim fader. So my suggestion is that the track volume fader should remain the same even after the envelope is armed (i.e. Right clicking on it DOES NOT bring up the trim fader) and instead, the new fader that is automatically created below, should be the trim fader. In TRIM/READ MODE: - The track volume fader all of a sudden becomes the trim fader. There's also another fader created below it, which I don't understand its role (it doesn't move in accordance to the envelope and I'm not able to move it either). That's why I find it confusing. Am I missing something?

Yea, I see we were talking about somewhat different things. I spoke mainly from a mixer view, you spoke about the track faders in the "arrange view". I understand now your point and agree to it. It's just that I've never used/watched those faders, so haven't paid any attention to this kind of beahvior before =) Yours, Kainz

I'm up for changes if they are implemented as optionally :) I love having real trim like we do, i can automate volume to my hearts content and then switch my relatively noisy motorised faders to trim and have a relative fader for overall mixing whilst still retaining the level automation in the background. NO other daw that i know of gives you such liberating control. :)

Absolutely, I'm sure there are a lot of users who are comfortable with the current automation behavior, so my request is just to add an option and not to change it.

More on the trim knob 

I propose the following implementation, which would allow users to trim parameters AND visualize trim state in both Read and Trim/Read modes (and in fact all other modes). A trim knob could be added to all automation lanes to trim each automated parameter. The knob would impose a FIXED gain on the current parameter value. The trim knob cannot be automated. In Trim/Read mode, track parameters (specifically volume and pan) and their associated trim knobs would be synchronized, in other words, moving one would result in the other one mirroring, and vice versa). This means that as soon as Trim/Read mode is activated for a given track, its corresponding mixer level and pan controls would ‘jump’ to a new position to mirror the value of the Trim knobs (Trim knobs would take precedence because they are fixed). In any of the other modes (Write and so on) a Trim knob and its associated track control would be independent of each other. By contrast, plug-in controls and their associated trim knobs are always independent of each other, even in Trim/Read mode (unlike track parameter controls). This is because REAPER cannot prevent automated plug-in GUI controls from moving while automation is being played (all it can do is pass parameter values to the plug-in, with no control over its graphical aspects). Since the Trim knob is inherently fixed, and automated plug-in GUI controls are unavoidably dynamic, it follows that the two cannot be linked in the way track volume and pan are linked to their respective Trim knobs. But the bottom line is that having an additional trim control in automation lanes would be a useful addition. My proposed implementation would not interfere with the workflow of those who like the current implementation, since they still would be able to adjust trim values from the mixer as usual. It would also allow REAPER to continue to work with control surfaces the way it does at present.