mcatalao wrote: ↑
26 Apr 2022
crimsonwarlock wrote: ↑
24 Apr 2022
I don't see why people think they need punch in/out. It is a relic from the past, invented to prevent the need for slice-editing real tape. The modern way to handle replacing small parts is comping. Even back in the day, you could do comping with multi-track recorders, but that would eat-up your available track count, so the industry came up with punch in/out. Comping is actually much easier from the perspective of the player, as punch in/out requires a perfect feel for timing (as you don't record anything outside the punch).
Actually, if you looked at how Auto Punch in works on other daws, you'd know that comping and auto punch in complement themselves. Also, your idea of a punch in is incorrect. There's nothing recorded out of the punch in, but the application manages the start and finishing of the recording, the player has the queue of his previous (correct) performance and plays on top getting the same "feeling" of the previous performance. In my experience from using the feature in other daws, timing, levels, expression, etc., are better retained because a full section performance various times on a cycle recording does not retain the same feeling on micro sections. And as I was saying, auto punch in and comping, complement themselves. As a matter of fact, after you punched in a small section on 5 or 6 takes, it's way easier to select the best take on a comp that was punched in than on a cycle recording.
There's a big difference between punching in, comping and cycle recording. But these complement themselves, and you can use them in your benefit (whereas for me punch in with comping is the most efficient way because you can start your editing on the recording session really quick and even involve the artist in the comping process and not have to bring him/her to the edit process)!
I also disagree with you about it being a relic of the past - even newer DAWs have it implemented right at release - like studio one, reaper or bitwig. IMHO, there's a big difference between it being a relic of the past to simply not being used by you. The fact is, and with all due respect, you just don't see the benefits of the feature. But as i respect the fact you think you don't need it, this old fart that used auto punch in Cubase in 2004, still misses it a lot.
Anyway, reason has everything in place for auto punch in to happen, it just needs the automation part. You just try a manual punch in (press record while playing with an audio track armed), and you'll see the following:
1 - Reason overdubs the armed tracks
2 - Reason commutes audio correctly between the previous recorded tracks and monitoring the incoming audio, just as other daws do
3 - Reason creates a new comp lane for the punched in section and ads q points
4 - Reason correctly starts and stops recording while playing
Adding to what I said, you can even add the automation part with remote overrides. I've had a pedal routed to the recording button for a lot of time. But with a pedal, pressing it when you're recording you might get a different performance (it happens, believe me). There is an interesting workaround that I've used too (, recurring to remote overrides, loopbe (a virtual midi cable) and the midi output device, automating the punch in and out. But then again it's a workaround and when you have multiple punch in takes it generates a bunch of q points (and if you try this with midi, it doesn't generate new lanes, which cubase allows you to select the daw's behavior, so you have a better consolidated punch in feature between midi and audio).
My point here is, punch in and auto punch in for more accuracy and self-recording, allows one to take care of errors right in the recording session. A good recording session, has the artist doing his/her stuff until it sounds right, and without auto punch in, you work blind because you need to know the whole take is ok or the lot of the takes have enough material for the whole song.