Bones, this is EXACTLY how I see it as well
I would say that the sub-mixer strip can be exactly like the main mixer-strip, but without the buss-routing as that is replaced by it being a sub-mixer (in essence a buss-group) already.
Maybe, for complex scenarios, the sub-mixer could have two local sends with it's own send-channels on the sub-mixer itself, in addition to the four sends to the main send-section.
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/SendsModerators: Christophe, Mark Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/Sendsyeah, I follow. I still wouldn't want full sized strips to show up in the submixer, but that's just me.
maybe the strips within the submixer could be semi-modular? Like being able to chose to add an eq section to the strips, or add/remove insert slots as users see fit?
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/Sendsi think its a great idea especially because you have to much freedom you could then even attach 2 submixer in another submixer. however it needs to be backwards compatible so you must look at it as a tool not a complete replacement i fear that a lot of people that are a bit conservative wont like the change because its quite a big difference between this situation and the one we are in now
Did You Know you can download my albums on 1albums.com and you can promote your own there to
http://www.myspace.com/djmatthy
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/SendsI don't think there would be any issues at all, since it wouldn't replace anything. It's just an added option people can use if they want.
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/Sends
Yeah.... not gonna happen any time soon, I think. That would allow for the same behavior for the mixer, and pretty much it's rigid right now, partly due to the way the skinning system works (it's all fixed-size images). But removing stuff is easy. You just dabble a bit with the background image, and then just put in the new coordinates for the stuff, placing off screen everything you don't want to see. Or just ask someone to do it for you Last edited by HYPNAGOGIA on Mon May 10, 2010 12:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SoundCloud ::: Facebook
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/Sendsby the way, what program do people use for skinning? I know absolutely nincs about it. I think I popped open mspaint (or maybe I had a copy of Gimp installed, but it seems to me I never got it to work right) one time just to play with colors on the mixer strips, but that wasn't very fun. Made me have immediate respect for people taking the time to make skins.
Last edited by Icaro on Mon May 10, 2010 2:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/SendsI think if one's doing synths or guitars in the Sub, and trying to get a good internal mix, a Mute button within the mixer would help speed things up.
Without having to mouse to a VSTi and mute it, or a sampler to Solo it. One could still do that if they wanted. But if I was mixing in the sub, especially with effects, I'd definitely want to check inst. each on their own to make sure they're not clipping or getting too crunched and all that. Without disrupting the volume and send levels and having to mouse around beforehand.
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/SendsAs I said make it exactly as the main mixer: have mute and solo buttons on the submixer that act ON the submixer. You can simply solo the related strip on the main mixer to hear ONLY your sub-mix and work from there on the sub-mixer. That's how I would work with it, and again it would very closely mimic a hardware mixers scenario
About skinning: it's been years since I did any skinning. No idea what's being used mainly for Orion (I think bones is the authority on that subject) but I would look at Inkscape as this is the main application used by the Reaper skinners and there's a lot skinning going on there I also think that Limeflavour, who has done a lot of skins for many softsynths is using Inkscape as well (not exactly shure about that though).
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/SendsI think if it looked 'exactly' like the main mixer, it would cause confusion and mistakes for the user. How many times have we gone to the EQ to turn up the bass for the kick and 'oh crap!' - we're cranking the bass on the snare strip. So I think Bone's is right to have it look a little different. I don't like the 'sideways' style myself, but could live with it if it's keeping me focused on the sub, the mixer, the main easily.
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/SendsI think a simple 'Sub-Mixer: name you give it' on the titlebar should take care of that.
There are two important reasons why I think it should look exactly like the main mixer (but with 'maybe' two send-channels included): 1. It would look and work exactly as what we are already using now so there is no learning curve involved. Think of it in hardware terms: if you where to buy a second hardware mixer in addition to the one you already had, to get more options for patching and tracks, would you get the same as you have so you get started with it right away... or would you get a different mixer where you have to hit the manual to find out how it differs and how to use it ? 2. (and this one is much more important)... if it is the same as the main mixer then Rich can reuse EVERYTHING that is currently in Orion mixer-wise, including skinning code and graphics. This would be an incredible bonus in regard to the amount of time needed to implement this. As far as I can see, Rich mostly has to put in some 'plumbing' and not much else besides some code that instantiates a new mixer object. So besides how it should look I'm thinking mainly about how easy it could be to implement
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/Sends
Sure, the Sub-Mixer would still need mute/solo, but the thing is that solo would not need to be global, it would just need to work within the Sub-Mixer. i.e. It would only need to mute the other instruments in the Sub-Mixer, not the full mix.
I think it can work in this context, in that it could sit nicely under the main Mixer, making it easy to flip from one to the other while you are mixing. If it were vertical, it would compete for space with the main Mixer and Master Section. Personally, I would not like to see it having all the features of the main Mixer. As I said earlier, I don't think it needs EQ, as you would tend to group similar instruments together and you could EQ them through the Sub's own strip. Where EQ was necessary, it could be handled by an Insert. Or maybe Rich could put the Analog EQ into it, as it only has 3 knobs but having exactly the same EQ at two points in the signal path seems a bit redundant to me. I'd prefer to see it as a smaller alternative, a way of saving time/space where you don't need the full power of the big Mixer. Making it exactly the same seems too limiting to me - it will only solve the direct issues of more busses and effects, where creating something new and distinct from the main Mixer opens up other possibilities as well as solving those problems. Dell G7 (Hexa-Core i7)|Cubase Pro 10||Analog Keys|Ultranova|MicroMonsta|Uno|Skulpt|Craft Synth 2.0|
novakill.com
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/SendsIndeed Bones. Either Solo or Mute in the sub would be fine. Just as a way to double check if the ukulele's too much or not enough with everything.
I think it's main purpose would stand as 'composite mixing'. Combining 2 or 3 snares and clap, or doubled or tripled guitars et al to act as 'one instrument/sound'. So I think you and Rich could fore go EQ's on it. At worst, someone could use a Insert EQ if they had to. But for me doing composite mixing, it's all about the filters on the synth or sampler. Having things 'sideways' just makes me think of GB and Cubase and the like. But could attract those users to OP as well. But highly agree it should be small and compact. If it could get 3 or 4 or more things off the main mixer, combined for that singular sound, and just label the strip 'Snare Bunch' or 'Guitar Clump' I think would be fantastic.
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/SendsOP-> this reminds me of how reason does business with multiple mixers and mini mixers and such...it works there, so itll probably work here.
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/Sends
I do agree with this to a certain point. We could do without EQ as we could insert it when needed. But I know of several scenarios where EQ is needed on every submix channel. So if there is no native EQ on the submixer, it need at least 4 inserts instead of 2 to cater for such scenarios.
Idea to Add Complexity Without More Busses/Inserts/SendsThinking of screen estate, maybe Rich could implement tabs on top of the mixer-panel. The first tab is always there for the main mixer, sub-mixers would create their own tab when added. This would also make it VERY visible in which mixer you are currently working.
I would even opt to have the master-section being able to dock into it's own tab as well.
Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: No registered users and 228 guests |
© 2017 Synapse Audio Software. All Rights Reserved. |