I like Tracktion !

[IIRs]

Cool, I wish I was that good.

What has being good got to do with it? Your ears aren't good enough, so you use your eyes instead? Doesn't make any sense to me.

There is no substitute for mixing with your ears, and the more you rely on visual "clues" the worse your mixes are likely to be..

IMO of course.

[nuffink]

Cool, I wish I was that good.

What has being good got to do with it? Your ears aren't good enough, so you use your eyes instead? Doesn't make any sense to me.

There is no substitute for mixing with your ears, and the more you rely on visual "clues" the worse your mixes are likely to be..

IMO of course.

Indeed. As you made clear in your previous post, and I'm delighted for you. Tracktion is an obvious choice for someone with your talent.
Meanwhile I hope you'll agree that for us lesser mortals visual feedback is a huge boon.

[amoebe]

Rather academic this discussion, right? T2 will feature huge visual feedback for each track. Anything for the audio impaired, the visual impaired, and anyone in between.

[Improv]

No skin off my back if there's a "mixer view" added to T2 (I suspect that will be one of the last announcements if it is). However, I hope that if it is added, it doesn't contain any extra functionality that isn't already present in the rest of the interface.

Same here. When I used Cubase, I used the mixer, T1 has a different way of working, so what?

When I started using T1 I wondered where the mixer was, but hey, no biggie, I just got used to it.

Dunno why some people spend so much time complaining about the lack of a mixer in T, if it bugged me that much, I'd say it's time to look at another piece of software!

Some users are not very adaptable, that's fo' shure!

[IIRs]

Meanwhile I hope you'll agree that for us lesser mortals visual feedback is a huge boon.

Sorry, I don't. Assuming you are a lesser mortal visual feedback regarding volume levels can do nothing but distract you.

If anything, the less experienced you are, the more important it is that your mixing decisions are not unduly influenced by irrelevant information..

In the days of analogue mixers and tape machines, the signal to noise ratio of the final mix was directly related to the gain structure set up by the engineer, so it was essential to have good metering available at all points of the chain.

In a modern DAW like Tracktion, using 32 bit floats, there are only TWO places where you need a level meter: Analogue inputs, and outputs.

Thats it. Anything else, must be judged with your ears, because thats the only way your listeners can judge it.

btw, I feel the same way about parametric equalisers: the only time I want to see a graph of my eq shape is when I'm trying to teach someone the concept of parametric eq!

Otherwise you end up dialing in a curve that looks nice, instead of the one that fixes the problem with the sound.

[nuffink]

No skin off my back if there's a "mixer view" added to T2 (I suspect that will be one of the last announcements if it is). However, I hope that if it is added, it doesn't contain any extra functionality that isn't already present in the rest of the interface.

Same here. When I used Cubase, I used the mixer, T1 has a different way of working, so what?

Things change-get used to it!

When I started using T1 I wondered where the mixer was, but hey, no biggie, I just got used to it.

Dunno why certain people spend so much time complaining about the lack of a mixer in T, if it bugged me that much, I'd say it's time to look at another piece of software!

Some users are not very adaptable, that's fo' shure!

I could probably adapt to a two track tape recorder and a razor blade if I had to. Meanwhile I'm on a internet forum and I'm discussing software user interfaces. Now, I could post saying (in effect) it works for me so what's your problem and litter that post with rolling eye emoticons, but I reckon that'd be a bit pointless.

[Improv]

No skin off my back if there's a "mixer view" added to T2 (I suspect that will be one of the last announcements if it is). However, I hope that if it is added, it doesn't contain any extra functionality that isn't already present in the rest of the interface.

Same here. When I used Cubase, I used the mixer, T1 has a different way of working, so what?

Things change-get used to it!

When I started using T1 I wondered where the mixer was, but hey, no biggie, I just got used to it.

Dunno why certain people spend so much time complaining about the lack of a mixer in T, if it bugged me that much, I'd say it's time to look at another piece of software!

Some users are not very adaptable, that's fo' shure!

I could probably adapt to a two track tape recorder and a razor blade if I had to. Meanwhile I'm on a internet forum and I'm discussing software user interfaces. Now, I could post saying (in effect) it works for me so what's your problem and litter that post with rolling eye emoticons, but I reckon that'd be a bit pointless.

Interesting that you chose to take the post so personally. Note that I said ***USERS***, which is plural-it means more than one user. So unless you have multiple personalities, get over it!

As for the emoticons, kvr-vst put them there to be used. If you don't like it, don't read it! Much like I am about to do with your forth coming
oh-so-predictable response to this message!


Plonk!

[Mr. Tingle]

A mixer is miss leading because a level may 'look' loud yet because of the type of sound will not cut through a mix. Conversely a low meter level may have cutting high frequencies that penetrate a mix very loudly.

looking at lots of levels may be pretty but is not as useful as listening, after all what could be more natural than that for an enginner?

You may argue that it is just additional information that you should have access to, but I think it actually detracts because seeing starts to dominate desicion making, a bit like thinking of music as a linear left to rigth time line. This is a conceptualization that distracts me from the nature of music. If Jules could get round the left to right time line I would be very grateful!

[IIRs]

If Jules could get round the left to right time line I would be very grateful!

If anyone can, Jules can!

Meanwhile try shutting your eyes..

[Mr. Tingle]

Meanwhile try shutting your eyes..

What is the shape of music in the minds eye??

[AD80]

A mixer is miss leading because a level may 'look' loud yet because of the type of sound will not cut through a mix. Conversely a low meter level may have cutting high frequencies that penetrate a mix very loudly.

looking at lots of levels may be pretty but is not as useful as listening,

I agree completly. I get all the info I want instantly from Tracktion without wasting all the screen space of a huge mixing "board". Down with virtual mixers. (in T at atleast)

[webmob]

Hi
Let me say it in my native language.
Ich benötige keinen Mixer!
web-mob

[koolkeys]

It seems to me that because most other sequencers have "mixers" that it's wrong to not have one. This is rubbish. Having no mixer doesn't make you an inferior program, but in this case(IMHO), a better one.

And as it's been said, the "purpose" of a mixer to show you the general levels, well, is sadly wrong. The mixer is the way that levels were set in the hardware world. That's just the design they came up with. Most(in fact, all) professional engineers I know don't look down at the mixers to mix their tracks. They don't stare at them and see what levels they are at. They listen, hear something, then look down and change it. And those who weren't "good" enough to hear the changes, they learned how. Anyone can learn.

It's simple logic. Mixers in software was for the sole purpose of giving people what they were used to, not necessarily the best option, just what they are used to. These are new days. Software, in a huge way, is able to replace hardware. And there are no rules that state you have to have a mixer.

I personally like T's way of working(as hundreds of others do). I can view the whole track, WHILE MIXING, including effects, levels, automation, MIDI, and everything else, all without opening up a window. No clutter, more work getting done. Plain and simple.

Koolkeys

[IIRs]

And as it's been said, the "purpose" of a mixer to show you the general levels, well, is sadly wrong.

There is one situation where the position of the faders (of an analogue desk) provides useful information:

Live sound.

When I soundcheck a band I leave all the faders at unity and make level adjustments with the channel gain trims. This means I start the set with all my faders in a straight line, and at any point I can tell at a glance what has been adjusted from my soundcheck balance.

However, this information is only useful because it allows me to instantly reset levels between tracks with my left hand, while my right hovers over the effects mute group ready to turn the vocal delay back on for the next track.. try doing that with a mouse and on-screen faders!

Also, it is still no substitute for proper listening as I have to use my ears to set the gain trims in the first place, and I need to use them again to decide what isn't loud enough / too loud during each track.

I can just imagine a band's manager approaching me mid-set:

"can you get that vocal a tiny bit louder?"

"no. look, its peaking at +4db, it must be loud enough."

[koolkeys]

I guess that is a possible use for a mixer. But really, how many live bands use software as their primary mixer? Maybe there's more than I thought.

But if you think about it, the software "mixer" wasn't created for live sound. When it was created, software really wasn't powerful enough or stable enough to run a live session, at least not for the most part. It was just created to emulate the hardware that everyone was used to. It became an unwritten "rule" to include a mixer, and everyone did it. Then Tracktion came along.........

By the way, what was the first software to include a mixer? Was it in the old Atari days? Cubase, maybe? I'm curious now.

Koolkeys