What's the point of mixers in software sequencers?

[IIRs]

hmm...that's exactly how I view my way. I don't have a problem "knowing" how my projects are set up or where things are. And orchestrated templates can get pretty nasty with number of automation and heck just tracks in general.

in other words, your preference for a traditional (old fashioned?) mixer view is just that: a preference. You can't name a single real advantage.. having tried both ways, I believe the Tracktion paradigm is more powerful, faster, more flexible, and MUCH easier to learn.

[allofdrab]

If you want to use your ears rather than your eyes, get rid of all the software all together and learn an instrument like a trumpet or piano or guitar.

hmm...

Has anyone made a velocity sensitive computer keyboard?

Or, a, uh, ... has anyone had much success with a force-feedback mouse for controlling things from a, uh, more tactile perspective?

Or, is this post an unacceptable tangent?

[SJ_Digriz]

hmm...that's exactly how I view my way. I don't have a problem "knowing" how my projects are set up or where things are. And orchestrated templates can get pretty nasty with number of automation and heck just tracks in general.

in other words, your preference for a traditional (old fashioned?) mixer view is just that: a preference. You can't name a single real advantage.. having tried both ways, I believe the Tracktion paradigm is more powerful, faster, more flexible, and MUCH easier to learn.

I would say the same to you. After trying tracktion it seems to take twice as long to do simple stuff that takes me no time in Cubase. They are both just preferences.

[allofdrab]

nevermind (not that you would) I'll just start a new thread...

[Lunch Money]

SJ - absolutely fair. It takes me 3 times longer to do simple things in Cubase that I can do in Tracktion. You have used Cubase as your main tool for so long that you are intimitely familiar with it. That's not something that a new interface, no matter how 'efficient' it may be for some of us, can easily replace.

Greg

[Sascha Franck]

Sasha is saying he likes to have his tracks arranged in a certain order in the Arrange view, but likes the ability to move them to whatever position is useful during mixing. Tracktion can't do that, since it's 'mixer' in integrated with the 'Arrange' view.

That's exactly what I was trying to say. And I find this to be one of THE big advances of digital mixing - I just have my trackorder like I want it to be and at the same time my mixer might represent quite another order.

I personally feel essentially the same way, but instead of wanting a software mixer, I'm getting a control surface for Tracktion and can then order the tracks however I like while keeping them in order on the mixing desk.

Uh-Oh... are you sure this will be possible?
I only know this from working with Logic/LogicControl and Cubase/Houston - they don't allow essential reordering of channels but rather follow the track list in your arrange.
One of the main reasons I ditched my LogicControl and went back to mouse mixing.

[Lunch Money]

You're able to map any controller to any filter. Since Tracktion's volume/pan are considered filters rather than just segments of the "mixer component", it should be possible. Disclaimer: I haven't done it myself, so I don't know how well it's integrated. I don't have a controller so I haven't been able to try this feature yet, I'm just going by the descriptions and text.

Regarding track order and mix order being separate-- well, OK, you got me there. They're not separate things in Tracktion. I don't see why you'd need them to be in different orders, but OK.

If you truly needed to, you could just route all of your base tracks to new tracks and order them however you wanted, though, so it's possible-- but I'll heartily admit before even being told this, that it's not an elegant solution.

Riddle me this: in what situations does it become handy to re-order the mix order while keeping the arrange order different? I'm not asking to be difficult-- rather, I'm merely showing my ignorance.

Greg

[Sascha Franck]

Riddle me this: in what situations does it become handy to re-order the mix order while keeping the arrange order different? I'm not asking to be difficult-- rather, I'm merely showing my ignorance.

I'm using a bus for all my drums. I want this to be next to my bass track. Completely impossible in Cubase when using any multi-out instrument, btw. Even when reordering my arrange.
I'm using a bus for my vocals and want this to be next to the individual tracks. Completely senseless having that bus in my arrange at all.
I have my default mixer set up that I just know like the pockets in my jeans. My arrange doesn't use the same order as I may start with *any* track.
I have my rhythm section tracks all stuffed into a folder in my arrange. I want them to be like I need them for mixing in my mixer though.
Etc etc.... there's just way too many possibilities.
I'll gladly post a screenshot or two, of some "typical" arranges.

[Lunch Money]

I'd love to see some screenshots, out of curiousity. I can see how you could get used to that workflow, and how powerful it could be. I don't need it or 'value' it myself, but I can at least begin to see why people think that Logic's mixer is great.

[Sascha Franck]

Here's some "typical" arrange:
http://home.arcor.de/s.franck/temp/LogicArrange.jpg
Sometimes I may hide all the items on the left, to have even more space for the pure arrangement stuff.
And here's the mixer of the same song:
http://home.arcor.de/s.franck/temp/LogicMixer.jpg

I didn't reduce the size of anything - this is how I have them going on my two 17" TFT at 1280x1024.

You may notice a few things such as the choir being stuffed into a folder (it's 12 tracks), which will only appear as a choir bus in the mixer, sitting nicely next to the main vocals in the mixer. You may also notice the guitar/drum bussing on the mixer page. Again sitting where I want them to be for this particular project (you can move any mixer channel around to your likings).
FWIW, both screens fit on my monitors without any need to scroll, so I can see the two rows of mixer channels in all their full glory.

[braj]

Uh-Oh... are you sure this will be possible?
I only know this from working with Logic/LogicControl and Cubase/Houston - they don't allow essential reordering of channels but rather follow the track list in your arrange.
One of the main reasons I ditched my LogicControl and went back to mouse mixing.

Yeah, I'm getting a Behringer with all rotary knobs, and I'll make a default project with knobs set up for mixing the first 8 tracks, and use them for my primary tracks (ie guitar, vocal, drums, bass, subgroups) and then always use those tracks for those purposes. Basically where I would be during mixing. Then I can move all the tracks wherever I need them and it won't matter, channel one will always be guitar, 2 will always be bass, three drums etc.

Anyway, that's what I'm planning.

[Lunch Money]

Thanks for posting that, but I have to admit, rather than pull me further along the path of, "Aahhhh, now I get it!" it's reinforcing my previous feelings of, "traditional mixer setup = yuk".



I appreciate the effort, though.

[Sascha Franck]

Well, Greg, each to their own I suppose. Nothing bad with that.

braj, let us know how it turns out!

[braj]

**Screenshots**

I think that illustrates the point nicely. IMO Tracktion's faders with that many tracks would be really hard to deal with. Logic's faders are long and the metering is better as well IMO. If you are going to be mixing a large project on screen with a mouse, I'd give the edge by a mile to Logic.

[TVD]

Having a visual overview of the whole song at all times is really important to me.

That's what a proper mixer should give you. What passes for a mixer in most sequencers is a useless joke. I couldn't possibly work without ORION's mixer, it is the hub of my studio.

Without question, Orion's mixer is very hardware-looking.