Is there a way on how to change the relative volume of a group of channels in the Mixer?

This forum is for discussing Reason. Questions, answers, ideas, and opinions... all apply.
Post Reply
User avatar
nscerri
Posts: 116
Joined: 01 Apr 2015
Location: Malta

01 Dec 2015

Hi fellow Reasoners,

Is there a way in Reason how can I change the relative volume of a group of channels changing only one slider. For example, I want to decrease the volume of each individual drums section by the same amount to all channels (-3db to each slider). I know that the same result can be achieved by creating a sub mix and then decrease the volume of the sub mix but I wish to know if it can be done?

I have seen this on protools and it is really a neat feature as per video here -->


Thanks in advance :)

User avatar
nscerri
Posts: 116
Joined: 01 Apr 2015
Location: Malta

01 Dec 2015

Any ideas pls?

Sent from my XT1052 using Tapatalk

User avatar
Wook
Posts: 293
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

01 Dec 2015

Unfortunately, no. It's been requested too many times now.
   

User avatar
nscerri
Posts: 116
Joined: 01 Apr 2015
Location: Malta

01 Dec 2015

Oh ok, thanks

Sent from my XT1052 using Tapatalk

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

01 Dec 2015

There is no way to do this accurately, that is to say so that each channel is at exactly the same relative level after adjusting.

There are third party workarounds, though not especially simple (Yes, I'm talking about my own product here, Selig Gain).

I see two workarounds, maybe three. One you have already mentioned, they way I typically do it - create a sub mix channel.
Another is to manually pull each fader down (not as painful as it sounds, actually).
Third you can go the third party route, but this will actually take longer than either of the other solutions.

I do not suggest using CVs to "group" faders, as this results in un-even tracking across faders at different levels. In other words, you won't get exactly 3 dB on all faders if they are not all in the same position to start with. :(
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
nscerri
Posts: 116
Joined: 01 Apr 2015
Location: Malta

01 Dec 2015

Thank you Selig for your detailed reply, much appreciated.

I guess I will have to stick to the sub mix then, this still does not completely solve the whole problem as imagine you have a particular channel that is clipping and you wish to pull down all the channels.

Thanks for letting me know about Selig Gain, it might come handy in the future ;)

Cheers

Sent from my XT1052 using Tapatalk

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

01 Dec 2015

nscerri wrote:Thank you Selig for your detailed reply, much appreciated.

I guess I will have to stick to the sub mix then, this still does not completely solve the whole problem as imagine you have a particular channel that is clipping and you wish to pull down all the channels.
Technically speaking you can't have a "single channel" clipping - you can only clip at the outputs, which means the mix is what is clipping when there IS clipping. And eliminating the clipping is as easy as lowering the level anywhere on the master channel: at the fader, the Master Compressor's Makeup Gain, any Master Insert, etc. Internally you have such extreme headroom in Reason you will never clip. Translation: a channel can't clip on it's own.

Here's a test - create a nice sine wave from any of Reason's instruments and then turn up the level (either using the instrument's master volume or the channel fader for that instrument) until the sine wave clips - should be painfully obvious when this happens! Next lower the master fader until the clipping goes away. You have just proven that it's not the channel that is clipping, it's the output because IF you were clipping the "channel", then pulling down the master fader would have only made the clipped audio sound softer and would not have eliminated the clipping completely.

You can take this to extremes. You can boost a channel's level by hundreds of dB (yes, I've done this!), then pull down the master fader by the opposite amount and you'll have a perfectly clean signal again. This is because of Reason's floating point audio signal path, and is in contrast to how a fixed point digital mixer behaves (such as the old Pro Tools mixer), and definitely not how an analog system behaves (which is why you need gain stage on analog systems).
:)
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
IanRich
Posts: 3
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

01 Dec 2015

There's a highly recommended app called rsTouch for controlling Reason using an iPad. It can move up to eight faders at a time... :thumbs_up:

User avatar
nscerri
Posts: 116
Joined: 01 Apr 2015
Location: Malta

01 Dec 2015

selig wrote:
nscerri wrote:Thank you Selig for your detailed reply, much appreciated.

I guess I will have to stick to the sub mix then, this still does not completely solve the whole problem as imagine you have a particular channel that is clipping and you wish to pull down all the channels.
Technically speaking you can't have a "single channel" clipping - you can only clip at the outputs, which means the mix is what is clipping when there IS clipping. And eliminating the clipping is as easy as lowering the level anywhere on the master channel: at the fader, the Master Compressor's Makeup Gain, any Master Insert, etc. Internally you have such extreme headroom in Reason you will never clip. Translation: a channel can't clip on it's own.

Here's a test - create a nice sine wave from any of Reason's instruments and then turn up the level (either using the instrument's master volume or the channel fader for that instrument) until the sine wave clips - should be painfully obvious when this happens! Next lower the master fader until the clipping goes away. You have just proven that it's not the channel that is clipping, it's the output because IF you were clipping the "channel", then pulling down the master fader would have only made the clipped audio sound softer and would not have eliminated the clipping completely.

You can take this to extremes. You can boost a channel's level by hundreds of dB (yes, I've done this!), then pull down the master fader by the opposite amount and you'll have a perfectly clean signal again. This is because of Reason's floating point audio signal path, and is in contrast to how a fixed point digital mixer behaves (such as the old Pro Tools mixer), and definitely not how an analog system behaves (which is why you need gain stage on analog systems).
:)
Hi Selig,

I didn't know that!! Awesome information. Thanks a million for sharing your knowledge :) Coming to think of it, it is very important having a limiter at the end of the signal chain for protection right, or Reason/Audio Interface has its internal protection?

With regarding the clipping signal it was only an example, of course, I avoid that from happening in the first place.

Thanks again Selig, much appreciated :)

User avatar
nscerri
Posts: 116
Joined: 01 Apr 2015
Location: Malta

01 Dec 2015

IanRich wrote:There's a highly recommended app called rsTouch for controlling Reason using an iPad. It can move up to eight faders at a time... :thumbs_up:
Hi Ian,

I do not use Apple products ;) However thanks for your suggestion.

Cheers

Noel

Sent from my XT1052 using Tapatalk

User avatar
Raveshaper
Posts: 1089
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

01 Dec 2015

Is this what you want? It's nowhere near as easy as what you are asking for, but it is possible. I'm looking into ways of improving this, but so far this is as good as it gets.

Image
:reason: :ignition: :re: :refillpacker: Enhanced by DataBridge v5

User avatar
nscerri
Posts: 116
Joined: 01 Apr 2015
Location: Malta

01 Dec 2015

Raveshaper wrote:Is this what you want? It's nowhere near as easy as what you are asking for, but it is possible. I'm looking into ways of improving this, but so far this is as good as it gets.

[img]http://www.reasontalk.com/download/file.php?id=2364349[/img]
Yes that is exactly what I am asking for! Would love to know how you did that if you don't mind.

Thanks

Noel

User avatar
C//AZM
Posts: 366
Joined: 20 Jan 2015

03 Dec 2015

Raveshaper wrote:Is this what you want? It's nowhere near as easy as what you are asking for, but it is possible. I'm looking into ways of improving this, but so far this is as good as it gets.

Image
Yes how are you doing that? Instant buy!

User avatar
Raveshaper
Posts: 1089
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

03 Dec 2015

This is made possible by a script architecture I wrote over the course of this past year. I am working on producing videos that give an overview of its capabilities and go in-depth on how to use it.
:reason: :ignition: :re: :refillpacker: Enhanced by DataBridge v5

User avatar
Reasonistas
RE Developer
Posts: 875
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: Morristown, NJ USA
Contact:

11 Feb 2016

Raveshaper wrote:Is this what you want? It's nowhere near as easy as what you are asking for, but it is possible. I'm looking into ways of improving this, but so far this is as good as it gets.

Image
Raveshaper wrote:This is made possible by a script architecture I wrote over the course of this past year. I am working on producing videos that give an overview of its capabilities and go in-depth on how to use it.
This has been requested since Record V1.0 was released. When do you plan to release your tutorials on this?
Thanks!
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Raveshaper
Posts: 1089
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

11 Feb 2016

Noel G. wrote: This has been requested since Record V1.0 was released. When do you plan to release your tutorials on this?
Thanks!
For all my genius, I am currently rebuilding my life after a rocky forced relocation from the rural area where I had been living. That's a whole different story, but it suffices to say that I am presently unable to put together these tutorials indefinitely. I would have to fund that endeavor entirely through crowd sourcing and that's ridiculous.

The reason I have not dashed something together is because I am currently revamping the architecture into something that will potentially work much better.

Currently, as I have said elsewhere, each fader must be manually setup by the user inside of the Remote Override Edit Mode. This is clunky. My new design will make it possible to create fader groups by typing in suffixes at the end of channel names. This will allow fader group assignment to be dynamic without the user needing to go to a lot of extremes.

Also, this goes far beyond mere fader grouping. Faders can link to device controls, CV can be sent over EMI to drive adjustments in the SSL, and with the new architecture even things like VU meter levels will be unlocked and capable of acting as data sources that can be used to make manipulations somewhere else.

The architecture, collectively known as RackNode (previously bundled inside the MetaPads family of experiments), currently works by taking a host control and sending its value out across up to 128 outputs that can each be programmed to have their own min and max settings, complete with automatic inversion. This is all whiz bang and terrific, but you need to set everything up and it takes a long time.

The new architecture will be able to work with the current one, but it focuses on surface locking to specific device types. Instead of having to setup source controls manually, they are all setup automatically as auto inputs within the remote map and the script simply gains focus for the targeted device once it's locked. From there, the data can be routed in Remote Override Edit Mode from a list of available remotable items named for each data source and output number (Attack Out1, etc).

My biggest challenge in the redesign is the SSL. It's a mammoth monster of a nightmare to wrangle with 92 items per channel strip, 64 channels supported, 101 items in the master section, and almost 200,000 items in total at last count (including the planned number of outputs).

So, as a super long winded answer to your question: I am swamped right now. This is not just fader groups, this is a sot patch to the core app written in Lua and loaded in using Remote. But I'd love to be able to make videos about it. I know people are excited to see it working.

Thanks for the encouragement, I'm still working really hard on these things.
:reason: :ignition: :re: :refillpacker: Enhanced by DataBridge v5

Stranger.
Posts: 329
Joined: 25 Sep 2015

11 Feb 2016

ΣΣΣ
Last edited by Stranger. on 06 Jun 2016, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

11 Feb 2016

Hey Raveshaper - do these faders track each other correctly? For this to actually work for folks you need to make all of the levels change by the same amount - otherwise you destroy the balances as you move the faders. This may be difficult with Reason due to the non-linearity of the faders, meaning that the distance traveled is not a consistent amount of gain. Move one fader 5 pixels down and it may represent 2 dB, while another may more 5 dB - no Bueno… are you aware of whether they track correctly or not?
:)
Selig Audio, LLC

Constant Fiasco
Posts: 1
Joined: 17 Mar 2018

17 Mar 2018

I've sussed a way. (sorry if it's been covered|) Go to the sequencer. Select all the tracks. Grab the volume envelope and pull all the tracks down. Only works for audio. Instruments will have to be done separately but I assume you would have a sensible level if you were creating the track from instruments. This is for when some one has given you a load of stems and there all bangin' at + 6db and you want to turn the whole lot down (before the mixer) without bussin' :)

User avatar
nscerri
Posts: 116
Joined: 01 Apr 2015
Location: Malta

23 Aug 2018

Finally this is going to be implemented in version 10.2.

Cheers to the props!

https://www.propellerheads.se/blog/reas ... 2_betatest

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk


User avatar
C//AZM
Posts: 366
Joined: 20 Jan 2015

28 Aug 2018

nscerri wrote:
23 Aug 2018
Finally this is going to be implemented in version 10.2.

Cheers to the props!

https://www.propellerheads.se/blog/reas ... 2_betatest

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk
Wow I just looked at the link and EACH ONE of these improvements is an "instant use" for me. Whoo- Hooo!!

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

28 Aug 2018

Constant Fiasco wrote:
17 Mar 2018
I've sussed a way. (sorry if it's been covered|) Go to the sequencer. Select all the tracks. Grab the volume envelope and pull all the tracks down. Only works for audio. Instruments will have to be done separately but I assume you would have a sensible level if you were creating the track from instruments. This is for when some one has given you a load of stems and there all bangin' at + 6db and you want to turn the whole lot down (before the mixer) without bussin' :)
Yes, that's great for adjusting levels before they enter the mixer (especially helpful when you receive a bunch of "normalized" audio tracks!), but it's not a replacement or workaround for moving multiple faders together since the latter affects audio at the end of the channel path while the former affects it at the beginning.
Selig Audio, LLC

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 29 guests