Mixer ?

[NAS]

I have started work on a mixer for T
I know a few people still want a mixer so let me know what features you want.

1 Should it be a single plugin with a lot of ins or

2 Should it be a plugin that replaces the standard vol+bal and get controlled from a seperate plugin so that T works the same but a control surface is available for Mixdown ?

Both ways have advantages and cons but whats the thought around here.

This mixer will have assignable LFOs and so on and i may build in some FX.

This is being built in SM and Beno is a bit of a dab hand at SM, Perhaps if we beg beg beg and beg and then beg again he may find some time to work on it aswell (We should go on strike until he codes a Mackie EQ for it )

Stuff
EQ types ?
How many sends ?
Mono channels ?
So on and so on.

I have the volume and balance working already and the balance is selectable between T type and an improved algo

EDIT* I should add i'm doing this as a performance tool for modulating vol pan and EQ and FX and so on, That is why i am doing a lot of it in SMs code component for sample accuracy.

[pHz]

NOOOOOOOOO !!!

slainte rob

[NAS]

OK i'll just make it for meself then.
No probs , I just like the idea of a remix console but then i use T a lot next to my 12s so i guess my needs are different.
No probs

[DHR53]

...should it be Mac too...

[NAS]

?
Do you guys just attack any idea posted here that you dont like ?

Sorry but i wassn't expecting such a negative reaction, Most people just dont bother getting involved if they are not interested, It seems as though its a bad idea to post anything to do with T here at the moment.

I will not bother making anything else T specific anymore if this is how the users are, Infact it's no great loss to any of you but after the reaction you have given to an idea i doubt i will post here again, I rarely have problems with T so no loss for me either.
I apologise for wasting anybodys time.

[pHz]

FFS chill man ...

(apologies though if a little in-joke or 2 have gone over your head ... check the smilies)

... i personally dont EVER want (for ALL sorts of reasons) a conventional mixer layout in T but you do and so do other users ...

... TBH id actually be pretty offended if you thought i was consciously part of driving anyone away from T2 or this forum ...

... mix away

slainte rob

[semiquaver]

hi nu audio - I think the second option that replaces the vol and pan but is controllable would be great (much more interesting imo! - Let me put in a mac vote tho...

[Hengy]

NAS i'm very interested in the implementation you come up with in SM, i'm curious as to how you would approach concept 2, which if i understand corectly you see as vol/pan plugins that sit in each track and an overall control surface plugin that can modify each track plug - did i uderstand that correctly.
thinking about it i can actually see me using that in T,

[NAS]

OK i guess i explained it badly

The point to this is for a performance tool not a conventional mixer setup, I apologise for giving that impression.

What i am trying to do is create a mix section that has built in modulation of volume pan EQ and FX, I want this for setting up next to my Turntables to do remix stuff on the fly.

SM will be Mac eventually so that is a future prospect.

I don't see a point to doing a conventional mixer when there is already a choice of a few anyway.

[NAS]

@Hengy
Yeah idea 2 wouldn't actually be possible at this exact moment in SM because you can't do CCs yet and this would be needed for that.

EDIT* I have had a working SE version of idea 2 for about 12 months though
In T2 i guess you just need a MIDI CC control surface, This is very easy to make in SE and there are few you can download.

[NAS]

Oh perhaps you guys should keep the in jokes to people who understand what you are talking about.
I'm not dissing anyone but i did actually think you were just being nasty for the sake of it

I don't post in this forum very often because there are cleverer people here to answer T questions and like i said i hardly ever get any problems with T that i can't sort myself.

[DHR53]

...was it the Mac suggestion?? Thanks for the effort, really...

p.s. I wish the Modular stuff was mac too...

[Hengy]

This has got me thinking that it'd be really cool if jorge could implement an inter process comms module that would let SM compiled vsts exchange data (sort of thing that spaceboy and modulr's senderella have implemented).
That'd open up side-chaining, ducking stuff and the sort of master/slave vsts you're talking about here without needing to go to midi CCs (am i right that they'd have lower resolution than an internal control signal?)
Anyway probably just a fantasy as i'm not sure how such a module would fit into SM's architecture

[dealwithit]

I'm all for a mixer paradigm in T, and have been since I started using it. The current "in line" method just doesn't suit me. I work with it okay now, and I've stopped mixing all my T stuff in Cubase, but I miss Cubase's mixer still. The thing with all the mixers made for T is hooking them up: it's really more of a pain than I'm willing to endure. If it were easier to use, I'd use it.

[pHz]

I'm all for a mixer paradigm in T, and have been since I started using it. The current "in line" method just doesn't suit me. I work with it okay now, and I've stopped mixing all my T stuff in Cubase, but I miss Cubase's mixer still. The thing with all the mixers made for T is hooking them up: it's really more of a pain than I'm willing to endure. If it were easier to use, I'd use it.

hook one up in a rack and save it as a rack preset ... only needs setting up once then ...

(but i STILL dont really understand the ill-use-tracktion-DESPITE-it-not-having-a-conventional-mixer attitude TBH)

slainte rob