The Best Looking Host Console View

[haydxn]

those last two are a little energyxt'ish aren't they. I like em though

did you not read the names? that's the idea, silly!

[BONES]

i don't see the need to replicate the mixer view anymore now i've become so accustomed to tracktion. i'm pretty handy on a real mixer, but the way tracktion works for me is ideal, and i just love having access to all the things at once no matter what. why do i need to see them all in a row? i can see what they're doing just fine. top stuff. here are a few of my favourite schemes for it...

I don't get it. When I played around with traktion I could see far less of what was going on at one time than I can in ORION. I don't understand how any of those screenshots show you much at all. I can't see EQ settings or Synth settings or send levels or half-a-dozen other things that I might want to see at a glance.
In ORION I can see all the mixer strips, every instrument's toolbar and the Playlist at the same time, with plenty of room for instrument and effect GUI's without having them on top of other important stuff. Mountains more information than in your screenshots.

[ModuLR]

As a T user, I don't have a need to focus on all of that... IMHO levels are better represented along the timeline as opposed looking at a mixer that is changing. In using a real mixer it's a tactile experience, not so with the computer (unless you've got your midi controller wired up, in which case the computers representation still means pretty much nothing). So seeing a timeline with a automation curve set to level is far more informative in telling me what has happend and is going to happen... as opposied to looking at a silly pseudo hardware strip realtime. Funny enough... most hosts can do this, however ORION's automation display is by far the wrose.

oh well... different ppl work different ways right?

[.jon]

I don't get it. When I played around with traktion I could see far less of what was going on at one time than I can in ORION. I don't understand how any of those screenshots show you much at all. I can't see EQ settings or Synth settings or send levels or half-a-dozen other things that I might want to see at a glance.

I can actually see EQ settings even from the minuscule screenshots posted. Tracktion's native EQ shows a graphical presentation of the EQ curve in the filter icon, which IMO is very informative, more so than traditional PEQ dials like on Orion.

I'll try to post some proper screens later from T as I use it. I keep the VST & VSTi GUI docked on a virtual second screen which should actually work well with all hosts.

[BONES]

As a T user, I don't have a need to focus on all of that... IMHO levels are better represented along the timeline as opposed looking at a mixer that is changing. In using a real mixer it's a tactile experience, not so with the computer (unless you've got your midi controller wired up, in which case the computers representation still means pretty much nothing). So seeing a timeline with a automation curve set to level is far more informative in telling me what has happend and is going to happen... as opposied to looking at a silly pseudo hardware strip realtime. Funny enough... most hosts can do this, however ORION's automation display is by far the wrose.

Automation curves? I doubt that one track in 50 of mine has any automation in it at all. Automation curves are the absolute last thing that I ever want to see. And I don't think I would describe using a hardware mixer as a tactile experience. I probably spend 10 times longer listening and making visual comparisons than touching anything. Where do you guys get this krap from? Seriously!

[Kriminal]

however ORION's automation display is by far the wrose.

How? You have an Event wondow that shows exactly each level each paramenter is set to and how it moves.....

[AD80]

I don't understand how any of those screenshots show you much at all. I can't see EQ settings....

When you use the Tracktion EQ (very efficient 4 band parametric), it shows the curve of the EQ right on the plug-in icon. It even changes in real-time if you automate it. It takes up almost no space and shows you a much clearer version of the EQ curve compared to looking at small knobs.

[headquest]

I think that automation curves are useful in two ways:

1) As Scott noted earlier in the thread, a large hardware mixer might require two or three pairs of hands to do everything live in real time in the studio. In the past this is exactly what would happen in studios during mixdown - an extra pair of hands might be drafted in to help move the sliders. Automation has enabled us to mechanise the process so that you no longer need a team of people hunched over the mixer console. It is a response to this... it is one way in which the use of software within studio production has made life easier for the mixing engineer. For those of us working wholly in software, automation is basically a no brainer when you want to fade stuff in and out.

2) Depending on the style of music you are doing you might want to use automation in more creative ways. For example, filter sweeps. Other creative effects use. Etc. Mixing down an audio recording of a rock band this may well never apply, but if you produce more overtly electronic music, automating stuff can be a key part of the creative process.

Bones - this might not be how you personally work, but that does not make it "krap". Lots of people do work this way, including the majority of the industry

[headquest]

I don't understand how any of those screenshots show you much at all. I can't see EQ settings....

When you use the Tracktion EQ (very efficient 4 band parametric), it shows the curve of the EQ right on the plug-in icon. It even changes in real-time if you automate it. It takes up almost no space and shows you a much clearer version of the EQ curve compared to looking at small knobs.

I really like that in Tracktion. The only aspect that I don't like is the way that the EQ filter icon (and the level/pan filter, meters, etc) all reduce in size the more you add. The EQ becomes of very little visual value once this happens, because it becomes so squashed up. Similarly the pan filter.

If you have a synth, an EQ, maybe one or two other fx, the volume/pan, and the level meters, then everything is too squashed already to give the amount of visual feedback and adjustable control that I would like, even if you widen the filter section out to the left.

I haven't seen an alterntive that works better in its EQ presentation though. It is pretty standard to need to look at your EQ graph in its own right.

EDIT: Because different tracks have different numbers of filters on them, this also means that the volume/pan filters do not line up properly in Tracktion. Again, I would prefer it if they at least did. The Tracktion mixing paradigm would be more effective imho if you could hardwire volume/pan, EQ and level meters to be a fixed width, lined up with each other consistently down the right hand side of the arrange page.

[ceenda]

headquest: yeah, I hear you on the "squashed filters" effect. It also tends to slow down quite a bit when there are lots of filters being drawn, which makes mixing a bit slow.

However, what I usually do is drag the filter section as wide as possible and then just switch it on and off using the toggle button at the top right.

[headquest]

headquest: yeah, I hear you on the "squashed filters" effect. It also tends to slow down quite a bit when there are lots of filters being drawn, which makes mixing a bit slow.

However, what I usually do is drag the filter section as wide as possible and then just switch it on and off using the toggle button at the top right.

Cheers, yeah I guess that's the best workaround for the situation. And its all down to personal taste of course... I would far rather use Tracktion for mixing than have to battle with some of the monster hardware emulations that people have posted in this thread

[BONES]

1) As Scott noted earlier in the thread, a large hardware mixer might require two or three pairs of hands to do everything live in real time in the studio. In the past this is exactly what would happen in studios during mixdown - an extra pair of hands might be drafted in to help move the sliders. Automation has enabled us to mechanise the process so that you no longer need a team of people hunched over the mixer console. It is a response to this... it is one way in which the use of software within studio production has made life easier for the mixing engineer. For those of us working wholly in software, automation is basically a no brainer when you want to fade stuff in and out.

Well I wonder how I ever got by recording in a studio with just me and an engineer. Its clearly a miracle we ever got anything done.

2) Depending on the style of music you are doing you might want to use automation in more creative ways. For example, filter sweeps. Other creative effects use. Etc. Mixing down an audio recording of a rock band this may well never apply, but if you produce more overtly electronic music, automating stuff can be a key part of the creative process.

Wow! That sounds like an amazing idea. With all that power you have to wonder why a synth would need LFO's or envelopes at all. I certianly don't think I'll be needing any more modulation matrices in the future.

Bones - this might not be how you personally work, but that does not make it "krap". Lots of people do work this way, including the majority of the industry

Of course it makes it krap. Its krap if I say it is because, clearly, I've looked into it and decided on the only correct course. Surely its obvious to everyone that I'm not just making this stuff up?

BTW, you're an idiot.

[haydxn]

bones is once again proving that his glasses are just to cover the c**t and balls on the top of his face

[stefancrs]

Bones, seriously, how would you go about for making for instance "trance'ish" filter build-ups without automation? Or, in the bridge in a song, pull up the reverb amount on an instrument? And so on.

[Kriminal]

Bones, seriously, how would you go about for making for instance "trance'ish" filter build-ups without automation? Or, in the bridge in a song, pull up the reverb amount on an instrument? And so on.

He doesnt do that kinda music, i know he uses a lot of vel to control filters tho.

I use the automation alot for filter sweeps and stuuf in Orion, i record it using the mouse or knobs on my controller, and edit by hand if i need to, piece of cake.