...but which way do I go? 48s to 44 or vv? I thought (obviously incorrectly) that you wouldn't want to convert, since REAPER renders on the fly, and cuz then when you render the project you're converting again. It's my understanding that converting sampling rates downgrades the sound quality and you want to do it as few times as possible. So that's where I thought the destructive piece takes place.
Nope...there is no "downgrading" really...it's just numbers...nothing you're going to hear, especially when going up from a lower to higher rate...you just end up with some "empty" extra data attached in the higher rate file.
If you have like 192 kHz and you down-sample to 44.1...you might(?) notice something on the very, very, very fine details, but I doubt it...and consider that what we all view as "lossless" conversion, it's CD quality, which is 44.1 kHz/16bit. Also, your DAW is running internally at 32 bits, but that goes down to 16 when you convert for most common audio files that everyone listens to.
The differences between 48 and 44.1 are meaningless...though I prefer to stay with 48 because 1.) it does capture a "little" higher than 44.1...and 2.) it's the standard for video audio tracks, and I've done stuff with video, so it just made sense to go with that across the board.
What you're probably thinking about is when you convert back-n-forth between analog and digital....there you could lose something with too many conversions, but even there going in/out a couple of times is not an issue. People often do that when they want to use some analog outboard gear with their digital tracks...so the audio goes back out, and then back in, being converted a couple of times.
The thing about using one sample rate is mostly for keeping things organized and all on the same page...plus once you convert and get new files at the correct sample rate...you remove that extra work from your DAW. Keep in mind that what Reaper does "on the fly" is still *converting*...and because it's "on the fly"...it has to constantly do that...every time you stop/start..etc.
I just do it once with an actual file conversion at the start of the project, and then there's no more of that happening "on the fly" as I work. There's nothing to be gained from "on the fly" resampling other than you have no new/extra files...but I actually prefer having the new file with new rate and the old file with original rate.
AFA the file naming...it doesn't matter as long as it makes sense to you.
That said...when you have a lot of tracks and you call them all EG1, 2, 3, etc...you have to remember what those numbers refer to.
For instance...some of your EG tracks are rhythm...but a couple of them are actually more "lead" like guitar tracks...so use the full space in the naming fields to be as descriptive as you can. Also, when it comes to actual file names, you can go pretty long with them, so you can really be descriptive...but I've seen some people get carried away with that, and the names are a mile long!
Another thing I do (and you probably do also) is use different colors to visually separate out the tracks...but I don't just pick random colors each time I start a project. Instead, I have designated colors for specific track types. I created my own custom color palette in my DAW, and I always use the same ones.
So as an example...my Kick drum tracks are always red....my Snare tracks always a bright green...I use dark blue shades for electric guitars and light blue shades for acoustic guitars....blue-green is for pianos/synths...purple for my organ tracks...etc....etc. Sometimes I run out of colors on my custom palette (it has room for 16 colors), but I still have access to the default color palette, and I can create any shade of new colors I want...so when I have odd tracks or more than what I can cover with my custom palette, I can pull from those.
If you come up with some DAW templates for how you set up tracks and assign things...the order on the screen (like my drums are always my top tracks, and so on)...it makes it easier for you as you work on new projects.
So back to your tracks...like I said, they could use some work, but that's for you do decide how much you want to do and how far back you want to go into redoing things. I think AFA the vocal track issues you were having with the loudness...that's going to be solved for the most part, and you can then proceed with that and the rest as is.
Not sure what the other guys are going to do or how deep they want to dig...but I don't really want to take over your project and redo tracks and completely change things and tweak them beyond what your doing. I just wanted to help you get on the right path, and then you pick up from there and work it.
That's the best way to learn. If we just redo everything for you, it might sound much better, but then it's not your project anymore.
