Anyone developing a mixer?

[selig]

It's just what it's called in Cakewalk. It's a stereo on / off toggle button, so off makes it mono.

The same thing is accomplished in Reason with the width knob in the SSL. The only thing is that the resulting audio becomes a dual mono signal, not a single mono signal.

Oh, a mono button, got it. I’ve never missed this on the line mixer or 14:2 mixer, but it’s easy enough to add (with the knowledge you’ll give up space for a different function, so there’s a possible trade off there).

Maybe a list of ‘must have’ features should be started here to better judge which features are actually needed, especially when you have to limit your choices or make tradeoffs (the time your “must haves” often turn into “nice to have”)

[DJMaytag]

Oh, a mono button, got it. I’ve never missed this on the line mixer or 14:2 mixer, but it’s easy enough to add (with the knowledge you’ll give up space for a different function, so there’s a possible trade off there).

TBH, I don’t care about a mono button. If I really want a mono signal, I’ll unplug one channel from the device, mixer, etc.

[selig]

Maybe I misunderstood the CV part - do you want a way to run CV through a VCA (Selig Gain does this), or do you want a to CONTROL a VCA with CV?

I want to control a CV with another CV.

Selig Gain does this, but as others have pointed out it’s overkill for that (even though I use it for that all the time).
I had long ago assumed RS would add CV tools such as a VCA and simple mixer for CV, so never thought much more about it. I’m happy to draw up a panel if someone else can code it (would be a great first project for someone interested in developing REs).

[DJMaytag]

Selig Gain does this, but as others have pointed out it’s overkill for that (even though I use it for that all the time).
I had long ago assumed RS would add CV tools such as a VCA and simple mixer for CV, so never thought much more about it. I’m happy to draw up a panel if someone else can code it (would be a great first project for someone interested in developing REs).

I just bought Selig Gain (and added Leveller to my RTO plan). I haven't tried it yet, but if that can scale a CV by another CV, then that should suffice. I wouldn't turn down someone making a simpler VCA, like a RE version of the Doepfer A-132-3 (https://doepfer.de/a1323.htm) or a Frequency Central "MORE VCA'S" (https://frequencycentral.co.uk/product/more-vcas/). Those VCA's are DC-coupled, so they can accept audio as well as CV. I bet it wouldn't be hard to squeeze 3 or 4 VCA's into a 1U RE.

[selig]

My “wanna haves” for a smaller mixer:

•8-12 inputs w/mute and solo per channel
•2-4 sends (at least one with option for pre fader)
•Simple EQ, at least 2 band, maybe 3 (old school Mackie style) with bypass
•Simple filter, at least HP but LP could be cool too (combined with the EQ could save some space by sharing shelf/filter controls as my earlier mockups show)
•Panning - I’d love a panner (not a balance control like the SSL in Reason)
•CV - the tricky part, definitely level/pan, maybe also sends and mid EQ and/or LP sweep
•Master- returns for sends (w/mute?), master fader (no need for inserts IMO)

Bonus for your consideration:
•Take the Mackie Mute idea where muting a channel sends it to alternate (3/4) outputs, making it a quick switcher device (maybe add CV for channel mute?).
•Peak hold numeric meter on the master outputs (in addition to level meters), always handy.
•CV inputs per channel, master CV out (maybe sends too?), running in parallel with audio mixer (no conversion of CV to audio etc) to allow CV “VCA”, Mixing, inversion, matrixing, etc.

Updated (rough) Mockup:

Screen Shot 2023-08-04 at 4.46.17 PM.png (474.66 KiB) Viewed 3157 times

[_andreypetr_]

I want to control a CV with another CV.

Selig Gain does this, but as others have pointed out it’s overkill for that (even though I use it for that all the time).
I had long ago assumed RS would add CV tools such as a VCA and simple mixer for CV, so never thought much more about it. I’m happy to draw up a panel if someone else can code it (would be a great first project for someone interested in developing REs).

Oh, I don't know anything about developer politics, but you might have a great collaboration with Murf.

[Murf]

My “wanna haves” for a smaller mixer:

•8-12 inputs w/mute and solo per channel
•2-4 sends (at least one with option for pre fader)
•Simple EQ, at least 2 band, maybe 3 (old school Mackie style) with bypass
•Simple filter, at least HP but LP could be cool too (combined with the EQ could save some space by sharing shelf/filter controls as my earlier mockups show)
•Panning - I’d love a panner (not a balance control like the SSL in Reason)
•CV - the tricky part, definitely level/pan, maybe also sends and mid EQ and/or LP sweep
•Master- returns for sends (w/mute?), master fader (no need for inserts IMO)

Bonus for your consideration:
•Take the Mackie Mute idea where muting a channel sends it to alternate (3/4) outputs, making it a quick switcher device (maybe add CV for channel mute?).
•Peak hold numeric meter on the master outputs (in addition to level meters), always handy.
•CV inputs per channel, master CV out (maybe sends too?), running in parallel with audio mixer (no conversion of CV to audio etc) to allow CV “VCA”, Mixing, inversion, matrixing, etc.

Updated (rough) Mockup:
Screen Shot 2023-08-04 at 4.46.17 PM.png

The back panel is so dense! This is where the major effort needs to be concentrated I think.
I will try and incorporate as many of these ideas as I can.
Murf.

[Arpeg]

My “wanna haves” for a smaller mixer:

•8-12 inputs w/mute and solo per channel
•2-4 sends (at least one with option for pre fader)
•Simple EQ, at least 2 band, maybe 3 (old school Mackie style) with bypass
•Simple filter, at least HP but LP could be cool too (combined with the EQ could save some space by sharing shelf/filter controls as my earlier mockups show)
•Panning - I’d love a panner (not a balance control like the SSL in Reason)
•CV - the tricky part, definitely level/pan, maybe also sends and mid EQ and/or LP sweep
•Master- returns for sends (w/mute?), master fader (no need for inserts IMO)

Bonus for your consideration:
•Take the Mackie Mute idea where muting a channel sends it to alternate (3/4) outputs, making it a quick switcher device (maybe add CV for channel mute?).
•Peak hold numeric meter on the master outputs (in addition to level meters), always handy.
•CV inputs per channel, master CV out (maybe sends too?), running in parallel with audio mixer (no conversion of CV to audio etc) to allow CV “VCA”, Mixing, inversion, matrixing, etc.

Updated (rough) Mockup:
Screen Shot 2023-08-04 at 4.46.17 PM.png

Thank you Selig for adding all that and sorting out CV use. A lot to think about so a fantastic mock up and great work

[Arpeg]

My “wanna haves” for a smaller mixer:

•8-12 inputs w/mute and solo per channel
•2-4 sends (at least one with option for pre fader)
•Simple EQ, at least 2 band, maybe 3 (old school Mackie style) with bypass
•Simple filter, at least HP but LP could be cool too (combined with the EQ could save some space by sharing shelf/filter controls as my earlier mockups show)
•Panning - I’d love a panner (not a balance control like the SSL in Reason)
•CV - the tricky part, definitely level/pan, maybe also sends and mid EQ and/or LP sweep
•Master- returns for sends (w/mute?), master fader (no need for inserts IMO)

Bonus for your consideration:
•Take the Mackie Mute idea where muting a channel sends it to alternate (3/4) outputs, making it a quick switcher device (maybe add CV for channel mute?).
•Peak hold numeric meter on the master outputs (in addition to level meters), always handy.
•CV inputs per channel, master CV out (maybe sends too?), running in parallel with audio mixer (no conversion of CV to audio etc) to allow CV “VCA”, Mixing, inversion, matrixing, etc.

Updated (rough) Mockup:
Screen Shot 2023-08-04 at 4.46.17 PM.png

The back panel is so dense! This is where the major effort needs to be concentrated I think.
I will try and incorporate as many of these ideas as I can.
Murf.

In Murf We Trust

[Murf]

Still early days, much UI work needed,
I am still not convinced it is bringing anything to the table over Line Mixer 6:2 and Mixer 14:2.
Yes it is smaller than 14:2, yes it has more channels than 6:2... but do we really need something in between these?

mix82_front.PNG (291.25 KiB) Viewed 1136 times

mix82_back.PNG (302.18 KiB) Viewed 1136 times

Murf

[Loque]

Still early days, much UI work needed,
I am still not convinced it is bringing anything to the table over Line Mixer 6:2 and Mixer 14:2.
Yes it is smaller than 14:2, yes it has more channels than 6:2... but do we really need something in between these?
mix82_front.PNG
mix82_back.PNG
Murf

Not the mix channels.

The send channels are the interesting part, at least 6 or 8 which can be tied back to the mixer or send to returns.

[xbitz]

I like the selig one above yepp, what could be done is the Swiss Army knife approach, integrating a compressor and EQ, but the 6-channel Rack Mixer has already done that, maybe just make a stereo version of it with more channels


https://www.reasonstudios.com/shop/rack ... nel-mixer/

In that case, the EQ should have the option to be removed from the signal path and placed before the compressor, just like on the large mixer. Who knows if it's worth the trouble

[Murf]

The send channels are the interesting part, at least 6 or 8 which can be tied back to the mixer or send to returns.

You mean this?

Screenshot 2024-03-09 at 7.12.12 pm.png (665.65 KiB) Viewed 1068 times

[DJMaytag]

Yes it is smaller than 14:2, yes it has more channels than 6:2... but do we really need something in between these?

Yes, and this looks great!

[dioxide]

How useful is the EQ if we can add any other EQ as an insert before going into the mixer? I thought maybe it might be cool for drum kits but not for instruments in Combinators. I guess it depends on what people are using this kind of mixer for. I think the sends are very useful though.

[Loque]

The send channels are the interesting part, at least 6 or 8 which can be tied back to the mixer or send to returns.

You mean this?
Screenshot 2024-03-09 at 7.12.12 pm.png

Yes. Would be great to have at least 6 sends with returns of the option to die them too the mixer and creat feedback loops or FX mixing.
10 channels in sum would be nice.

[Loque]

How useful is the EQ if we can add any other EQ as an insert before going into the mixer? I thought maybe it might be cool for drum kits but not for instruments in Combinators. I guess it depends on what people are using this kind of mixer for. I think the sends are very useful though.

For quick overall tone shaping a bass and treble is nice, but not necessary.

[Murf]

Yes. Would be great to have at least 6 sends with returns of the option to die them too the mixer and creat feedback loops or FX mixing.
10 channels in sum would be nice.

So like this?

mod2.png (311.67 KiB) Viewed 944 times

[Loque]

Yes. Would be great to have at least 6 sends with returns of the option to die them too the mixer and creat feedback loops or FX mixing.
10 channels in sum would be nice.

So like this?
mod2.png

Yeah. No need to make it extra small. When I mix a sound, I am in mixing mode and working on the mixer only. Tbh, just a Reason mixer with at least 2 more sends. I don't really need the EQ. Editable labels would be nice.. do in fact, just a update of the mixer.

But sure what others need. 4 sends are easily filled with delay, reverb, glitch, chorus. No room for more glitch, phaser, flanger more delays.... And now nix them all together, also in feedback. Heaven. Just think of 8 sends...

[Murf]

Yeah. No need to make it extra small. When I mix a sound, I am in mixing mode and working on the mixer only. Tbh, just a Reason mixer with at least 2 more sends. I don't really need the EQ. Editable labels would be nice.. do in fact, just a update of the mixer.

But sure what others need. 4 sends are easily filled with delay, reverb, glitch, chorus. No room for more glitch, phaser, flanger more delays.... And now nix them all together, also in feedback. Heaven. Just think of 8 sends...

I think Selig made the best summary of what I am working towards, I just changed 4 sends to 6 now. I think if I did 8 I cant fit it all in 2U.
I was thinking the editable labels would have to go as well... so what you need Loque might have to be a different RE
The good thing is, once Code an UI for this is done, I can easily make different layouts and functions for different versions.

My “wanna haves” for a smaller mixer:

•8-12 inputs w/mute and solo per channel
•2-4 sends (at least one with option for pre fader)
•Simple EQ, at least 2 band, maybe 3 (old school Mackie style) with bypass
•Simple filter, at least HP but LP could be cool too (combined with the EQ could save some space by sharing shelf/filter controls as my earlier mockups show)
•Panning - I’d love a panner (not a balance control like the SSL in Reason)
•CV - the tricky part, definitely level/pan, maybe also sends and mid EQ and/or LP sweep
•Master- returns for sends (w/mute?), master fader (no need for inserts IMO)

Bonus for your consideration:
•Take the Mackie Mute idea where muting a channel sends it to alternate (3/4) outputs, making it a quick switcher device (maybe add CV for channel mute?).
•Peak hold numeric meter on the master outputs (in addition to level meters), always handy.
•CV inputs per channel, master CV out (maybe sends too?), running in parallel with audio mixer (no conversion of CV to audio etc) to allow CV “VCA”, Mixing, inversion, matrixing, etc.

[Arpeg]

I like the selig one above yepp, what could be done is the Swiss Army knife approach, integrating a compressor and EQ, but the 6-channel Rack Mixer has already done that, maybe just make a stereo version of it with more channels


https://www.reasonstudios.com/shop/rack ... nel-mixer/

In that case, the EQ should have the option to be removed from the signal path and placed before the compressor, just like on the large mixer. Who knows if it's worth the trouble

I reply to this post as it's very similar to what I am after.

Thanks Murf for further development of smaller Mixer design. For me it is not more Sends needed in a smaller Mixer although could be useful. Having 4 Sends is really good in this 2U. One can just add/tie another Mixer or Bcase's Parallel Effects Mixer for more sends, no?

Selig, this Mixer design is really good... Love the EQ section with Mid n' filters as I feel these are more important fundamentals along with separate Panning for L & R and I see slight room for that, perhaps!? Anyway, I would use this all the time.

Ekss... Mixer is great but would like in Stereo also. I still may purchase this though

Easy

[xbitz]

just a side note, It can be done with Anansi Mid Side Router, but I would also add a check mono compatibility button

[Abstrax]

cool thread. im just now getting caught up on it. here's my 2 cents.
for sound design, I always combinator my instruments and use a mixer 14:2 in said combi. this might just be me, but i never even use the send returns and instead just wire them back to a channel in the mixer. that way i can make send feedback loops.
I guess what i'm saying. are returns even necessary? could free up space on the front and back by getting rid of those

[Loque]

cool thread. im just now getting caught up on it. here's my 2 cents.
for sound design, I always combinator my instruments and use a mixer 14:2 in said combi. this might just be me, but i never even use the send returns and instead just wire them back to a channel in the mixer. that way i can make send feedback loops.
I guess what i'm saying. are returns even necessary? could free up space on the front and back by getting rid of those

Yes, the returns make sense, because they have a lower delay. The mixer input delay depends on the audio buffer settings. AFAIK.

[Abstrax]

Yes, the returns make sense, because they have a lower delay. The mixer input delay depends on the audio buffer settings. AFAIK.

oh thats interesting. I didnt know that