Acoustica - Software should be easy to use

Feature suggestion: "takes" mode extra settings for lanes

Support and feedback for Acoustica's Mixcraft audio mixing software.

Moderators: Acoustica Dan, Acoustica Greg, Acoustica Chris, Acoustica Eric

jaborandi
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 6:43 am

Feature suggestion: "takes" mode extra settings for lanes

Postby jaborandi » Fri Oct 03, 2014 10:12 am

Based on the problems discussed in the thread, asking Mixcraft folks to kindly consider following features:

1) option that will make Mixcraft auto-mute _entire_ previous lane when recording to new one - not only the part that has new clip on next lane underneath, hence _not_ breaking automatically anything on previous lane. Can be in global preferences.

2) when no lane selected, record to new lane (instead of first from the top that has empty space). No one in the thread commented against this, so may just make it always so, but if you think someone needs that "first-from-the-top" behavior - make it an option in (global?) setting

3) automatically remove lanes that become empty (have no idea who would oppose this, but if you think that may happen - make it an option)

Thanks in advance for consideration.

that's all. below goes original post

------------------------------------------------------

(previous subject: "Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/clips")

Hello!

Video of the problems:

1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wA0ODakzLg - take #1 gets broken in 2 clips

2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKG5D5cu8B4 - by default (when no lane selected), Mixcraft records take of the "ending" on the first lane that has space (even non-empty lane)

When recording in "takes" mode, "if you are recording over an area that already has sound data, it will automatically create or find an empty lane" (quotation from Mixcraft help).

Note the: "or find an empty" part. I.e. Mixcraft doesn't always create new lane, it tries to reuse existing ones. And "empty" here doesn't mean "fully empty", it means empty at this particular time of recording.

In practice, at least for me, this results in that takes are often either scatter over several different lanes, or - even while on single lane - consist of several clips (despite of being recorded as single, continuous take). So that I, at least, often have to "merge" what I actually recorded as single and never broke.

I tried to find in settings how to change this, but failed.

Am I missing something?

If that is impossible to change - this is really-really inconvenient.

First, you have to figure out and keep in mind that half of particular take is on different lane (or lanes, if you're recording from multiple inputs).

Second, the natural (chronological) order of takes is broken: you might have later take somewhere up among early ones, just because in take 20 you wanted to focus on second half of the composition, and in take 3 you messed up earlier, dropped it and moved on, so second half of the lane is empty, and Mixcraft uses it.

Finally, even if clips are on same lane, you need to merge them (which is not much fun, some pieces can be tiny, some - out of the view, etc), otherwise you will mess them up when moving, or will have to click mute/unmute on every of them to mute/unmute take (again, with some possibly out of the current view, and toggling mute with tiny icon is not much fun even for one clip per lane, so...)

And I frankly cannot think of any possible advantage from this behavior: why Mixcraft is so economical about new lanes - who could possibly benefit from this?

I don't mind it to reuse lanes that are _completely_ empty*, and if full take is placed there. But otherwise - it's better, in my opinion, to create new lane.

So, am I missing some option that would allow me to have every take in single lane and not broken in separate clips?

*although I would actually prefer for lanes to be removed automatically once they are empty - i.e. when all clips on the lane deleted - this way, option to delete empty lanes with ALT+K would not be even needed... if that cannot be always like this (because someone would dislike it, wishing empty lanes to stay there even after he deleted all its contents - although I really doubt someone would need that) then make it an option?

Thanks for reading and have a great weekend everybody!
Last edited by jaborandi on Fri Oct 10, 2014 9:12 am, edited 4 times in total.

gypsy101
Posts: 2322
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:00 pm
Location: near Music City,USA

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby gypsy101 » Sat Oct 04, 2014 1:18 am

jaborandi wrote:Hello!

When recording in "takes" mode, "if you are recording over an area that already has sound data, it will automatically create or find an empty lane" (quotation from Mixcraft help).

Note the: "or find an empty" part. I.e. Mixcraft doesn't always create new lane, it tries to reuse existing ones. And "empty" here doesn't mean "fully empty", it means empty at this particular time of recording.

In practice, at least for me, this results in that takes are often either scatter over several different lanes, or - even while on single lane - consist of several clips (despite of being recorded as single, continuous take). So that I, at least, often have to "merge" what I actually recorded as single and never broke.

I tried to find in settings how to change this, but failed.
go into Preferences>Recording & change Takes to Overdubs

Am I missing something?

If that is impossible to change - this is really-really inconvenient.

First, you have to figure out and keep in mind that half of particular take is on different lane (or lanes, if you're recording from multiple inputs).

Second, the natural (chronological) order of takes is broken: you might have later take somewhere up among early ones, just because in take 20 you wanted to focus on second half of the composition, and in take 3 you messed up earlier, dropped it and moved on, so second half of the lane is empty, and Mixcraft uses it.

Finally, even if clips are on same lane, you need to merge them (which is not much fun, some pieces can be tiny, some - out of the view, etc), otherwise you will mess them up when moving, or will have to click mute/unmute on every of them to mute/unmute take (again, with some possibly out of the current view, and toggling mute with tiny icon is not much fun even for one clip per lane, so...)

And I frankly cannot think of any possible advantage from this behavior: why Mixcraft is so economical about new lanes - who could possibly benefit from this?

I don't mind it to reuse lanes that are _completely_ empty*, and if full take is placed there. But otherwise - it's better, in my opinion, to create new lane.

So, am I missing some option that would allow me to have every take in single lane and not broken in separate clips?
that depends on where you start the recording cursor. check out Punch In/Punch Out recording.

*although I would actually prefer for lanes to be removed automatically once they are empty - i.e. when all clips on the lane deleted - this way, option to delete empty lanes with ALT+K would not be even needed... if that cannot be always like this (because someone would dislike it, wishing empty lanes to stay there even after he deleted all its contents - although I really doubt someone would need that) then make it an option?

Thanks for reading and have a great weekend everybody!

.

jaborandi
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 6:43 am

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby jaborandi » Sat Oct 04, 2014 8:30 am

Hello, gypsy101!
Thank you very much for finding time to read my rant and reply.

gypsy101 wrote:go into Preferences>Recording & change Takes to Overdubs


1) This problem exist in overdub mode too - try to record something, interrupting some takes early. Record several takes (to have several lanes with content, some of which - shorter than Loop area. Now change recording loop area like if you wanted to work on the final part of the track. Hit record - you'll see that Mixcraft starts to record on the very first (starting from the top) lane that has space available for new loop area, despite that lane having clip in the beginning of the track

2) In Overdub mode previous takes are not muted! lol
So I wouldn't be able to use this as a solution even if Overdub mode was not susceptible to same problem.

gypsy101 wrote:that depends on where you start the recording cursor. check out Punch In/Punch Out recording.


Not sure how it is related. I'm sorry may be my original post was totally confusing. As far as I understand, Punch In/Out is extra feature that allows to record only specific part while playing-back greater part encompassing it.
Whereas I'm talking about tricky ways of how mixcraft allocates lanes for recording.
Turning Punch In / Out mode and setting Punch In/ Out region will not affect the result I described in example above

Sorry for possible confusion from my first post, or if I misunderstood what you mean

User avatar
trevlyns
Posts: 2402
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 1:59 am
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Contact:

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby trevlyns » Sat Oct 04, 2014 10:48 am

Also not fully sure what you mean, but the way I work is as follows.

I punch in/punch out a small section at a time and loop the area just before to the punch out line.
I then arm the track for takes and do whatever is needed for just that section.
I select the best take and delete the rest, moving on to the next section.
This continues to the end when I'm left with a load of short takes spread all over the lanes, but in the correct sequence from left to right.
Finally, just 'select all' and merge then delete the empty lanes.

Hope this helps!
Keep on trackin'

Trevor

Website
Soundcloud
FaceBook

Official OFC™ Founding Member

Win 10 64 bit; MX8 Pro; Intel quad core i-5; 3.0 GHz; 16 GB RAM
I started out with nothing - and still have most of it left! - Seasick Steve

jaborandi
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 6:43 am

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby jaborandi » Sun Oct 05, 2014 10:04 am

Hello, Trevor!

Thank you very much for the detailed reply (cunning scheme, by the way! lol)

As I understand the workflow you just described, you indeed won't face the problems I face, because you work with sufficiently short areas, so you probably never stop/interrupt the take, as it is short enough to just wait till the end of the loop. As a result, no shorter/longer clips = no premise for Mixcraft to exercise its advanced lanes allocation;

You probably record already composed tracks for production piece by piece, right?

Whereas my cases are:

1) recording takes while composing the line of another instrument for existing track - when you need to work with longer parts (than in your example) and might want to work with different areas in unpredictable order;

2) recording some tracks after practice (to listen to it afterwards, as a part of practice etc.)
Full piece at once, with some attempts possibly dropped early. And usually several takes of one composition, then several takes of another and so on. (And in several channels).
Result - multiple takes of different length.

I actually figured out some amazingly simple example, and will post screenshot and / or video soon.
Last edited by jaborandi on Mon Oct 06, 2014 7:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

freightgod
Posts: 615
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 5:18 am

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby freightgod » Sun Oct 05, 2014 3:35 pm

Jaborandi, I record in takes all the time and know exactly what you mean. It's very annoying. I'm not sure what the benefit to this behavior is in the first place. Makes comping a p.i.t.a.

jaborandi
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 6:43 am

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby jaborandi » Mon Oct 06, 2014 8:09 am

freightgod wrote:Jaborandi, I record in takes all the time and know exactly what you mean. It's very annoying. I'm not sure what the benefit to this behavior is in the first place. Makes comping a p.i.t.a.


Oh, thanks - now I know I'm not crazy Ɑ:
I was amazed there was no big topic with lots of complaints about this.

jaborandi
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 6:43 am

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby jaborandi » Mon Oct 06, 2014 8:30 am

Videos of the problems:

1) takes getting broken into multiple clips

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wA0ODakzLg

take #1 gets broken in 2 clips. But take #1 is totally innocent - it gets broken in two just because take #2, recorded on the next lane, happens to be shorter!

2) inconvenient default take placement:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKG5D5cu8B4

By default (when no lane is selected), Mixcraft records take to the first lane that has space in the area you work with (even if lane is not empty).

In this example I record "first instrument" then several takes of the full line of the "second instrument" and then several takes of just ending of the "second instrument line".

This default behavior is very inconvenient, because when I change the loop/record area, I almost certainly click on the track 1 in the process, as selecting the record area is related to composition - (first instrument). As a result, none of the lanes in the track 2 is selected. So, when I hit R(ecord), Mixcraft places the takes in the first lane that has space in the selected area.

Clicking on the last lane (which would be workaround _sometimes_ - when it is not empty in the selected area) is not a solution, as it might be empty there, and then you end up recording different thing in that lane, not to mention that it is very unintuitive.

Since there seem to be no any benefit for Mixcraft to use existing lane that's empty in selected area, it would really help if default behavior (when no lanes selected) would be always creating new lane.

3) Regarding take being scattered over several lanes - it can be that I made mistake, that this doesn't happen and I was just so much confused by problems (1) & (2) that thought takes are indeed span across mutliple lanes, while that is not the case. If so - sorry for confusion, though this just goes to show how confusing existing issues are

gypsy101
Posts: 2322
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:00 pm
Location: near Music City,USA

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby gypsy101 » Mon Oct 06, 2014 8:42 am

the simplest way to do it would be to make a separate track for each insturment.
record parts of each insturment in sequential order, arming only the track you need @ the time.
when you have the whole composition mapped out then go back & concentrate on overdubs.

or,
record parts as you come up w/ them leaving plenty of space/time between sections then go back & link them together.

jaborandi
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 6:43 am

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby jaborandi » Mon Oct 06, 2014 9:18 am

gypsy101 wrote:the simplest way to do it would be to make a separate track for each insturment.
record parts of each insturment in sequential order


Of course I do! (: I do have each instrument in its own track (:
I'm talking about different takes of same instrument!

User avatar
Mark Bliss
Posts: 6514
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:59 pm
Location: Out there

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby Mark Bliss » Mon Oct 06, 2014 7:39 pm

Now that I see the video at least part of what you are saying makes sense to me.....

I'd say the first behaviour, where a track split is automatically added when you add a take, is not only normal, but desirable. Imagine comping bits of takes if you had to find the exact location to add a split for every segment to match the new take. Use it to your advantage. Saves time. Dont need it? ignore it or merge the clip as necessary. I dont see the hassle outweighing the benefit.

The second example, I cant really say. I have never seen that simply because I don't work that way. Maybe theres a slight change in your workflow that would make that work better for you? Try a different mode?
I can't answer for the design of the function, but maybe someone thought it best to not have 30 sub tracks of takes scrolling off the screen. Personally, I'd be at a loss for keeping track of all those little clips no matter how they are organized to be honest....... Not trying to be cocky or a jerk, but If I have many more than 3 or 4 takes on a pass at something, I generally think its time to disarm the track and figure out how to fix that...... 8)
Stay in tune, Mark

Image

My SOUNDCLOUD Page

gypsy101
Posts: 2322
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:00 pm
Location: near Music City,USA

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby gypsy101 » Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:41 am

mbliss wrote:Now that I see the video at least part of what you are saying makes sense to me.....
. Maybe theres a slight change in your workflow that would make that work better for you? Try a different mode?
I can't answer for the design of the function, but maybe someone thought it best to not have 30 sub tracks of takes scrolling off the screen. Personally, I'd be at a loss for keeping track of all those little clips no matter how they are organized to be honest....... Not trying to be cocky or a jerk, but If I have many more than 3 or 4 takes on a pass at something, I generally think its time to disarm the track and figure out how to fix that...... 8)


BINGO!!!
I just didn't want to say it.lol

see,a lot of us come from the ol' analog tape way of thinking & you would simply not work in the manner that you do. make your loops longer w/ plenty of lead-in & cut-off times and it shouldn't be a problem.
you're just making things harder on yourself doing suck short loops.

no offense. :wink:

jaborandi
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 6:43 am

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby jaborandi » Tue Oct 07, 2014 5:52 am

mbliss wrote:I'd say the first behaviour, where a track split is automatically added when you add a take, is not only normal, but desirable. Imagine comping bits of takes if you had to find the exact location to add a split for every segment to match the new take..


Thank you for your answer, mbliss.

You see, I suspect we are talking about two very different usage scenarios, this is why this feature brings you lots of benefits and 0 inconvenience, whereas for me it is exactly opposite.

Since you mention comping, I assume you are talking about making recording for production.

Use cases I deal with are different: 1) composing second/third/... instruments for existing tracks; 2) rehearsal; Doing this, I don't use comping at all. The time at which take #1 and take #2 in the video end (and even takes themsalves), therefore, don't need to be related at all. You can interrupt take of a long solo and start over. You may try totally different version in two neighbor takes. You can do whatever. In scenario (2) you can even start same piece at different time, play in different tempo etc.

So, in my use cases, finding the moment in take #1, at which take #2 ends, is similar to subtracting the number of fishes in the sea from the number of stars in the sky.

mbliss wrote:Not trying to be cocky or a jerk, but If I have many more than 3 or 4 takes on a pass at something, I generally think its time to disarm the track and figure out how to fix that...... 8)


I suspect, it again has to do with the difference in our usage scenarios. In my scenario 1, for example. you might have myriads of takes and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Same time, in both (1) and (2) the last thing you need is to divert yourself with even quick organizing, tidying-up, correcting tasks from the task you are focused on. Even the fact that I need to hit more than one (usually three) keys to drop the take and start anew, is quite annoying and I'll probably eventually try to fix it using some software. The time when I decide to check takes, organize them, decide what to keep and what to delete must be only determined by the music, not by the fear that later it will be much harder to do due to Mixcraft having a feature useful in one and troublesome in other use cases.
Last edited by jaborandi on Tue Oct 07, 2014 6:06 am, edited 3 times in total.

jaborandi
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 6:43 am

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby jaborandi » Tue Oct 07, 2014 6:02 am

gypsy101 wrote:see,a lot of us come from the ol' analog tape way of thinking & you would simply not work in the manner that you do. make your loops longer w/ plenty of lead-in & cut-off times and it shouldn't be a problem.
you're just making things harder on yourself doing suck short loops.

no offense. :wink:


Hi, gypsy101!

Loops and everything is short in sample video just because it is a sample video and I doubt anyone would watch it if I used realistic example with 2-3 minutes tracks. Imagine that track is as long as you wish.

I don't understand how lead-ins and cut-offs would help me: if I drop second track in the middle of composition, first take will be clipped apart at time where there's a music, regardless of any cut-off "buffers"

gypsy101
Posts: 2322
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:00 pm
Location: near Music City,USA

Re: Anyone troubled by takes scattered over multiple lanes/c

Postby gypsy101 » Tue Oct 07, 2014 6:28 am

jaborandi wrote:
gypsy101 wrote:see,a lot of us come from the ol' analog tape way of thinking & you would simply not work in the manner that you do. make your loops longer w/ plenty of lead-in & cut-off times and it shouldn't be a problem.
you're just making things harder on yourself doing suck short loops.

no offense. :wink:


Hi, gypsy101!

Loops and everything is short in sample video just because it is a sample video and I doubt anyone would watch it if I used realistic example with 2-3 minutes tracks. Imagine that track is as long as you wish.

I don't understand how lead-ins and cut-offs would help me: if I drop second track in the middle of composition, first take will be clipped apart at time where there's a music, regardless of any cut-off "buffers"


this is why you would use overdub mode.


Return to “Mixcraft”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 26 guests