Link mixer/track status, duplicate/alt track inputs

[Dave23]

It would be quite helpful if the mixer and arrange page could reflect each other (if desired) so that muted arrange tracks etc. would show as a muted mixer channesl and vice versa...Track arming buttons on the mixer channel strips would be handy too.

Also- the ability to simply create new,multiple track lanes for mix channels would be great- unless I'm doing it wrong (v. possible) having to duplicate the entire signal path just to record alternate/successive takes is very cluttersome.

[selig]

Tracks and channels are different. Mixers have channels, recorders have tracks. As such there is not a one-to-one relationship between the two.
Multiple takes are possible with audio and note tracks, no need to duplicate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dave23]

Thx for the reply, though actually I beg to differ.. There is a relationship between the two- the front end, or inputs of the mixer channels are the items in the tracklist of the arrange page.. (as you say there may or may not be a recording function engaged in between the two...)
What I am suggesting is that it would nice if (or as an option) they would reflect each others' status i.e if say, "guitar" was muted (or solo'd or rec armed) on the mixer then the corresponding track in the arrange page would also have it's mute/solo/rec button engaged, and vice versa
..kind of like Logic's link function where changes in one window are reflected in other windows.
Not a big deal but would save a bit of clicking around.

[Dave23]

.. I know it is possible to record endless takes on top of each other on the same track but tbh I don't find this helps my work flow.
In Logic I am used to simply creating a new track object that addresses the same mix channel, directly below the previous one.. so I can see "what and where" at a glance- also helps with cueing if I can actually see where I've come in, or how I phrased the previous take. Having a big pile of takes on one track isn't very helpful for me.

[selig]

Thx for the reply, though actually I beg to differ.. There is a relationship between the two- the front end, or inputs of the mixer channels are the items in the tracklist of the arrange page.. (as you say there may or may not be a recording function engaged in between the two...)
What I am suggesting is that it would nice if (or as an option) they would reflect each others' status i.e if say, "guitar" was muted (or solo'd or rec armed) on the mixer then the corresponding track in the arrange page would also have it's mute/solo/rec button engaged, and vice versa
..kind of like Logic's link function where changes in one window are reflected in other windows.
Not a big deal but would save a bit of clicking around.

This subject comes up again and again! The mute and solo functions are separate in the mixer and recorder in Reason and therefore cannot be linked.
It's like asking for the clip gain and fader gain to be linked!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dave23]

Hi Selig thanks for the reply!
As you note, having CLIP gain and FADER gain linked is pointless/silly/not possible... because they are two different classes of things, that would serve no purpose..
But in the case of of arrange tracklist items and mix channels, they are essentially different parts of the same item and already affect each others behavior- if the mixer channel is muted no sound will be heard regardless of track list state, and conversely if the track list item is muted no sound will be heard regardless of mixer channel state.. so ONE is muted they are BOTH effectively muted. it would be nice to have the two indicator.s in agreement.Would save a bit of switching back and forth and eliminate some confusion on big projects.
It's a little thing but sequencer workflow is RSNs weak point imho. cheers, D

[selig]

Same rules apply for gain. If you lower clip gain you won't hear anything, and same for fader gain! The mute/solo in the mixer is also a different "class" from the sequencer.
The question is how to implement your suggestion. Is you have a redrum with 10 mixer channels you cannot link or duplicate mute/solo. Same for having multiple devices each with their own sequencer track but submixed to one Mix Channel. Again this has been discussed for years with no viable solution presented to date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dave23]

Point taken but I think your example is not quite the same thing- if clip volume is lowered you won't hear that clip, but other clips on the same track can still be heard- clip volume has no effect on mix channel volume, but mix channel volume DOES affect all clip volumes, so there is no direct correlation as there is in the case of track list item/mix channel mute status.

I do see what you're saying about implementation, regarding multi channel instruments. Other "ahem" sequencers implement this by creating a track list item for every single mix channel used by an instrument.

[selig]

Here's a recent thread asking the same question about mute/solo, if you're interested in hearing other insights on the subject:
Mute or solo is not visible on all devices

https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?share_ ... are_type=t


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[Dave23]

hey thanks for that Selig- interesting read. I see it's a natural thing to wish for (other sequencers have it) but I can appreciate if it's not built in from the beginning it's probably a major undertaking to make happen later. cheers, D

[selig]

hey thanks for that Selig- interesting read. I see it's a natural thing to wish for (other sequencers have it) but I can appreciate if it's not built in from the beginning it's probably a major undertaking to make happen later. cheers, D

More importantly in my mind, it's what works best-maybe I'm a 'control freak' in that sense! It's also how I worked in Pro Tools, so I'm familiar with having the ability to mute the MIDI track OR it's associated Mix Channel. Reason takes it further (and more consistent IMO) by giving the same functionality to Audio Tracks.

I do appreciate how that added level of control means an added level of complexity. And I'd definitely do things differently if I was designing a DAW from the ground up today (believe me, I've thought long and hard about how this SHOULD work). There ARE better ways to address these issues, but I feel they all require a ground up approach to accomplish this elegantly.

This is just another example of the evolution of MIDI apps adding audio, and audio apps adding MIDI - neither approach has worked out perfectly in the end IMO.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk