[MXXX] I don't really understand the mixer module

[paterpeter]

Hi Vojtech,

It seems that I don't fully understand the mixer module: I would expect it to just grab the signal of the activated input channels (at the vertical level above the mixer) and mix it together. But it seems that there's more going on.

Let's assume this preset:

- col 1: utility module that does nothing but send feedback to feedback channel 1
- col 2: feedback module for channel 1, sync'ed delay 1/8th

If I play this I hear the original sound + the same audio one 1/8th delayed. So far so good.

But if I now add a mixer after the utility and I enable no input I don't hear anything anymore. I would expect the delayed audio to be still audible, because the signal fed into the feedback channel is sent from the utility module, right?

Regards,
Andre

P.S.: here's an image of the layout (with no mixer inputs activated)




P.P.S.: but if I move the mixer to channel 3 and enable "steal input 1" without enabling any input I only hear the delayed (feedback) version as expected.

[MeldaProduction]

Just click on it with your right mouse button and select channels you want to mix

[paterpeter]

Yes, I understand that, but why does it mute the audio sent to the feedback channel if I put the mixer after the utility (without setting any input)? It should only mute channel 1.

[elassi]

Yes, I understand that, but why does it mute the audio sent to the feedback channel if I put the mixer after the utility (without setting any input)? It should only mute channel 1.

Andre, just must have mis-clicked something. Your example works here (read: no mute of audio).

On the other hand I also found a unprecedent behaviour with the mixer mod. Once I deleted it and re-enabled it worked as expected. Can't recreate what I've done and therefore it may have just been... mis-clicking.

[paterpeter]

Maybe I didn't explain my example very well. Here's a screencast of what I'm doing: http://screencast.com/t/QaSl11Pdxy (please ignore the female voice, I had to use a trial version of virtual audio cable to capture the sound).

- audio sent to MXXX: a click sound playing on beat 1 of a bar being played in a loop
- add a utility on channel 1
- add a feedback on channel 2, configure 1/8th delay
- make the utility send to feedback channel 1
=> Now the click is doubled thanks to the feedback
- add a mixer after the utility, but don't enable any inputs
=> Now no sound is playing at all. I would have expected the mixer to "block" the audio of channel 1 only, the sound on channel 2 should keep playing

I'm running MXXX in Reaper 4.21 x86 and x64

[MeldaProduction]

Aaaaha, here's the thing - MXXX automatically optimizes all routes, so if an output is not used, the whole path is disabled to free resources. So when you added mixer with no inputs, you blocked the first input and it got all disabled (the line disappeared), but then there was nothing to generate the feedback!

Check the sample 10, where the feedback is used to drive the modulator, but since the signal is not used, it is sent to utility with "silence" volume to remove the audio, but still keep it processed.

[paterpeter]

Aaaaha, here's the thing - MXXX automatically optimizes all routes, so if an output is not used, the whole path is disabled to free resources. So when you added mixer with no inputs, you blocked the first input and it got all disabled (the line disappeared), but then there was nothing to generate the feedback!

Ah, that was probably the missing link! Thanks for clarifying this.

Check the sample 10, where the feedback is used to drive the modulator, but since the signal is not used, it is sent to utility with "silence" volume to remove the audio, but still keep it processed.

This was in fact what I was trying to do: (efficiently) disabling the audio of a channel. So I suppose using Utility with volume=silence is the most effective and recommend approach?

[MeldaProduction]

This was in fact what I was trying to do: (efficiently) disabling the audio of a channel. So I suppose using Utility with volume=silence is the most effective and recommend approach?

Yes, but I'll probably add some "Muter" processor for this purposes, just to make it slightly faster.
EDIT: No no, wait, you can just "steal" the input, that's the quickest one.

[paterpeter]

This was in fact what I was trying to do: (efficiently) disabling the audio of a channel. So I suppose using Utility with volume=silence is the most effective and recommend approach?

Yes, but I'll probably add some "Muter" processor for this purposes, just to make it slightly faster.
EDIT: No no, wait, you can just "steal" the input, that's the quickest one.

As in: add a mixer to channel 2, enable input 2 but steal input 1?

[MeldaProduction]

Well, you can steal both , depends on what you are up to.