Anyone developing a mixer?

[dioxide]

I DO get that 8 would be more easily supported with controllers, but in that case just don't use the last two channels?

That works but you could say similar things for the other mixers. For me there's something to be said for the hardware matching what you see on screen. That can be difficult for instruments or effects but for a mixer it could be easy.

[selig]

I DO get that 8 would be more easily supported with controllers, but in that case just don't use the last two channels?

That works but you could say similar things for the other mixers. For me there's something to be said for the hardware matching what you see on screen. That can be difficult for instruments or effects but for a mixer it could be easy.

Depends on which mixer - not for the SSL mixer!
What I would want to know is how often folks are going to be actively "mixing" with hardware faders on an aux mixer in the rack?
The main mixer, yea, I can see wanting hardware to control the main/SSL mixer - but even then, it is hardly normal to have the same number of hardware faders as you have mix channels in your current project. It would just be coincidence if it happened, so I'd have to say most users are already used to fader banking etc. when using hardware to control software.
So I would have to disagree it would be easy or necessary for a mixer to have hardware matching what you see on screen.
Or maybe I need to give it 16 inputs…

[_andreypetr_]

I'm dreaming about such device that could replace combinator in some way. It's really simple and easy to make but I don't know anything about RE development and cannot make it by myself.

The goal of it is super minimalistic design and smallest size possible that gives possibility to stack several instances and to craft versatile control panels without Combinator CV restrictions. It's a CV control panel designed as smart as mixer.

Maybe CV MOD polarity switches should be on the back panel and CV MOD On/Off switches on the front panel.

CVtrol.jpeg (258.97 KiB) Viewed 5807 times

I mean more compact version of this with 8 CV inputs and clear labelling:
https://www.reasonstudios.com/shop/rack ... arametrix/

So if Murf will do it, I'll buy it/grab it instantly

[jam-s]

I'm dreaming about such device that could replace combinator in some way. It's really simple and easy to make but I don't know anything about RE development and cannot make it by myself.

The goal of it is super minimalistic design and smallest size possible that gives possibility to stack several instances and to craft versatile control panels without Combinator CV restrictions. It's a CV control panel designed as smart as mixer.

Maybe CV MOD polarity switches should be on the back panel and CV MOD On/Off switches on the front panel.

CVtrol.jpeg

I mean more compact version of this with 8 CV inputs and clear labelling:
https://www.reasonstudios.com/shop/rack ... arametrix/

So if Murf will do it, I'll buy it/grab it instantly

The free mxsplirger is pretty close to your dream device. It only lacks the polarity switch buttons.

[_andreypetr_]

I'm dreaming about such device that could replace combinator in some way. It's really simple and easy to make but I don't know anything about RE development and cannot make it by myself.

The goal of it is super minimalistic design and smallest size possible that gives possibility to stack several instances and to craft versatile control panels without Combinator CV restrictions. It's a CV control panel designed as smart as mixer.

Maybe CV MOD polarity switches should be on the back panel and CV MOD On/Off switches on the front panel.

CVtrol.jpeg

I mean more compact version of this with 8 CV inputs and clear labelling:
https://www.reasonstudios.com/shop/rack ... arametrix/

So if Murf will do it, I'll buy it/grab it instantly

The free mxsplirger is pretty close to your dream device. It only lacks the polarity switch buttons.

Thank you for the suggestion!

No, to be more precise, it's missing CV generating knobs (like Shift in Hamu Mesher/Value in CV Parametrix/Knobs in Acrus User knobs), labelling and up to 4x scaling. I think I discovered every CV device in the shop and nothing is that compact and versatile as it should be to stack and craft flexible devices.

I'm aware that you could make everything with using even stock devices. Such workarounds causes restrictions that makes impossible to finally be able to craft what I want. For example, in my use case (I'm using Reason Rack Plugin) after copying several control panels and extensions RRP runs out of available for automation slots and parameters becomes unreachable for host DAW. So I'm dreaming about gentle minimalistic beast as great as Pepin Hazan's Tinker.

[Arpeg]

I would like something like the Mixer 14:2

with low cut and high cut filters, and double pan, I would buy that

for something more limited I don't see the point

Which brings us back to page one - I’d have to expand the height to add the second pan knob but as a fan of dual pan knobs I totally see the reason for that. You could also make it even taller and squeeze more than 10 channels in…

I'm addressing you as Giles on this one Please start building this immediately, if you haven't already. A lot of folk will use this I believe. EQ above sends is great, and perhaps more than 4 sends, maybe 6? Some folk like a lot of FX. Yes very please you thank to dual pan knobs
8, 10, 16 channels are all good but perhaps you could make two mixers. An 8 and 16 channel to keep everyone happy.

Last request and performance related. Would it be possible to add in a crossfader and obviously be able to choose which channel goes to side A or B of the crossfader for straight forward compatibility instead of setting one up. Similar idea to Akai APC 40 mkII and others.

What you offer here is good enough already and thank you for taking the time to put it together

Easy

[Steedus]

I think I remember Ekss saying one of the reasons his 6-ch mixer (which is great btw), only supports mono channels was he was limited to 8 inputs on the device and wanted to also add a stereo return channel. Was that just a GE restriction or something?

[DJMaytag]

Could be an RE I/O restriction, but I hope they’d open that up now that they’ve expanded the VST I/O count significantly.

[lowtom]

Some great ideas here.
RS should added more I/O to the Combinator so we could then design our own mixers to the taste.

[_andreypetr_]

Some great ideas here.
RS should added more I/O to the Combinator so we could then design our own mixers to the taste.

But that's the greatest idea
What if we could design back panel too

[Murf]

Hi all, I have done some more work on MIX88 (The Midas XL88 inspired 8x8 Matrix Mixer)
Here are some screenshots:

MIX88_FP.PNG (358.99 KiB) Viewed 5558 times

MIX88_BP.PNG (555.28 KiB) Viewed 5558 times

MIX88_FFP.PNG (39.69 KiB) Viewed 5558 times

Murf.

[Loque]

Hi all, I have done some more work on MIX88 (The Midas XL88 inspired 8x8 Matrix Mixer)
Here are some screenshots:

MIX88_FP.PNG

MIX88_BP.PNG

MIX88_FFP.PNG


Murf.

Looks pretty good

[Steedus]

Looks great.

[Loque]

...

So...i loaded it up and yea, it looks great, but also very, very tiny. I normaly use 140% zoom, but nearly nothing is readable with this zoom. I need to scale to 200% to be able to read anything.

Here are a few suggestions:
* I am not sure that all the numbers and scales are needed, maybe remove a few of them
* Remove the channel, leave the button including the number, move the light to the top or leave it completely and make the button "glow/light up" if enabled
* One scale for the fader is enough if it matches the Meter
* Remove the LEDs beside the Mute buttons, make them bigger and let them "glow/light up". Same for all other buttons
* There is still room on the right side, which could be used for the Fader, Scale and Meter

I noticed, that the Input Faders default to the center, but i think they should default to the 0db.

I also noticed a few alignment problems, some lines are odd and the separators are not equal in their shading. I tried to highlight some examples. This is with 200% zoom:

alginmentsandstuff.jpg (352.21 KiB) Viewed 5519 times

[selig]

...

So...i loaded it up and yea, it looks great, but also very, very tiny. I normaly use 140% zoom, but nearly nothing is readable with this zoom. I need to scale to 200% to be able to read anything.

Here are a few suggestions:
* I am not sure that all the numbers and scales are needed, maybe remove a few of them
* Remove the channel, leave the button including the number, move the light to the top or leave it completely and make the button "glow/light up" if enabled
* One scale for the fader is enough if it matches the Meter
* Remove the LEDs beside the Mute buttons, make them bigger and let them "glow/light up". Same for all other buttons
* There is still room on the right side, which could be used for the Fader, Scale and Meter

I noticed, that the Input Faders default to the center, but i think they should default to the 0db.

I also noticed a few alignment problems, some lines are odd and the separators are not equal in their shading. I tried to highlight some examples. This is with 200% zoom:
alginmentsandstuff.jpg

100% agree!
My first impression is it looks super busy with no indication what is going on. Considering the screen size I don’t think the original design translates well to the screen. Some buttons have numbers and numbers are also on the panel next to the button. Other buttons have a button AND an LED next to it - save space make the button light up and ditch the LED. Meters don’t need to have every LED segment labeled, or even the meter itself labeled (we know what it is), The fader scale starts on the right side at the top and moves to the left side on the bottom. You really don’t need the scale at all especially if this is the only option.
Look at the Reason SSL - no numbers on the fader scale, minimal number on the channel meter, no numbers on the knobs etc.
Bottom line, where there are that many controls in such a small area you may need to remove any extra visual ‘data’ that isn’t strictly necessary.

[MuttReason]

Agree with comments about the front panel UI being a little too busy. Also (and apologies if this was covered earlier in thread and I missed it) it would be great if this was a stereo 8 x 8 not a mono 8 x 8. Much more useful if the inputs preserved positioning in stereo rather than requiring mono input only. Even better would be stereo matrix sends similar to the stereo FX sends on the Reason stock mixer devices. Although I appreciate that would make for one hell of a busy rear panel.

[Steedus]

Yeah if you notice, that's how the hardware is designed (numbered buttons below numbers, and a mix of buttons with LEDs etc ... perhaps a case of being too close to the real thing doesn't translate into software?

[Murf]

Thanks everyone for the feedback on the MIX88 Matrix Mixer, and all of the things you have suggested will be addressed in "my take" on this design, and it will be totally re-designed (stereo as well).
In the meantime I will stick to the original for this one (it is a pain point for me, I am OCD and I set out to make it as close as possible sorry)
If anyone can give any technical feedback on it's implementation (so please try and ignore UI!) that would be great.
It is currently a summing mixer, and I cant find anything in the manual about it being summing or averaging, other than this:

Group matrix output.
The jumpered input from the matrix mix board feeds a virtual earth summing stage
[IC4b] before being passed to the main matrix level fader. After buffering [IC5b],
the signal is fed via ST7 to the Matrix mute switch SW2 as well as to the meter
changeover switch SW3.

Any thoughts?
Murf.

[Murf]

...

I noticed, that the Input Faders default to the center, but i think they should default to the 0db.
I also noticed a few alignment problems, some lines are odd and the separators are not equal in their shading. I tried to highlight some examples. This is with 200% zoom:
alginmentsandstuff.jpg

Thanks Loque, I will fix these.
Murf.

[Murf]

Hi All, here is some screenshots my latest beta for MODRACK MATRIX88, let me know if you want a beta invite for testing.
Thanks to Loque for his suggestions of Phase shifting and CV control.

The CV matrix currently just attenuates the inputs, let me know if you think it would be better to offset them.

MATRIX88_FP.jpg (312.14 KiB) Viewed 5337 times

MATRIX88_BP.jpg (157.32 KiB) Viewed 5337 times

Murf

[_andreypetr_]

Hi All, here is some screenshots my latest beta for MODRACK MATRIX88, let me know if you want a beta invite for testing.
Thanks to Loque for his suggestions of Phase shifting and CV control.

The CV matrix currently just attenuates the inputs, let me know if you think it would be better to offset them.

MATRIX88_FP.jpg

MATRIX88_BP.jpg


Murf

Wow!
Definitely want to test this.

[selig]

Thanks everyone for the feedback on the MIX88 Matrix Mixer, and all of the things you have suggested will be addressed in "my take" on this design, and it will be totally re-designed (stereo as well).
In the meantime I will stick to the original for this one (it is a pain point for me, I am OCD and I set out to make it as close as possible sorry)
If anyone can give any technical feedback on it's implementation (so please try and ignore UI!) that would be great.
It is currently a summing mixer, and I cant find anything in the manual about it being summing or averaging, other than this:

Group matrix output.
The jumpered input from the matrix mix board feeds a virtual earth summing stage
[IC4b] before being passed to the main matrix level fader. After buffering [IC5b],
the signal is fed via ST7 to the Matrix mute switch SW2 as well as to the meter
changeover switch SW3.

Any thoughts?
Murf.

An “averaging” mixer (poor name choice IMO) in the modular world is simply dividing the signal to avoid clipping, basically just building in some headroom. In the digital domain you either work with reduced levels (audio peaking 12 dB below clipping, for example) on mixer channels OR you reduce the master - same thing in the end, just a workflow difference.

[Murf]

An “averaging” mixer (poor name choice IMO) in the modular world is simply dividing the signal to avoid clipping, basically just building in some headroom. In the digital domain you either work with reduced levels (audio peaking 12 dB below clipping, for example) on mixer channels OR you reduce the master - same thing in the end, just a workflow difference.

Great explanation thanks Selig!
yeah we have plenty of headroom in Reason so summing it will remain
Murf.

[Murf]

Hi All.
I have made an online manual for my upcoming release of the MIX88 RE, it is a bit different to the MIDAS XL88 manual (as that contains some ridiculous mistakes).
Please feel free to preview, and feedback is most welcome!

https://re.murf.net/mix88-manual/

Thanks,
Murf.

[wendylou]

Great project and very cool!

Regarding GUI, IMHO, it seems visually distracting with so many diagonals, dBu labels, and outlined LEDs. Any consideration for a cleaner, minimalist design? iZotope came to this conclusion beginning with Ozone 6 when they hired a GUI expert to clean up their entire product line.