Mixcraft Suggestions!

[aquataur]

For those of us on crappy, underpowered computers, how about a Freeze/Unfreeze(...)

Mixcraft folks, may I call to your attention again that in the case of freezing a track it would be useful to release the plug-in memory, if that is possible at all.

The more powerful a plug-in is, the more one profits from freezing, but also, the more memory it probably consumes. Such as: samplers...


-helmut

[msavoia]

This has also certainly been mentioned before as i recall but let me suggest it again.^_^

The ability to automate the active/not active (On/Off) state of an effect.
You can do something like that now only *if* the effect has a mix dial or or its own on/off parameter, but the ability to active/deactivate any effect mid-stream by automation is not currently possible....

[Acoustica Greg]

This has also certainly been mentioned before as i recall but let me suggest it again.^_^

The ability to automate the active/not active (On/Off) state of an effect.
You can do something like that now only *if* the effect has a mix dial or or its own on/off parameter, but the ability to active/deactivate any effect mid-stream by automation is not currently possible....

Hi,

You can put the effect on a Send track and automate the send.

Greg

[msavoia]

This has also certainly been mentioned before as i recall but let me suggest it again.^_^
The ability to automate the active/not active (On/Off) state of an effect.
You can do something like that now only *if* the effect has a mix dial or or its own on/off parameter, but the ability to active/deactivate any effect mid-stream by automation is not currently possible....

Hi,

You can put the effect on a Send track and automate the send.
Greg

Yes, but that requires some extra maneuvering if you've already got the effect set up on a particular track - sometimes you just want to shut it off (inactive) automatically at certain points...

[msavoia]

Possibly rather low down on the totem pole of inconveniences, but still a slight inconvenience...

When you select a region for play looping, all the clips within that region on all tracks get selected. But selection of clips is not usually the purpose when you're defining a loop start/end region, so is it possible to unselect all those clips once you press "L" to define your loop?

Cheers,

[Brian S]

I've always been bothered by the inefficient space usage of the mixer. I've got a lot of screen real estate, and I'd like the option to use it for something more than just longer throw on the faders. For instance, something like this:




No, I would probably NEVER use that many sends. But it's not uncommon for me to have a couple reverbs, a delay and maybe a doubler or something else. I would love to just be able to see at a glance all of my send levels at the same time instead of having to select which one I want to see at any given time. This would be a huge quality of life improvement for me.

Shorten the Main Mix fader to the same length as the other faders and use the space to tell me the name of each send over there.

I know, probably still want to have one send knob that can use a drop down to select what it controls - just in case someone is really crazy and uses even more sends. Or if someone just doesn't have the screen real estate that I do. Nevertheless, the ability to have more send knobs on screen and less throw length would be a big improvement imo.

[mick]

Ha Ha! Here's a tin opener for a great big can o' worms!

Referring to BrianS suggestion I would like to add:
Stacking effects tracks above the main one would help to solve the following issues of disorganisation I guess.

If I open 2 instrument and 2 audio tracks I can see what I have.
If I open 2 send tracks for each then Mixcraft will place the sends to the left of the track or the one that holds the midi or audio - fabulous!

If I decide to reorganise the track layout and place the instruments in alphabetical or notation order, or just move one track then the associated sends get left behind and do not move with the re positioned track. If I re position 4 tracks I would be left with total chaos as to which sends belong to which track because sends are not tagged or linked to the audio or midi track that it affects. It looks like I could end up with track 1 audio and its send track could be track 9 therefore presenting a serious head scratching moment. There is very little appearance wise between main and sends, And on a personal note I'm not sure that I would want an equaliser or pan if the send is attached to a track that already has these. On the 3rd pic I moved an audio track to the top but its send track stayed put, I only know which it is because I wrote it down.

Mixer 1.PNG (213.46 KiB) Viewed 7604 times

ixer 2.PNG (400.72 KiB) Viewed 7604 times

Mixer 3.PNG (453.57 KiB) Viewed 7604 times

[mick]

No prizes for guessing which track belongs to which send.

Disclaimer: This is not a bashing but a simple observation!

[Juno]

Mick, i understand why you say that a track and a send track are associated with each other. But what should happen to the send track if you have several tracks using it and then rearrange your tracks?

Also, when i add a send track by using the '+track' button it is dropped at the bottom (main view) and all the way to the right (in mixer view). And that makes sense - how would Mixcraft know in advance the track(s) i wish to use it for?

(If you right click a track and insert a send track, it will indeed be inserted above it/to the left. But that's for every kind of track, except video tracks.)

But i do think the mixer would profit from a new design, including visual aids to see the routing. I also spend a lot of my time in the mixer just finding out where the track is that i'm working on. If my selected track would always be the same (customizable) color for instance, regardless of its type, that would already help.

Other stuff that comes to my mind when in the mixer: some type of visual border between the tracks; customize the number of visible sends; show/hide/lock buttons and faders and other information per track, combined with scalable tracks (width); linking faders; grouping (move and customize tracks as a group); create a yellow note on a track; a picture of a happy cat, etc.

[mick]

Juno, I think I'll settle for a happy cat!

Happy cat.PNG (662.26 KiB) Viewed 7564 times

[Brian S]

A better solution to the "association" is to have the send knobs take on the color of the track they are sending to. So if the send track is dark blue, the knob that sends to it is also dark blue.

[Juno]

So if the send track is dark blue, the knob that sends to it is also dark blue.

The same problem arises. What color should it be if a track uses more than one send track?

[Brian S]

So if the send track is dark blue, the knob that sends to it is also dark blue.

The same problem arises. What color should it be if a track uses more than one send track?

If the send track is blue, the knob is blue. If the send track is red, the knob is red.

Multiple knobs per track, color coded to the corresponding send track, and labeled off to the right.

[Mark Bliss]

If the send track is blue, the knob is blue. If the send track is red, the knob is red.
Multiple knobs per track, color coded to the corresponding send track, and labeled off to the right.

I have to say that while its not a big deal, I like this suggestion. I could use that, though I generally use 2, maybe 3. On rare occasions maybe a 4th send track, this suggested visual cue could be useful.

Far less important to me than additional routing options that have been suggested, but none the less, I like it.
Elegant solution.

[Juno]

I still think it leads to problems. You'd have to give every send track a different color.

Would it work with the labels having the color linked? Tracks can still be any color, but the labels have a color independant of that track color, and those label colors are then linked.