Moved from the Top 3 Feature Requests thread
- - - - -
So I'm just kinda sorta going to do an aggregate post here, tying together a few comments from this thread as well as pulling in one from another thread and I'm only pulling these together thanks to a little eureka moment I had responding to another thread
Acoustica Greg wrote:Hi,
How would recording the track be different from just directly converting the track to wav? When you mix to a new audio track in Mixcraft, it includes everything on the track, effects and all.
simple example - I layered 3 VST synths in tracks 1,2,3 and want to record they outputs to track 4 and perform changes of synths parameters and controlers on the fly. I can't do this by converting track to wave. Of course I can record or paint automation in separate tracks, then mix to new tracks, then mix new tracks to new one, maybe not to mix, maybe mix, maybe start new track....But where is the joy of jam?
Hi, guys! I'm an audio-engineer and I just wanna say that Mixcraft 8.1 is hands down the best music software that I ever used. In short, because I want to keep this as simple as possible I would say that Mixcraft is a software that probably needs the fewest improvements but 3 very needed ones come to mind when i read the question.
1. The ability to record audio using MIDI! ex: Inserting Antares Harmony Engine as an effect plug-in and being able to record the harmony while playing it on the midi keyboard. (At the current time you can only play the harmony and cannot record what you play.) This video demonstrates the process (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etl4NRo8d_4
So these two quotes kinda get at the same problem (as well as this thread
), which is that Mixcraft doesn't have the most ideal handling of passing audio between channels with the existing first-party tools. For one of these complaints, the issue is that Acoustica Instruments is not a multi-channel tool, and you can't force a single Instrument track to have sub-tracks when you layer multiple instances of Ac.Inst. and setup a keyboard split/layer (This makes drum processing "fun", because you currently have to split the MIDI into different channels and have a separate instance of Acoustica Instruments on each) - i.e. you can't have four copies of Acoustica Instruments on Track 1 and give each instance its own sub-track; instead you need multiple duplicates. The other complaint is that there's no easy way for MIDI-to-Audio-Effect to be "printed" into the track without writing out the MIDI for the whole track then using bounce-to-track. If you only want a MIDI effect for two measures out of a 200 measure project, you have to apply the MIDI, bounce the whole track in question, split the bounced track at the selection in question, Cut (Ctrl-X) that selection, delete the bounced track then unmute the original (or spam Ctrl-Z with your fingers crossed that an undo doesn't also clear the clipboard), then add a new audio track for those two measures to exist separately. Which is a massive mess.
But, if you have bounce-to-new-track happen in real time (have an audio track receive its armed signal from an instrument track), you could have a potential solution to several of these problems. For the drums: you could have audio track 1 record from Instrument 1 on Track 1, audio track 2 record from Instrument 2 on Track 1, Audio 3 record from Instrument 3 on Track 1, etc.
This way, with the current version of Acoustica Instruments, you could have multiple signal paths coming from a single MIDI track when using instruments that are not multi-out enabled (or, the alternative being the option to give each instrument in the Instrument Panel its own output if so desired, and multiple possible outs like normal for the multi-out instruments). For the Harmony audio effect, you could have the MIDI routed to the effect chain, then route the audio from that track to a new audio track
, so that you could potentially have two separate signals to work with - one original, and one modified with a harmonizer. (All this said and done, you can technically do this with Mixcraft 8, as long as you're willing to do a bunch of bounce-cut-undo-paste work - when bouncing a track with an effect list that is receiving MIDI, that MIDI is included in the bounce).
So, yes, some of this can technically be done in Mixcraft 8, they require longer workarounds that other DAWs have eliminated by allowing audio tracks to record from other audio or instrument tracks' outputs (both Ableton and Pro Tools allows this, in slightly different ways - I only name these two because they're the only two I've used outside MX). Most notably, the frustrating aspect of the bounce-cut-undo-paste workaround is most apparent when you're trying to record snippets of an Instrument channel for sampling (say you accidentally make a cool drum-like sound in the third measure of a synth solo you recorded on Instrument track 1,and you want to have that sound sampled for later loading into Omni Sampler. For now, you gotta bounce-cut-undo-paste to get the sample from the original track, instead of just clicking Arm on an audio track set to the instrument track and hitting record for a measure or two).
2. Increase overall stability when loading plug-ins and reduce loading times if possible. Also, improve the communication between the software and ASIO interface drivers (ex: Focusrite ASIO) because I just feel that the other drivers have better interrelation with the software.
3. The ability to configure a VST plug-in such as a sampler (ex: Kontakt) to Mixcraft's own channels for each individual instrument that you open inside of Kontakt and not just one channel and then sub-channels for each instrument because this way you can only record different MIDI instruments using lanes and not separate channels and you also cannot send the sub-channels to effects such as reverb or delay using different parameters but only with one controller on the channel. With the feature I'm talking about we could modify every parameter of each instrument because they would be assigned to a different channel each and not to sub-channels under the same one.
This video demonstrates the assignment that can be done currently (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdedrmwFylg
-Thank you to the team for such an amazing software and also to this forum for allowing us to express our ideas in order to keep maintaining Mixcraft's high level of professionalism!
Emphasis mine - Anorax
This was one I had to spin around in my head a time or two to figure out what you were getting at. I think you're wanting to say that it'd be nice for each multi-channel out to have its own separate channel as opposed to being sub-grouped inside the parent channel? I'm personally not sure what the benefit is, because each sub-channel on a multi-out track has its own channel strip, complete with effects, automation, and even full control over sends. They're essentially full-featured audio tracks (well, I guess they're actually send tracks) that are locked in a subgroup and only have one audio source.
I̶ ̶s̶w̶e̶a̶r̶ ̶m̶y̶ ̶m̶a̶i̶n̶ ̶f̶u̶n̶c̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶o̶n̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶s̶e̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶u̶m̶s̶ ̶l̶a̶t̶e̶l̶y̶ ̶h̶a̶s̶ ̶b̶e̶e̶n̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶d̶r̶i̶v̶e̶ ̶A̶c̶o̶u̶s̶t̶i̶c̶a̶ ̶G̶r̶e̶g̶ ̶c̶r̶a̶z̶y̶.̶ ̶I̶t̶'̶s̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶i̶n̶t̶e̶n̶t̶i̶o̶n̶a̶l̶,̶ ̶I̶ ̶p̶r̶o̶m̶i̶s̶e̶!̶