What's the point of mixers in software sequencers?

[Lunch Money]

kritikon - ironically, many people feel that having a 'hardware-emulation' mixer DOES make you use your eyes instead of your ears. Your contention is that using a mixer allows you to use your ears instead.

Weird.

A few Tracktion users lately have taken to removing the level meters (a separate component) and using ONLY volume and pan. This, to me, is using your ears rather than your eyes. I don't know of other host 'mixers' that allow you to disable the visual level metering cues, though I'm certain there must be a way, given how many features those apps have, right?

superddman - have you tried Tracktion yet? Not everyone meshes with it, but it sounds like a perfect fit for you.

Greg

[pHz]

superddman - have you tried Tracktion yet? Not everyone meshes with it, but it sounds like a perfect fit for you. Greg

and to think ... ive tried SO hard in this thread to avoid host evangelising and then you turn up with your panties wet for tracktion and go and try to start some kind of host-mixer-war !!!

slainte rob

[Lunch Money]

I was trying to be diplomantic. It just seems like superddman is asking for features that already exist in a current host.

No war intended...!

T does kind of make me damp, though.

[pHz]

...

slainte rob

[koolkeys]

To add to the Tracktion method of mixing, another thing that is good for me is that you can even change where your level meters are in the chain, or add more to monitor before and after EVERY effect, or put a volume/pan filter ANYWHERE in the signal chain, as well as change the order of anything in the change with a simple drag and drop. For me, this is better than any mixer interface based on hardware. I don't think Tracktion is for everyone, but for many, it's a new way of working. But it's whatever makes your music sound how you want it to sound. That's all that matters, really.

Koolkeys

[stefancrs]

Most hosts supply a decent way to control fx, pan and volume, so stfu already?

Yes, lots of them do. I am not saying none of them do.

And actually you are stating a good finding. More and more of the new versions of sequencers utilize this idea of the mixer controls inside of the arrange window.

I guess, at the end of the day we will stick with what we are used to.

Yeah. My favourite kind of channel handling is the one in Podium. Some others prefer the one in Tracktion. Or how you can set up the inspector to be your best friend in Logic. Or whatever. If I was on a dual monitor set up here, I'd probably have the arrange on one window and mixer + editors on the other (in Podium that is, but probably something similar in any other host if I'd use them, except for tracktion because I doubt it's doable due to its fullscreen interface).

Also, did I forget to mention that I love long parenthesis?

I probably did. But that was on purpose.
This is a silly topic. There's plenty of different hosts that allows different handling of channels. Most big ones can supply both a mixer and a arrange window way of handling it. Some hosts are "channel-less" due to their free/modular routings, which still is just a way of visualising it though. More hosts than most people think allow modular routings, atleast of the audio.

Goodnight now.

[koolkeys]

Traction2 isn't restricted to full screen any more. Sorry, that's all I got....

[ghost666]

If you can afford it, then I recommend going to a dual monitor setup. This has obvious benfits but first & foremost gives the ability to have the arrange window, mixers & any/everything else ya might need all open & visible at once. No more page turning or windows, hidden behind windows etc, everything is there if & when you need it.
This has definitely increased my workflow!

[DevonB]

as ever in this game mate ... its whatever works for you ...

... or me ...

... just wish more people would remember that round here

slainte rob

Then that wouldn't be KVR. Sad, but true... very sad...

Devon

[Sascha Franck]

i actually wonder which host it is where you can't mix from the main page anyway.

Well, there's a strong difference between, say, Logic or Cubase and, say, Tracktion.
In Tracktion you actually have access to more than one channel's parameters from the main page whereas Logic and Cubase will only give you control about the selected channel.

However, I like having a dedicated mixer page for one reason: Configurability.
Of course, the mixer in Cubase doesn't qualify for this, it's a plain bugridden piece of shit and configurability is almost non-given.
Logic's mixer (the environment one, not the track mixer) however is brilliant. I can just re-order my mixer channels the way *I* want them - instead of having them follow my arrange page's selection, which, in many cases, is just ridiculously stupid... actually so stupid that I can't understand why only a few hosts have a mixer as configurable as Logic's.

I mean, we're not living in a "24 tape returns running into 24 mixer inputs 1:1" world anymore, yet Cubase (and partially Tracktion too, not too sure about some others) are still following that paradigm.
Now, Tracktions approach is actually kinda fresh and I sorta like the clean visible signal flow. On the other hand it's wasting way too much space IMO - there doesn't seem to be a way to get to an almost fullsized "arrangement only" scren at the flick of a switch.

As said, in Cubase it's even more ridiculous. The "show inserts" or "show sends" view options are as lame as it ever could get. I mean, who wants to see 8 inserts at once? I think, that even in the most complexed mixes I've done, the max. number of inserts used at a time might be like 4. The same is true for 8 sends.
I'd need, say, 2 inserts and 2 sends shown simultaneously. That's what's Logic is doing - it's showing the used components.
Plus, as said, it allows for reordering of ANYTHING in the mixer. So, I can actually have my drum bus channel straight to the right of the individual channel and the bass again sitting next to it. Completely impossible in quite some other hosts (unless I'm totally changing my arrange track order, which I surely don't want).

Having said all this, to me it makes perfect sense having an extra mixer page - in case the concept is laid out properly. Which, in many hosts, it unfortunately isn't, mainly due to non-configurability.

[stefancrs]

Sascha, you have control of a all parameters for a channel directly in the arrange window, without using the inspector. You know that!

FWIW, I've used more than 8 inserts (and in Cubase, I've hit the limit), and I doubt I'm alone

[Sascha Franck]

Sascha, you have control of a all parameters for a channel directly in the arrange window, without using the inspector. You know that!

WITHOUT using the inspector?
How would you do that?
Do you mean the channel strip below inspector? I'd call this part of it.
And apart from that, no, you don't have control about all parameters at once as they're taking up too much space once you open them all - you can't even scroll down to them, another prove of extended Steinberg lameness.

FWIW, I've used more than 8 inserts (and in Cubase, I've hit the limit), and I doubt I'm alone

I've been using a LOT of inserts as well (actually, Logic allows for 16, so there...), but that's not the usual thing for most people.
And it's beyond the point, too. Let's just face it, Cubase's mixer is offering close to no configuration options, working with it is a true PITA for numerous reasons - especially when you're used to the elegance of Logics mixer. And IMO that's not even debatable...

[IIRs]

I mean, we're not living in a "24 tape returns running into 24 mixer inputs 1:1" world anymore, yet Cubase (and partially Tracktion too, not too sure about some others) are still following that paradigm.

How is Tracktion following a hardware paradigm?

[Sascha Franck]

I said "partially" - simply because it's showing a more or less 1:1 signal flow from left to right, which is pretty much following the hardware paradigm.
To give you a counter example: Logics mixer isn't (even if it looks like) as you can move mixer channels around freely - which wouldn't be possible in hardware land unless you'd like to redo all your channel settings or actually plug the physical channel out of the modular desk.

Don't get me wrong, I find Tracktions approach refreshing, but it doesn't offer a configurable mixer page nonetheless. Whether you like that or not is beyond the point, but for my workflow such a mixer seems to be essential (and one of the reasons I'll go for a Mac on day).

[IIRs]

I said "partially" - simply because it's showing a more or less 1:1 signal flow from left to right, which is pretty much following the hardware paradigm.

The hardware paradigm is; seperate multi-track recorder and mixer. Thats what iLogic does, not Tracktion.. T lacks a mixer page exactly because it rejects the hardware paradigm completely, and just aims for the fastest easiest way to get results from a computer.