Hide Mixer/Audio Channels in the Mixer

[nebraskafire]

Is it possible to hide Mixer/Audio Channels in the Mixer?

[okaino]

Quickly ill tell you no....reason hasnt got there yet.

You can only take the mixer channel out as showing as a sequencer track and keep the mixer channel which isnt what your asking.

[Billy+]

Is it possible to hide Mixer/Audio Channels in the Mixer?

It's not possible to hide the channels in the mixer, you can collapse the channel strips or maximise the rack / sequencer.

Why do you want to hide the channels?

[guitfnky]

Is it possible to hide Mixer/Audio Channels in the Mixer?

It's not possible to hide the channels in the mixer, you can collapse the channel strips or maximise the rack / sequencer.

Why do you want to hide the channels?

because you might not want to see every track in a large project. too much unnecessary stuff on screen can lead to things becoming visually confusing (especially in Reason), and you might find yourself wondering whether your tweaks to one channel are really making a difference only to find out you’re actually working on the (currently silent) channel next to the one you thought you were adjusting. basic stuff, really.

[Billy+]

It's not possible to hide the channels in the mixer, you can collapse the channel strips or maximise the rack / sequencer.

Why do you want to hide the channels?

because you might not want to see every track in a large project. too much unnecessary stuff on screen can lead to things becoming visually confusing (especially in Reason), and you might find yourself wondering whether your tweaks to one channel are really making a difference only to find out you’re actually working on the (currently silent) channel next to the one you thought you were adjusting. basic stuff, really.

I have a tendency to move the current channel all the way to the right so I know what one im listening to then group and label as necessary, I would rather not have a channel hidden just in case it gets overlooked.

[selig]

Hiding channels is essential to the way I USED to work. Alternate tracks, ideas you're not ready to delete yet, DI tracks for electric guitars, scratch vocal from tracking session, drum mics you're not using but aren't ready to delete yet, and so on.

Interestingly I'd not need track hiding if you could import tracks from older versions, of course FIRST providing you CAN keep saving versions without needing to save the audio too. So for now, track hiding would be most awesome.

In decades of working in PT I've never once "overlooked" them - they are hidden for a reason, typically that they are NOT a part of the current mix but MAY be required for reference or the obligatory "I changed my mind" events...

[Billy+]

Maybe I'm just to quick to delete then?

[selig]

Maybe I'm just to quick to delete then?

Which is fine - Speaking only for myself, I have worked both on my own music AND for clients all my life, and you don't just "delete" things if there's no quick and easy way to get them back (CYA). In a way, I treat MYSELF as I would a client, because I know that even "I" can change my mind. Again, if there were some way to import individual tracks like other DAWs, or to save versions like other DAWs, or to (dare I say) hide tracks like other DAWs…you get the idea!

[Billy+]

Yeah I think I get it, and I guess a client really wants their work/tracks included in the whole mix I guess it's really what I've got used to over the years drag right to work on and drag left if I want it out the way until later.

I think I would be happy with the labelling system working correctly, I find it really annoying when the labels aren't the same.

[guitfnky]

having to drag mixer tracks around to make sure you’re working on the correct stuff sounds like an awful workaround (though I’m sure it works just fine). way more work than a button to hide and show tracks would be.

[Billy+]

having to drag mixer tracks around to make sure you’re working on the correct stuff sounds like an awful workaround (though I’m sure it works just fine). way more work than a button to hide and show tracks would be.

Yeah I never said it was the perfect solution, but it's one that works for me and much easier than having to remember each channel.

[selig]

having to drag mixer tracks around to make sure you’re working on the correct stuff sounds like an awful workaround (though I’m sure it works just fine). way more work than a button to hide and show tracks would be.

Yeah I never said it was the perfect solution, but it's one that works for me and much easier than having to remember each channel.

I hide them so I DON'T have to remember them - if you just delete them then the memory is all you have…
Not trying to change the way you work, just trying to share how useful I've found this feature to be in the past.

FWIW…You don't have to remember "each" channel, you only have to look in exactly one place to find all of them. In Pro Tools I'd leave the show/hide list in view so I never had that issue, hopefully the Props would figure out a way to make this useful for us "creative" types that need both "everything available" and also a way to hide the clutter so we're not constantly distracted (speaking for myself, naturally!).
All I know is I feel better with all the "extra" stuff cleared out of my way but still knowing it's a click away if I ever need it. It's also a great way to keep all your files from the entire production process in one place.

[marcuswitt]

Yeah I never said it was the perfect solution, but it's one that works for me and much easier than having to remember each channel.

I hide them so I DON'T have to remember them - if you just delete them then the memory is all you have…
Not trying to change the way you work, just trying to share how useful I've found this feature to be in the past.

FWIW…You don't have to remember "each" channel, you only have to look in exactly one place to find all of them. In Pro Tools I'd leave the show/hide list in view so I never had that issue, hopefully the Props would figure out a way to make this useful for us "creative" types that need both "everything available" and also a way to hide the clutter so we're not constantly distracted (speaking for myself, naturally!).
All I know is I feel better with all the "extra" stuff cleared out of my way but still knowing it's a click away if I ever need it. It's also a great way to keep all your files from the entire production process in one place.

Selig, good point you've made here.
Personally, I wish the R&D people at RS would transfer one basic functionality and principle of the Combinator to the main mixer. For example and just as a basic idea, one way to do this could be to implement some sort of "nesting" of all the selected channels that I want to hide in some sort of "fold-able frame" as part of the main mixer. Once this frame is closed, you can only see it in the main mixer as a thin object that is - say - a fifth or a sixth the width of a channel in the main mixer. And as soon as this frame is opened, the Channels that it contains are fully visible again. Each frame should be re-nameable and indicate how many Channels it contains. I think that would be pretty consistent with other functions and workflow scenarios of Reason.

[selig]

Selig, good point you've made here.
Personally, I wish the R&D people at RS would transfer one basic functionality and principle of the Combinator to the main mixer. For example and just as a basic idea, one way to do this could be to implement some sort of "nesting" of all the selected channels that I want to hide in some sort of "fold-able frame" as part of the main mixer. Once this frame is closed, you can only see it in the main mixer as a thin object that is - say - a fifth or a sixth the width of a channel in the main mixer. And as soon as this frame is opened, the Channels that it contains are fully visible again. Each frame should be re-nameable and indicate how many Channels it contains. I think that would be pretty consistent with other functions and workflow scenarios of Reason.

I would be happy with being able to hide the channels in a bus, such as hiding all the drums and keeping the bus fader(s) visible.

[michael.jaye]

I've always really wanted hidable mixer channels, but lately I've been trying to work with as few channels as possible so it hasn't been much of a problem. Mixing live instruments on bigger projects I'd imagine would be a nightmare.

[nebraskafire]

Is it possible to hide Mixer/Audio Channels in the Mixer?

It's not possible to hide the channels in the mixer, you can collapse the channel strips or maximise the rack / sequencer.

Why do you want to hide the channels?

I record a lot of guitars with amp simulations the problem in reason I found is that you can't use the mixer to mix the recorded guitars because an amp simulation is an effect. So I would mix the clean signal in the mixer rather then the signal after the amp simulation. Sure I could switch signalflow in the mixer but I put some other FX after the amp that don't want to as send effect. So I make a mixer channel route the audio after the amp simulation to this mixer channel can mix it and add FX but now I have to channels in the mixer. One for the audio track and one for the mixer channel and I would be great if I could hide the audio channel.

[LittleBoy]

Yeah I never said it was the perfect solution, but it's one that works for me and much easier than having to remember each channel.

I hide them so I DON'T have to remember them - if you just delete them then the memory is all you have…
Not trying to change the way you work, just trying to share how useful I've found this feature to be in the past.

FWIW…You don't have to remember "each" channel, you only have to look in exactly one place to find all of them. In Pro Tools I'd leave the show/hide list in view so I never had that issue, hopefully the Props would figure out a way to make this useful for us "creative" types that need both "everything available" and also a way to hide the clutter so we're not constantly distracted (speaking for myself, naturally!).
All I know is I feel better with all the "extra" stuff cleared out of my way but still knowing it's a click away if I ever need it. It's also a great way to keep all your files from the entire production process in one place.

hopefully the Props would figure out a way to make this useful

Do not count on it. Reason Studios is never going to integrate these types of functions into the DAW (or not in the short term), that is very clear to me. Track folders, mix scenes, hide channels / groups, mono mix. They are basic tools that any DAW should have, but the Reason mixer has not been updated in 15 years. Then there are users here who say that people only complain, but it is that they are basic functions that a professional tool should have (and someone asking why you want to hide mixer channels, gives me to understand that they have never mixed a project with 80 tracks). VST3 support, mixing tools, video support, multi-timbral MIDI. We are in 2021 and the program costs € 400 or € 20 per month. Of course, they upload sound packages every week. Ridiculous.

[slic]

Sounds like you would be better off using the rack in studio one as it already does everything you want? Many (most?) of us use more than one DAW nowadays, RRP makes it easy!

[LittleBoy]

Sounds like you would be better off using the rack in studio one as it already does everything you want? Many (most?) of us use more than one DAW nowadays, RRP makes it easy!

No, it sounds like Reason Studios could improve the product that some of us have been paying for 20 years. I don't like using more than one DAW (and I've already spent a lot of money on Reason and updates, ), and if Reason Studios keeps forgetting about its DAW users (how many improvements to the DAW has it introduced in the LAST TWO YEARS), what is going to happen is that I will have to go to another DAW (I don't want Reason as a plug-in). I have already worked with Ableton Live or Logic for several years, but in 2018, with VST support, I started working with Reason exclusively hoping that at least some of the shortcomings it had would be solved (because it is logical in a professional tool they charge as a professional tool).

But I was wrong, because 3 years later those improvements do not arrive, and the worst thing is that it seems that they will never arrive. And I don't know about you, but I value my money, and if I spend hundreds of euros on a program and its updates over the years, I think I have the right to ask that things that are not right be improved. Because for that I have paid, and in the same way I value the strengths that the software has, which are many. But today, Reason is not a professional program for many tasks. And if Reason Studios has no intention of improving their DAW, just say so and keep improving their plug-in. I will wish them good luck and I will start working with another tool, but let them say so to know where I have to spend my money.

[LittleBoy]

By the way, I apologize for my English. It is not my mother tongue and I sure do not explain how well I would like to.