Reaper with ReaClassical extensions

[tacitus]

Just been reading about the combination in the title. Given that Reaper’s dead economical and the BethHarmon extensions are free, it sounds a lot more achievable for me than Pyramid or Sadie.

Does anybody know or use this? Seems pretty new, and the similar (I presume) Cohler Classical does actually cost on top of the heavy-handed promotion.

Given that I seldom have the luxury of multiple takes in live recording, I can’t justify a top-drawer classical editing tool for what is essentially a retirement project.

[James Perrett]

I've not used it but I did watch some of the videos produced to show what it can do and it certainly looks impressive. I get the impression that it re-assigns a few keyboard shortcuts so you may want to use it with a second, stand-alone installation - at least initially.

[tacitus]

I was about to wade through some videos when I caught a comment from Beth about them being out of date following more changes; I think I’ll have to go through them now - I’ll see if my impressions chime with yours …

[shufflebeat]

This is something that might not have normally caught my attention but I see some comments that it may be useful for folkie types. When you've explored further I'd really appreciate your first impression and highlights.

[The Red Bladder]

We use only Reaper for classical and we do this for money!

[James Perrett]

We use only Reaper for classical and we do this for money!

Are you using either of these Source/Destination editing add-ons or are you using Reaper as it comes?

[Aled Hughes]

I have a few scripts added to Reaper to enable source/destination editing, and they work very well. I’m not sure if they are the Beth Harmon ones, but I’ll have a look.

I have Pyramix as well, but to honest 99% of the time I use Reaper.

[tacitus]

In the past I’ve always used whatever DAW I had lying around. I moved away from recording to PA in the early 2000s, and the need for a DAW configured for classical editing operations didn’t seriously arise at the time. And until I mostly retired from conducting I wasn’t often in a position to take on major projects. Not sure I am now, but the kids need less attention and I’m technically retired, so if it doesn’t happen now it never will. And I can’t shift all the PA gear without a team any more.

I can see (I think) how classical techniques would work for folk; I’ve always preferred live work and capturing the sound of the gig; usually a bit of room tone is the only extra I have.

When I’ve caught up with the housework I’ll start on the Beth Harmon videos …

[Aled Hughes]

Yes I find a lot of the classical techniques work well for folk material- anything that’s not not done to a click track in fact.

Since discovering S/D editing I’m surprised it’s not more if a ‘standard’ feature in DAWs. It surprises me how often I hear something like “we can’t really edit that as it was not done to a click” (though of course it can still be done without S/D of course)

[The Red Bladder]

We use only Reaper for classical and we do this for money!

Are you using either of these Source/Destination editing add-ons or are you using Reaper as it comes?

Straight out of the box - no magic extensions.

There is no such thing as classical music being different to record and edit, compared to any other type of music - music is music. Whether five or fifty people are playing, the process is pretty much the same for each type of recording - classical is acoustic, i.e. no MIDI and no synths, etc. But recording acoustic rock or folk or Abyssinian nose-flute playing - the processes are the same!

Recording classical music - Artist(s) come(s) to the studio and plays a section until he/she/it/they are totally happy with a passage and then crack on to the next bit - until we get to the end. I then FTP the audio to them and they piece together the bits they like by copying all those bits to a separate track. They send me the bare Reaper project file without the audio encapsulated. I stich it together and send it as an MP3 for approval. Improvements are made and a final WAV/88.2 version is sent to the label for mastering (or I get to use my own ears for mastering, or it is sent to a third-party mastering house).

As for any extensions - I have yet to find an extension to any DAW that didn't involve a great deal of fannying about for little or no benefit.

Things get hairy when the musician(s) do not know how to use a computer and only put the EDL onto the score. Then all their hard work has to be duplicated by the editor for no good reason - other than an obstinate refusal to learn how to use a DAW. That can add a couple of thousand to the cost of a one hour CD!

I once met a 73-year-old blind conductor from Bad Harzburg who used Sibelius, ProTools, MIDI, you name it - and I have met many 40- and 50-year-olds who refuse point-blank to use a DAW.

As that great poet and philosopher Dizzy Rascal said "Bonkers!"

[tacitus]

Well, after some soul-searching I came to an unexpected conclusion; I’m going to stick with Audacity until I absolutely need something more powerful/precisely configured or whatever.

I couldn’t help agreeing with the comment that add-ons generally involve lots of fannying about. The editors I’ve worked with in the past have been on the basic side, but as I was unaware of the exact limitations at the time, I “walked on air” pretty much like Wile E Coyote, doing patching operations probably no saner person would consider.

I think the thing to do is to get back into recording, keep it simple and focus on sound quality while I unlearn the bad habits I acquired doing outdoor PA. I can edit a live performance perfectly well with what I have and hopefully get a notch or two above iPhone recordings. Beyond that, the problems will make themselves known and I’ll come back looking for solutions. Or stay at home and play records …

[Arpangel]

Recording classical music - Artist(s) come(s) to the studio and plays a section until he/she/it/they are totally happy with a passage and then crack on to the next bit - until we get to the end. I then FTP the audio to them and they piece together the bits they like by copying all those bits to a separate track.

I thought classical musicians, owing to their extensive training and natural ability would be able to play a piece through from start to finish without mistakes, you know, like at a concert And classical recording, being all about having everything "natural" wouldn’t want it mucked about with. So, given the right editing software even my rendition of of Bachs Toccata Adagio and Fugue in C major could be made to sound faultless, but that isn’t the point is it? it’s about listening to someone play a great performance naturally, admiring their skill and talent.
But the real world is different, I’ve sat in, and helped on a lot of classical sessions, some changed my life, and we’re a great source of inspiration and knowledge, some weren’t. Having a producer take a day to decide if that top C from the soprano is the best out of 100 of them, and we have to listen to all of them. Me sitting there trying desperately to hear the differences between edits that are so small no one would ever notice, "but take No 99 is obviously the one, can’t you hear it? No, and neither could you in a blind test. I wasn’t cut out for this work, my level of diplomacy wasn’t up to it, which is why I never took it up permanently.
Regarding software, we were using "Fast Edit" on pre XP machines in the 90’s with good results, we then got Magix Sequoia, Samplitude/Sequoia are IMO very good for classical editing owing to their good cross-fade abilities. Editing requires the same talent (I don’t have it) as being a musician, if you haven’t got it no software will help you to do a good job.
PS, my views here have been enhanced a bit to get things across, but they are by no means untrue.

Bob Auger, "the brass isn’t cutting through Bob, what can you do about it? Bob goes out into the live room and lowers the brass mic, and then puts it back up to exactly the same position, he goes back into the control room, the producer says "that’s much better Bob"

[tacitus]

There are plenty of orchestras that can do a live concert of near-CD standard; plenty that can’t, too. Solo players/singers are usually a lot more critical.

That said, it’s been a while since my pinnacle of “almost semi-professional”, so I’m most likely going to be recording good amateur groups playing live. If I can edit out or ameliorate major bangs and clattering, and get a nice room sound with good balance, there should be a worthwhile advance on phone recordings (or the last bang will be me shooting myself!).

Fortunately, at my age I have experienced the things you mention, Arpangel, and I’m not likely to be working with 150-take musicians anytime soon.

When I was recording regularly in the early 2000s I did do actual sessions where that sort of thing might happen. In a not very wonderful school hall we talked about reverb. The conductor wasn’t sure, so we looked through a catalogue of reverbs from what appeared to be mainly all-wood Scandi spaces. By the third picture he’d chosen the one he wanted.

Another time a hi-fi purist MD was unhappy with a take of Padstow Lifeboat. Despite his typically brisk tempo already being some way ahead of Arnold’s own, we sped it up a fraction. OK, it sounded a lot tighter, but I’m surprised he didn’t veto it on sound quality.

Meanwhile, in the curious world of live organ recordings I was getting organists (some very picky about sound quality) raving about the “magic” I was performing; largely reducing gaps where they were pulling stops and tidying up extraneous noises. It didn’t hurt having a pair of the original Rode NT2s up on a huge stand. How could they sound bad? Verily, I say unto you, this church’s resonance doth cover better than Dulux.

Not that I ever do less than my best, but it often helps to make things look nice, too. I always used CD-text for recital discs. I can’t remember when I last saw any, but I figured if a soloist ever saw their name coming up on the CD player they’d feel a bit more positive. Sounds dreadfully old-fashioned now!

[Arpangel]

Tacitus, sounds like you’re out there doing it, which is more than I can say for myself these days, I haven’t done any live acoustic recording of other people for many years, only my own piano/marimba duo.
I love organ music, and recording, it can be a tricky thing to record, but if you’ve got a great player, and an acoustic, that suits the music, you’re 99% there.
I used to get dragged around by the venerable Mike Skeet, classical engineer and all-round eccentric, what little knowledge I now have I learnt from him, a very inspiring man, he was a professional, in every sense of the word, and was only concerned with what he could hear, and he always spent money where it mattered, good monitors, excellent microphones, always the best, a very large collection, and the best recorders, he wasn’t interested in cables or fancy flight cases, he always used the basics, often turning up with stuff in old suitcases, wonderful.
He was a keen motorcyclist and he loved the challenge of being able to do a classical session with nothing more than he could carry on his motorbike, I met him at gigs many times like this, nothing more than a couple of mic's, folding stands, his little preamp, Sound Devices recorder and a pair of phones!

[tacitus]

Most churches I ever recorded the organ in have somebody hanging around who knows where the organ sounds best. Often the priest, years ago, nowadays not so much, but they come out of the woodwork for recitals. I mostly found with a spaced omni pair on a tall stand I did pretty well starting at their golden spot and moving in to get the direct/reverb balance better.

I’ve only just started assembling the gear for location recording again. Hope to do a concert in about 10 days. Last time I recorded on location I was still taking a DAT machine, though at the last few only as a backup. Should be interesting, anyway.

[sonics]

Well, after some soul-searching I came to an unexpected conclusion; I’m going to stick with Audacity until I absolutely need something more powerful/precisely configured or whatever.

Whilst I understand your decision, I would urge you to use better software than Audacity. It really is worth spending a little money for a decent DAW.

[Drew Stephenson]

Or cakewalk is completely free.

[Sam Spoons]

And, While Reaper isn't, it is cheap and excellent (and it works on a Mac).

[Drew Stephenson]

Good shout. I keep forgetting that Cakewalk doesn't work on those funny devices...

[Sam Spoons]

I was a latecomer to the world of 'funny devices' (and for a long time I was a heavyweight detractor too) but, while they are far from perfect, the work for me.

[tacitus]

I appreciate all the concern, and I know it’s a bit like abseiling with garden twine. But, I’m lined up to record a concert in 10 days and I’m running through everything and doing trials as far as possible to ease my way.

I haven’t totally rejected the idea of upgrading, but we’re talking about limited editing of live events at the moment and I’ll know soon enough if I run into limitations I can’t get round. And it’s not that you’ve all said to get the same thing that’s undoubtedly better than Audacity.

As it happens, I’m up to record a gig by a sax group I know several members of, on the understanding this is not for release, though they’re welcome to anything I produce. It might not even happen if any if them decide they don’t want to be recorded, an issue which is ongoing.

If all goes well, I’ll have some files to work on. I might then have a Road to Damascus moment and work out what the hell I need. Right now, I’m focusing on getting something recorded. Whatever extras I need later, I’ll get later. And, while I’m using those funny computers from Apple, it won’t be the end of the world if I end up with a PC to run it on.

Unfortunately, I don’t even have any of my old DAWs available or I’d probably have dusted one of those off. I’ll let you know how it goes. If in fact it does go …

[Arpangel]

Best of luck! hope it goes well.
Just a reminder, Reaper is free to try and if you like it you can pay for it.
I can’t see any point in paying more, it’s a very good program.

[Drew Stephenson]

As Arpangel says, good luck and hope it goes well. If you get a good performance and a good capture then that's 95% of the job done.

[James Perrett]

I think most people are trying to tell you that you would do better with a DAW (Reaper/Cakewalk/Cubase/Protools etc) rather than an audio editor (like Audacity/Sound Forge). They are designed for different purposes.

Ironically, an audio editor isn't necessarily the best tool for editing because edits are destructive - you are changing the original file (or a copy of the original). With a DAW you don't touch the original file - you just tell the DAW what you want to do with the file and it stores that list of instructions in a project. Because you aren't continually storing the edits to the file you can work much faster and more flexibly in a DAW. You only commit the audio to a new file at the end of the process once you are happy with all the edits and processing.