a mixing screen?

[Rock]

I wish that you could have a bank of say 16 sliders. You could select the function at any time for any of the 16 and then have the same hardware controller move those sliders no matter what they are dynamically assigned to. These settings could be saved as a "patch" just like the way racks works. But I do wish that when possible there would also be a meter displayed over the fader. I don't fell like I explained it well but for some reason I don't think it matters...

[spacefox]

What I'd like to see for racks is a way of creating a new parameters for a rack, that can be used to control one or more parameters of plugins contained inside the rack.

A build your own control surface interface that could be used to control parameters from a range of different plugins, or assigned to a rack filter to effectively create a 'build your own synth' environment would be pretty powerful.

This would be brilliant. The main thing I dislike about using racks, is that it makes editing parameters on wrapped plugins more diffuclt.

[semiquaver]

Valley - great idea - I could make a bunch of synth primitives (oscillators filters distortion panning etc) in MAX ...

Similar to Rock's idea I would like to be able to save banks of controller mappings with an edit: I have 8 faders and I'd love a "tweak the drum levels setting" and "tweak the submixes" setting.

Also I think Rock makes a good point that some more visual feedback to let you know where your controllers are mapped would be good (hate to just twiddle them and see what moves!)

But to return to the topic: I think that a mixer (if there is to be one) should be implemented horizontally to keep T clear, no?

[mandolarian]

You know, those cheapskates at Mackie could solve this once and for all if they wanted. Just bundle the MCU with every copy of Tracktion!
Sure, people would complain about not being able to download the whole package...

The virtual mixer metaphor does not work for me, because it misses the best part of a real mixer. The tactile element. And the massively parallel nature of real sliders. And the cupholders!

Automation is stupendously powerful and flexible, yet simple. If there is mixer metaphor that's better, I'd like to see it.

[semiquaver]

mandolarian: I think the issue is visual feedback - a way to see what you are doing with your controller.

[jplanet]

Think of it as methodone for Cubase addicts. Eventually they may outgrow it.

I would probably not user the mixer very often myself, but I would support its addition if it meant that more users, and therefore more financial backing, and therefore more development resources and support to T and its users.

[mandolarian]

Ah...Line of sight mixing. I get it. But I still want those cupholders...

[ShawnG]

How about a completely separate app that uses tracktion's file structures, and plugins simply for mixing, so you get done tracking, fire up the new program, and mix! that way tracktion doesn't need to change, and mixaholics can work in a comfortable environment for them. I don't see anything wrong with mixing in tracktion, it makes you think about things a little differently, which can be very creative.

[jplanet]

How about a completely separate app that uses tracktion's file structures, and plugins simply for mixing, so you get done tracking, fire up the new program, and mix! that way tracktion doesn't need to change, and mixaholics can work in a comfortable environment for them. I don't see anything wrong with mixing in tracktion, it makes you think about things a little differently, which can be very creative.

That's similar to the concept behind Lightwave, an excellent 3d graphics program. It consists of two programs: one for creating models, and one for animating scenes. It keeps the interface very clean, and both programs are extremely lightweight.

[braj]

I think something along the lines of what valley suggested would require it to be part of the same app, anyway I think if T does get a mixer it needs to be more than a mixer, like a totally modular control area like Racks that focusses on the whole set at once. You may only need three volume sliders, but you may want access to other parameters like the compressors and verbs etc on all the different devices across your composition. Having a way to get that all in one interface as you feel fit would be really powerful. And better than 'just' a mixer.

[ELI]

hmm. There is a such thing as "DEMO DOWNLOADS", try before you buy, and not just fly because someone says it's good.

[stash98]

I like using the mixer for busses and Auxs more then anything. I think if you hit a button and a really cool mixer came up that made aux sends much more cohesive it would be a great thing and probably draw in more users.

That being said, I still use T2 and get killer mixes in it..I just am very used to the virtual mixers and believe that they have their place in a sequencer.

[koolkeys]

I know I suggested the option back on the first page, but I do want to address the "visual" side of things.

I mix on a daily basis, on different consoles, from ProTools Control 24 to Digital X Bus to Neve and SSL consoles. And NEVER during the process of mixing do I ever look at the faders to see where something is in the mix. If you are doing that, then you're not getting an accurate view. Knowing what sounds good is FAR more valuable than using a mixer. The "shape" of the faders does nothing.

Really, I think T is fine without a mixer of ANY kind. But you will never convince some people otherwise. And that's just how they work I guess. Even when I used Cubase I never used the mixer visually.

Koolkeys

[semiquaver]

The "shape" of the faders does nothing.

This is especially true w/floating point mixing as there is no analog gain-staging going on.

[braj]

hmm. There is a such thing as "DEMO DOWNLOADS", try before you buy, and not just fly because someone says it's good.

Hmm, I've used Tracktion for more than two years. And I still wouldn't mind a 'mixer'.