Mixcraft 9 vs 10

[USCGT35]

Hello,
What are your thoughts about Mixcraft 9 Pro Studio vs 10 Pro Studio?
Are you happy with the new implementations of Mixcraft 10 PS?

My thoughts are such, M9 PS is more pleasant in terms of overall look and colour options of tracks.
As I understand that M10 PS uses vectoral images to create scalable UI but I still prefer M9 PS colours and look in general.
And I couldn't find a way to put master track to bottom as it's on M9 PS.
Is it too difficult to give users an option to chose master track location between bottom or top whatever convenient to them?

And on both versions I can not manage to send one track's out to another track (not the send track).

M10 PS is lighter on PC I may add.

[ppayne]

I am absolutely satisfied with the new interface and the dark skin. The contrast of the gray tones between the work areas could be a little stronger.

I can't find anything bad about the functionality and stability in MC 10. Everything works for me without any problems. In MC 9 I had a few plugins that were causing problems. No more problems with MC 10. I also really like many of the new features in MC 10. I would have prioritized and implemented a few reported features that affect the workflow. but ok, I can't have everything. I think that will come at some point.

I was really happy about the changes in the interface from MC 8 to MC 9. The old-fashioned wood look and glass effects were completely outdated. that bothered me extremly.

My personal conclusion is:

MC 9 was much better than MC 8. And MC 10 is 10 times better than MC 9 for me.

[cactus-head]

Out of the box, the default dark theme of MC 9 and 10 are almost identical. I would say that the mixer looks a little better in 9. There are a few color changes here and there but nothing that really separates the two. They are both fine workable interfaces- I prefer more contrast and light 3d effects to identify what is clickable or draggable. Flat design across the board, not just in Mixcraft, seems very 8 bit to me. Old interfaces had to be designed that way based on resources.

As far as functionality: MC 10 adds a lot of new stuff that makes MC 9 a bit obsolete. From the plugin manager, to the hotkey setups, to the MIDI routing from effects and instruments - I can't see a reason to use MC 9 for new projects. For old projects, I generally don't want to take the chance of messing anything up that works as is - so I just use them in MC 9. If I do load an old project into MC 10, I save it as a completely new and separate thing.

And on both versions I can not manage to send one track's out to another track (not the send track).

MC 10 makes this super easy. There is a little red button that can make an effect or an instrument the recording source for another track. Let's say you had a trumpet recording on track 1 as an audio file and for some reason you want to send this output to another audio track (track 2). On track 1, add an effect like an EQ for example. You can set the EQ or you could leave it flat etc. It depends on why you want to send the audio to track 2. On the effect, there is a red button that when you hover over it will read "enable Plugin to be recording source". If you turn that on, you can arm track 2 and choose this eq as the recording source. Now when you play the transport, track 2 will pick up the audio from track 1 going through the EQ.

The same thing works for MIDI instrument plug-ins. The MIDI will be made available as a source to send to another track.

I don't know if MC 10 runs better or not. It seems to have a slightly larger processing footprint than MC 9 when I review memory usage and CPU load. But it also seems to have some optimizations for speedy loading and playback. It's hard to tell as I've never had issues with MC 9.

[Sturdy]

I like 10 alot, mostly just feels smooother to me. I liked 9 and never really had any problems with 9, but 10 feels more refined.

One little thing that I really like is ability to change the endpoints of a loop without the loop stopping playing. It's a little thing, but that's one that pops to mind as improved in 10 vs. 9, but there are quite a few others I've noticed as well.

The midi routing in 10 that allows redirection of generated midi to another track is an important feature to have imho. There's going to be more powerful stuff like Scalar that we're going to want to send to other channels. I'm thinking the next generation of virtual drummer might be some type of generative drumming (like jamstix) instead of relying so heavily on finding prebuilt midi drum loops that match the music.

[Mr.Mxyzptlk]

The scalability of MX10 was the big dealbreaker for me as with Kontakt 7. Doesn't seem to be making a dent on my processor either.

[USCGT35]

Thank you for your reply and info about the send issue @cactus-head.

The keyboard sometimes loses focus while playing instruments/midi editing, no matter how hard I try, it does not activate, the midi detection indicator confirms the data flow, but the keyboard cannot be used, this has never happened on the M9.

Even though I've been using it for a few months, I still haven't gotten used to the colors. It's similar to the M9, but I think the M10 colors (the color palette used) are not a good choice, they are harsh and make the interface look old. The blue colors in the midi sequencer were fine before, now they are more raw and disturbing (they can be adjusted, but the colors in the color palette are not good). We can talk about regression, not progress, in these areas.

It may not be important for some of you, but interface colors are important to me. For example, Reaper is a very good DAW, but its colors and interface are boring (even though it has many themes).

And I still don't understand why the master track is forced to be at the top. Considering a user group that has been accustomed to having it at the bottom for years, there could at least be a "top/bottom" option.

[cactus-head]

Would you be interested in altering the colors somewhat? Maybe for the major in your face stuff like the tracks, background and timeline? It involves tweaking Mixcraft ini files.

[Acoustica Greg]

Hi,

The master track is on the top due to Mixcraft 10 Pro Studio’s region control feature, which provides a powerful new way to arrange songs.

Greg

[cactus-head]

I kinda like the master track at the top. It took a minute to get used to. When it comes to looking at and controlling the master level automation for a project, it's convenient for me.

[mixyguy2]

M9 PS is more pleasant in terms of overall look and colour options of tracks.

? They're almost exactly the same.

M10 PS is lighter on PC I may add.

Haven't noticed any difference there either and I have a pretty low-end machine, but then again my needs are probably less than many.

The most noticeable differences I saw were the little blue outline, which I like as it makes the window "pop out" a bit more, and it handles VST3s better (although I think that was fixed in the last version of 9). Other than that, it's mostly the same to me, although I know it has other features or improved features other may use more.

As for the wood grain of 8, pffft, I liked it. It gave MC some character; now it looks about the same as every other DAW, which is fine, but I wish I had an option to "regrain" it.

Also I'm not crazy about the 2D thing either, but that's what helps with scalability, and practically everyone is doing it. I'm fine with it, esp since a lot of plugins aren't that way, so I can still get some 3D in my life.