I wish Props would make a new Mixer

This forum is for discussing Reason. Questions, answers, ideas, and opinions... all apply.
User avatar
Heigen5
Posts: 1505
Joined: 25 Sep 2018
Location: Finland / Suomi

04 Oct 2018

I mean a mixer for to use in a rack like 14:2. The 14:2 is a bit challenging for my eyes, so when I sometimes use it, the labels are very hard to read. So if you props would make a new mixer, remember to make all the mixer channels big enough and let every channel to have audio outs too, so when the sends are summed together you could route every channel out to a new audio in of any device. So the space for bigger channels could be taken from of by reducing the amount of channels. 8 big channels would already do. If you run out of the channels, you can always add another one, just like you can with the 14:2 too...

User avatar
joeyluck
Moderator
Posts: 11029
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

04 Oct 2018

Ya know...when Rack Extensions were first announced 6 years ago, one of the first things I was sure somebody would create would be a different mixer for the rack. Something comparable to the 14:2, but better. Maybe emulations of popular mixers. Maybe single mix channels emulations as well. I guess there isn't much desire for that? Or maybe some developers just need to be given the idea?

User avatar
Heigen5
Posts: 1505
Joined: 25 Sep 2018
Location: Finland / Suomi

04 Oct 2018

joeyluck wrote:
04 Oct 2018
Ya know...when Rack Extensions were first announced 6 years ago, one of the first things I was sure somebody would create would be a different mixer for the rack. Something comparable to the 14:2, but better. Maybe emulations of popular mixers. Maybe single mix channels emulations as well. I guess there isn't much desire for that? Or maybe some developers just need to be given the idea?
I was thinking a possible RE-mixer, but I wasn't 100% sure it can be done, so all the things would work with the core code, but now when I think it, nothing comes into my mind that why not.

Edit: actually one thing, if this mixer would cost money or even would require to have it, then sound-designers would need to stick with 14:2 so their combinators would not say a "missing device".

stephensmattlee
Posts: 144
Joined: 05 Feb 2015

04 Oct 2018

Personally I’d love for Props to add another main mixer allowing users to switch between the SSL style one and others such as a Neve style one to give us more options when it comes to mixing. Could also give Mixbus a run for its money :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
Carly(Poohbear)
Competition Winner
Posts: 2871
Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Location: UK

04 Oct 2018

What's wrong with using multiple mix channels and bus them together?

I just wished we could save mix channel(s) and settings along with a normal combinator patch for starters.

User avatar
Heigen5
Posts: 1505
Joined: 25 Sep 2018
Location: Finland / Suomi

04 Oct 2018

Carly(Poohbear) wrote:
04 Oct 2018
What's wrong with using multiple mix channels and bus them together?

I just wished we could save mix channel(s) and settings along with a normal combinator patch for starters.
Well, you can't use SSL in combis or in a rack. :puf_unhappy:

User avatar
Heigen5
Posts: 1505
Joined: 25 Sep 2018
Location: Finland / Suomi

04 Oct 2018

stephensmattlee wrote:
04 Oct 2018
Personally I’d love for Props to add another main mixer allowing users to switch between the SSL style one and others such as a Neve style one to give us more options when it comes to mixing. Could also give Mixbus a run for its money :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If nothing is used in SSL like all the EQ's and compressors, than shouldn't they both sound identical?

User avatar
Loque
Moderator
Posts: 11176
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

04 Oct 2018

I am not totally with the op. 8 channels are not enough in my workflow. I often layer 1 to 4 sounds and route the sebd fx to their own channels, where i sometimes have a different device for left and right, which i nix individually. This i easy end up with 6 send mix channels on top of the sound layer.

I never had the need of an output for each channel, but i can imagine it can be quite interesting here and there.

The size of the 14:4 mixer is ok, the 6:2 lacks 90% of the time enough send fx. And that is that i would add, at least 2 more and fx to the 14:4.

From UX perspective... Well... It looks ugly, but i never cared much. Its easy and quick to use.
Reason12, Win10

User avatar
Heigen5
Posts: 1505
Joined: 25 Sep 2018
Location: Finland / Suomi

04 Oct 2018

Loque wrote:
04 Oct 2018
I am not totally with the op. 8 channels are not enough in my workflow. I often layer 1 to 4 sounds and route the sebd fx to their own channels, where i sometimes have a different device for left and right, which i nix individually. This i easy end up with 6 send mix channels on top of the sound layer.

I never had the need of an output for each channel, but i can imagine it can be quite interesting here and there.

The size of the 14:4 mixer is ok, the 6:2 lacks 90% of the time enough send fx. And that is that i would add, at least 2 more and fx to the 14:4.

From UX perspective... Well... It looks ugly, but i never cared much. Its easy and quick to use.
So how would you solve the bigger channels issue then?

User avatar
Loque
Moderator
Posts: 11176
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

04 Oct 2018

Heigen5 wrote:
04 Oct 2018
Loque wrote:
04 Oct 2018
I am not totally with the op. 8 channels are not enough in my workflow. I often layer 1 to 4 sounds and route the sebd fx to their own channels, where i sometimes have a different device for left and right, which i nix individually. This i easy end up with 6 send mix channels on top of the sound layer.

I never had the need of an output for each channel, but i can imagine it can be quite interesting here and there.

The size of the 14:4 mixer is ok, the 6:2 lacks 90% of the time enough send fx. And that is that i would add, at least 2 more and fx to the 14:4.

From UX perspective... Well... It looks ugly, but i never cared much. Its easy and quick to use.
So how would you solve the bigger channels issue then?
Dunno... I don't have the mixer backside in front of my eyes atm. If I have to choose, I choose more send fx - its impossible to create feedback loops over several mixers or to be precise it is PITA.

If you don't need the send fx, you can just send a channel to a send fx which gives you 4 extra controllable outputs. Ok, with a slight delay.
Reason12, Win10

User avatar
Heigen5
Posts: 1505
Joined: 25 Sep 2018
Location: Finland / Suomi

04 Oct 2018

Loque wrote:
04 Oct 2018
Heigen5 wrote:
04 Oct 2018


So how would you solve the bigger channels issue then?
Dunno... I don't have the mixer backside in front of my eyes atm. If I have to choose, I choose more send fx - its impossible to create feedback loops over several mixers or to be precise it is PITA.

If you don't need the send fx, you can just send a channel to a send fx which gives you 4 extra controllable outputs. Ok, with a slight delay.
If the new mixer would take advance out of the space vertically, then there could be lots more space for at least 8 sends. But the mixer channel amount would be 8-10?

User avatar
joeyluck
Moderator
Posts: 11029
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

04 Oct 2018

Heigen5 wrote:
04 Oct 2018
Loque wrote:
04 Oct 2018

Dunno... I don't have the mixer backside in front of my eyes atm. If I have to choose, I choose more send fx - its impossible to create feedback loops over several mixers or to be precise it is PITA.

If you don't need the send fx, you can just send a channel to a send fx which gives you 4 extra controllable outputs. Ok, with a slight delay.
If the new mixer would take advance out of the space vertically, then there could be lots more space for at least 8 sends. But the mixer channel amount would be 8-10?
It could be many things. It could be a series of different mixers, each focusing more on this or that. But you are only limited by the size you make it. I think the largest is 9U? And then it all depends on how long the throw is on your faders, if you use faders, etc., but you can fit many connections on the back for sure.

User avatar
Ahornberg
Posts: 1904
Joined: 15 Jan 2016
Location: Vienna, Austria
Contact:

07 Oct 2018

With Selig Gain https://shop.propellerheads.se/rack-ext ... elig-gain/ you can build your own volume/pan mixer in a combinator.

antic604

07 Oct 2018

I wish they focused on something else - the SSL is great as it is, better than most mixers in other DAWs

User avatar
Ahornberg
Posts: 1904
Joined: 15 Jan 2016
Location: Vienna, Austria
Contact:

07 Oct 2018

antic604 wrote:
07 Oct 2018
I wish they focused on something else - the SSL is great as it is, better than most mixers in other DAWs
Yes, and with Console 1 as harware controller, the SSL mixer comes to live :thumbs_up:

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

07 Oct 2018

joeyluck wrote:Ya know...when Rack Extensions were first announced 6 years ago, one of the first things I was sure somebody would create would be a different mixer for the rack.…I guess there isn't much desire for that?
Well, since then (the past 5-6 years), there’s this one guy here asking for this, so yea, “there isn’t much desire for that” would be my assumption.

There are lots of ideas out there that would appeal to a very small user base, which make them low priority for developers.

FWIW, a mixer like this would be very easy to build, and you could use switchable panels to either provide access to the different parts of the mixer (since vertical space is limited), or to switch out different EQ/dynamics/Input options.

Personally, what I could use is a Reason mixer (not an RE) that fits between the Line Mixer and 14:2, an 8-10 channel simple 2 space mixer with two sends/returns, Low/High filters, polarity invert, direct outs, linking to additional mixers, full CV support, and maybe a bus compressor on the output.

Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
Heigen5
Posts: 1505
Joined: 25 Sep 2018
Location: Finland / Suomi

07 Oct 2018

selig wrote:
07 Oct 2018
joeyluck wrote:Ya know...when Rack Extensions were first announced 6 years ago, one of the first things I was sure somebody would create would be a different mixer for the rack.…I guess there isn't much desire for that?
Well, since then (the past 5-6 years), there’s this one guy here asking for this, so yea, “there isn’t much desire for that” would be my assumption.

There are lots of ideas out there that would appeal to a very small user base, which make them low priority for developers.

FWIW, a mixer like this would be very easy to build, and you could use switchable panels to either provide access to the different parts of the mixer (since vertical space is limited), or to switch out different EQ/dynamics/Input options.

Personally, what I could use is a Reason mixer (not an RE) that fits between the Line Mixer and 14:2, an 8-10 channel simple 2 space mixer with two sends/returns, Low/High filters, polarity invert, direct outs, linking to additional mixers, full CV support, and maybe a bus compressor on the output.

Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
I'm sure there's lots of top-notch ideas from me, that were suggested by me ONLY, but it's not always the case that it had to be requested by thousands IMO.

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

07 Oct 2018

Heigen5 wrote: I'm sure there's lots of top-notch ideas from me, that were suggested by me ONLY, but it's not always the case that it had to be requested by thousands IMO.
Of course, but the suggestions that ARE made by thousands are more likely to be implemented in my experience. I even agree with your suggestion, if it’s done the way that addresses my needs. And I also agree it should be done by the Props and not as an RE so it can be freely used in Combinators.

One of the points I was making is that everyone has a DIFFERENT idea of how this “new mixer” should look and how it should function - we all have different needs, which is of course stating the obvious.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
dioxide
Posts: 1781
Joined: 15 Jul 2015

07 Oct 2018

I always thought that a single mixer channel as a RE would be useful, with matching db values to the SSL mixer so you can easily copy settings from the main mixer into a Combinator for instance.

User avatar
Heigen5
Posts: 1505
Joined: 25 Sep 2018
Location: Finland / Suomi

07 Oct 2018

selig wrote:
07 Oct 2018
Heigen5 wrote: I'm sure there's lots of top-notch ideas from me, that were suggested by me ONLY, but it's not always the case that it had to be requested by thousands IMO.
Of course, but the suggestions that ARE made by thousands are more likely to be implemented in my experience. I even agree with your suggestion, if it’s done the way that addresses my needs. And I also agree it should be done by the Props and not as an RE so it can be freely used in Combinators.

One of the points I was making is that everyone has a DIFFERENT idea of how this “new mixer” should look and how it should function - we all have different needs, which is of course stating the obvious.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Yeah, indeed, we all have our own needs. But feel free to recommend your needs here as well, propably Props would put the most useful ones into it then. ;) And like I said, I'm totally happy with the SSL, but would like a new one for a Rack this time.

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

07 Oct 2018

Heigen5 wrote:
07 Oct 2018
selig wrote:
07 Oct 2018


Of course, but the suggestions that ARE made by thousands are more likely to be implemented in my experience. I even agree with your suggestion, if it’s done the way that addresses my needs. And I also agree it should be done by the Props and not as an RE so it can be freely used in Combinators.

One of the points I was making is that everyone has a DIFFERENT idea of how this “new mixer” should look and how it should function - we all have different needs, which is of course stating the obvious.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Yeah, indeed, we all have our own needs. But feel free to recommend your needs here as well, propably Props would put the most useful ones into it then. ;) And like I said, I'm totally happy with the SSL, but would like a new one for a Rack this time.
Here's mine, as previously described and crudely drawn:
Screen Shot 2018-10-07 at 11.49.04 AM.png
Screen Shot 2018-10-07 at 11.49.04 AM.png (192.72 KiB) Viewed 1658 times
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
Heigen5
Posts: 1505
Joined: 25 Sep 2018
Location: Finland / Suomi

07 Oct 2018

selig wrote:
07 Oct 2018
Heigen5 wrote:
07 Oct 2018


Yeah, indeed, we all have our own needs. But feel free to recommend your needs here as well, propably Props would put the most useful ones into it then. ;) And like I said, I'm totally happy with the SSL, but would like a new one for a Rack this time.
Here's mine, as previously described and crudely drawn:
Screen Shot 2018-10-07 at 11.49.04 AM.png
This is pretty good, as long as the text on the labels would also stick out pleasantly i.e. would make it easy to recognise that what is what. :thumbs_up: :puf_smile:

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

07 Oct 2018

Heigen5 wrote:
selig wrote:
07 Oct 2018
Here's mine, as previously described and crudely drawn:
Screen Shot 2018-10-07 at 11.49.04 AM.png
This is pretty good, as long as the text on the labels would also stick out pleasantly i.e. would make it easy to recognise that what is what. :thumbs_up: :puf_smile:
Take a look at the line mixer - it’s got basically the same text effect (that’s where I copy/pasted from). Did it that way so folks would be familiar with the basic color/text size etc. Look familiar?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
Heigen5
Posts: 1505
Joined: 25 Sep 2018
Location: Finland / Suomi

07 Oct 2018

selig wrote:
07 Oct 2018
Heigen5 wrote:
This is pretty good, as long as the text on the labels would also stick out pleasantly i.e. would make it easy to recognise that what is what. :thumbs_up: :puf_smile:
Take a look at the line mixer - it’s got basically the same text effect (that’s where I copy/pasted from). Did it that way so folks would be familiar with the basic color/text size etc. Look familiar?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Yours looks cleaner. But yeah, one way to get more space for the labels would use space vertically.

Edit: by the way, the text don't always need to follow the old "text on a tape" principle.
Last edited by Heigen5 on 07 Oct 2018, edited 1 time in total.

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

07 Oct 2018

Heigen5 wrote:
selig wrote:
07 Oct 2018


Take a look at the line mixer - it’s got basically the same text effect (that’s where I copy/pasted from). Did it that way so folks would be familiar with the basic color/text size etc. Look familiar?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Yours looks cleaner. But yeah, one way to get more space for the labels would use space vertically.
Not sure your point. Let’s talk features, not fine tuning the text placement, size, and color…kinda getting the cart before the horse!


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests