Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > REAPER Feature Requests

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-18-2012, 12:18 PM   #81
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airon View Post
Bump up.

So far I'm thinking that VCAs would simply be another Group feature.
  • One track is designated to be a VCA master

  • There can be only one VCA master per group

  • The VCA master cannot perform any other group functions.

  • A VCA master can be a slave to another VCA master

    One example of this are to have a VCA master for groups of similar instruments, and then have another VCA master that controls the VCA masters of the instrument groups, so you have one fader to adjust all instruments for example.

    Or a VCA each for Main vocals, Background Vocals Verse, Background Vocals Chorus. Then you create a group with those VCAs as slaves and a new track to be a VCA master, and you've got a non-bussing, indenendapt fader to dip the vocals over the entire session without having to mess about with any of the automation on the slave tracks.
I've only just spotted this post Airon, but I'll comment on it now I've read it.

One master per group is very limiting, nearly all modern VCA consoles allow multiple masters per group. If a channel is in the "Backline" VCA group and the "EBV" VCA group, then the gain change applied to the channel fader is merely the arithmetic sum of the (logarithmic) dB gains of the VCA masters. I regularly have channels in two or even three VCA groups during live shows.

VCA master being in another VCA group I can live with, but this is not often the console way. See my previous point for how flexibility is achieved. If this is the only way that a channel can be controlled by more than one VCA, you chain yourself to "tree hierachy" only -one of VCA group functionality's advantages is The freedom from this.

You're not routing the audio, so latency is not even a consideration, all you are doing is combining the gains from other channel faders and applying them to the channel in question. It is so simple a concept in DAWs and so related to gain profiles and automation envelopes (hell we have parameter modulation and it's an amoeba cousin to that) that I can think non-familiarity with the VCA workflow is the only reason that the devs haven't rattled it off.

Here's an example to show how multiple VCA master configuration is better than "tree hierachy": Imagine a performers band (drums, Backline, vocals) and a house band (drums, backline, keys, brass, b-vocals) on the same soundstage. This can apply to live or post. The house band may augment the performers band or play links in an out of the performers slot -all very tight control for live.

All of the house band are in the VCA group "HBand", all of the performer's band are in VCA group "PBand"; the whole of each can be controlled on single faders.

All of the drums are in "Drums" irrespective of which band they're in, same with backline, same with vocals, etc. This way main band/houseband balance can be ridden with two faders, whilst also the musical balance can be be ridden while the houseband augment the performer's band.

This is non-hierachial, and it cannot be achieved with your VCA-VCA-Channel tree hierachy. It's a real situation live and one where eight or twelve VCAs/DCAs in control of 48 or more channels (live to video or broadcast) are a necessity rather than a useful addition.

I really do think I'm going to have to produce a video showing VCAs in action to get people to realise what they've been missing out on. They are so simple, and yet they are so powerful. I think the Devs' non-familiarity with them is the only reason they have never been implemented.


>
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2012, 01:25 PM   #82
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned View Post
Thanks for the elaboration on your workflow. Exactly the kind of stuff I like to hear.

Indeed we all have different needs. But I hope you're not implying that musicians only need toys and engineers somehow require superior tools - except comfy chairs perhaps.

The point that the tools you need are not like a musical instrument is taken. Of course the UI needs to be suited to different tasks, fair enough. But I still think most of the benefits you describe apply in a much broader context. For example, I use this virtual CV type of thing all the time with sequencing in Numerology, which does not even have any mixer like REAPER does. I'd love to see such a thing in REAPER, and not only for track volume faders. The same argument you guys make for 'why haven't they ...' goes just as well for parameter modulation / linking imho. It's the same thing, with a slightly different UI on top. Which may well be the hardest part, still.


Specific to panning, sends/receives and subgroups, do you see anything I missed in my PoC? Is there something that REAPER still is not doing right? If so, what should it do instead?
Banned, I'm not familiar with your code and how to implement it in REAPER or I'd happily play around with it and give you my reactions from my workflow's perspective. I have only seen the video you posted at this time.

I'm an out in the field type (although that does mean something else here in Lincolnshire), and I don't spend that much of my time in front of the workstation, it's left me a bit behind to be honest. Been investigating some python stuff from Tim Lloyd, but I feel like a fish out of vodka.

Musicians need inspirational things like instruments and technical toys. Engineers need tools to shape media into a requirement or a product. And technical toys, but don't tell anyone.

REAPER nearly has it with Track Grouping. All it needs is for the master's automation to be picked up by the slaves, as I'm sure I've seen in your video. Having a channel receive gain input from more than one "VCA master" would be better, but it would be functional with track groups then.

A separate way would be to select a track, activate an "assign VCA to track(s)" type action (right-click menu) and then assign a bunch of tracks to it. Select another track for VCA group master and repeat the process. In usual REAPER style, you could right-click or look in the track properties and assign VCA group masters to it from the other end, so-to-speak.

It would even be great as part of the parameter modulation funtionality (its a track fader modulating another one or more faders, in essence), as long as we had actions to assign for shortcuts to set groups up.

Just be nice to have something integral, native, to set any fader as a VCA group master to any other track, allowing gain changes, including automation, to assigned tracks, and meaning any post-fade FX sends work as they're supposed to.


>

Last edited by planetnine; 04-18-2012 at 01:41 PM.
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2012, 01:57 PM   #83
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,162
Default

I was not implying that tracks cannot be part of multiple groups, which is what you want to do.

I merely said that a group can only be assigned one VCA master, but any tracks in that group can be part of other groups, which can have their own (or the same) VCA master.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2012, 02:09 PM   #84
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,162
Default

Nathan, do you think we should do the VCA stuff separately from track groups ?

We could do 64 VCA track assignment slots and have actions like :
  • Assign Selected Track(s) to VCA 01 to 64

  • Clear VCA 01 to 64

  • Remove Selected Track9s) from VCA 01 to 64

I'd then also recommend a VCA matrix to display EXACTLY what is going on in the session, a third matrix so to speak. That would be extremely cool for live people to get a very fast overview about what is assigned to what.

Perhaps the groups should be in that matrix as well on the source side, so VCA's could also be assigned to control groups instead of just single tracks.

Sources on the left are the tracks and groups. The targets at the top are the VCAs. After all, top to bottom is easier if you want to find out what is assigned to a particular VCA.

Or maybe the VCAs should be on the left source side instead. A track has to be assigned to function as a VCA after all for it to work.

That would probably be the best feature set, don't you think ?
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2012, 03:03 PM   #85
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,585
Default

I'd be happy with that, Airon, but I'm coming from a primarily live, seat-of-yer-pants perspective. Simplicity, clarity, robustness -well you know how it has to be for live SEs

Im not even bothered whether the faders have to move or not like in track groups. I just need the gain on the fader or automation of a track, to affect an assignable bunch of other tracks. I want the post-fader sends on these assigned tracks to follow this gain, even if the fader doesn't physically.

On their own with a VCA matrix is great. As part of Track Groups is great as long as it's clear and easy to set up. If on their own, a track right-click properties dialogue that includes this assignment would be the icing on the cake! -and inclusion in the Project Bay and Track manager would be heaven (I love the way these management tools have been implemented).

I'm up for separate VCA section, but I'd be quite happy for other inclusive methods if they were done well.



Quote:
Sources on the left are the tracks and groups. The targets at the top are the VCAs. After all, top to bottom is easier if you want to find out what is assigned to a particular VCA.

Or maybe the VCAs should be on the left source side instead. A track has to be assigned to function as a VCA after all for it to work.

That would probably be the best feature set, don't you think ?

Do a mock-up, see how pretty it is



Quote:
I was not implying that tracks cannot be part of multiple groups, which is what you want to do.

I merely said that a group can only be assigned one VCA master, but any tracks in that group can be part of other groups, which can have their own (or the same) VCA master.

I'll believe you.

Sorry, I'm tired, you don't expect me to read everything you wrote, surely?


>

Last edited by planetnine; 04-18-2012 at 03:08 PM.
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 07:17 AM   #86
Banned
Human being with feelings
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airon View Post
Each control group (Aux, Dynamics, EQ, Fader for example) has its own attention switch. It's used for all kinds of stuff. Think of it as the equivalent of selecting a track on a console or a control section of a track. Actually each AUX and each EQ band has its own attention switch so you can link them across channels.
Awesome! See, now that's exactly what I've been getting at all along. It's not just about faders for controlling track volume. It's about every parameter you can think of.

When it affects the parameters of *plugins* like eq and dynamics (in REAPER, those are not part of a track per se - at least, until the *very* recent developments on the ReaEQ/OSC front; arguably they should indeed *become* track parameters much like on consoles), it should apply to whatever plugin I want to use in REAPER. And not just the ones that just happen to be similar to the type of thing that exists on some hardware console system(s).

Thus, the exact same feature set that this FR asks for (automation, trim envelopes, VCA style groups) is applicable on a very general level, even completely disregarding the entire track concept. Track grouping should have nothing to do with it per se, as it can also be used on the level of linking plugins on the *same* or different tracks, as well as parameters within a single plugin.

Thus, in terms of implementation, we (1) all seem to want such a system added to REAPER's features, but (2) envision a few different 'ideal' implementations in terms of UX (GUI, workflow: where do we find it, how does it look, how do you set it up).

Imho we should be distinguishing these two things, and not tie generally useful features to a specific workflow. That was my point all along this thread, and I'm only getting more convinced that I'm right about that.

So I think it is preferable to treat this whole VCA thing a bit more separately from things like track grouping, navigation, and selection - and think of how it can be *linked* (i.e. not integrated with) to such things, but also to other ones, like parameter modulation, parameter linking, and whatever else can be useful. Console-style VCA group mixing is just one of them. I can see how this is very desirable, but imho we should also keep in mind that it is not the only desirable use case for them, and frame FRs accordingly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by airon View Post
[...] sweet spot [...]
Although I don't exactly understand how this is implemented, I think I understand the basic idea very well, as I'm implementing a similar thing myself for my OSC control surface stuff. Basically, by restricting the range of the CV signal at some point to lower/upper bounds, you avoid useless or 'ugly' extremes on the range, thus also getting a better resolution on the controls. Is that a (sort of) correct description of what 'sweet spot' does as well?
Quote:
Originally Posted by airon View Post
[...] Spilling refers to selecting either a member of a group or a VCA itself, and saying: Show me the "members of that group"/"slaves of that VCA". [...]
What does "show" exactly mean in this context? I'm assuming physical tracks aren't motorized and being moved out of the way here. So is it a selection with knobs and buttons, some hybrid system with some GUI showing you a list?

Perhaps a little video demonstration it would be most illustrative. Could anyone point to a good example?

Btw, for the sake of a more advanced OSC/Pd workaround PoC, I think many things like track (un)selection and showing/hiding could be achieved via OSC triggering native REAPER actions and such. If only I better understood what should be happening to track selection/visibility and such apart from the CV mixing stuff itself.
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 07:19 AM   #87
Banned
Human being with feelings
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airon View Post
Nathan, do you think we should do the VCA stuff separately from track groups ? [...]
I do think so, as I hope is clear from my previous post.

Bring on the mockups Airon!
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 07:22 AM   #88
Banned
Human being with feelings
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airon View Post
I was not implying that tracks cannot be part of multiple groups, which is what you want to do.

I merely said that a group can only be assigned one VCA master, but any tracks in that group can be part of other groups, which can have their own (or the same) VCA master.
Cool, that clears up the Spartacus/Slave/Master/Emperor/God Track thing as well. (I'll add a Free level as well between Slave and revolt. Three levels of control, two levels of disobedience seems enough for starters. Then I can add Enlightenment and Democracy levels later on, much like it happened in real life. )
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2012, 05:18 AM   #89
daxliniere
Human being with feelings
 
daxliniere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,773
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned View Post
...I think "drag and drop to all other tracks required to be slaves" is overkill. ...[it would take] too much clicks (although an 'insert plugin in all selected tracks' action that has also been requested would greatly help there).
Ahhh! We already have 2 solutions for that. I guess you guys mustn't know about these very handy SWS actions;

One of them is the set of actions to copy/paste selected plugins to and from selected tracks. (Yes, multiple tracks can be selected for the paste opertation)

Also, we already have actions to insert a particular plugin (or chain of plugins) on any selected track or item.
You can set it up in the S&M Resources window in about 5 seconds.

Hope that makes some people happy and their lives easier.


All the best,
Dax.
__________________
Dax Liniere
London's newest premium studio complex! (Facebook)
[i7-4790K, 12Gb RAM, Win8.1x64, NVidia 9600, UAD2-OCTO, FireFaceUFX, REAPER x64]
daxliniere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2012, 06:03 AM   #90
Banned
Human being with feelings
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daxliniere View Post
Ahhh! We already have 2 solutions for that. I guess you guys mustn't know about these very handy SWS actions;

One of them is the set of actions to copy/paste selected plugins to and from selected tracks. (Yes, multiple tracks can be selected for the paste opertation)

Also, we already have actions to insert a particular plugin (or chain of plugins) on any selected track or item.
You can set it up in the S&M Resources window in about 5 seconds.

Hope that makes some people happy and their lives easier.


All the best,
Dax.
Cool, that may eliminate some of the workflow/speed-related objections, but my main argument is that even having to use multiple plugins is overkill, at least for 'native' parameters like track volume, mute, panning, send/receive volume, etc.

The story is of course different when you take my suggestion to apply the CV concept generally, for the subset of cases where you'd want to use CV groups for the same parameter(s) in multiple plugins, one each per track.

(ReaEQ seems to be a very special case. Since some very recent changes, its parameters should arguably be considered to be 'native' as well. I haven't played with the new possibilities yet, so I'm not entirely sure. But I do have a strong suspicion other Reaplugs will follow the same route, especially ReaComp / ReaGate. This should all be *very* exciting especially to those desiring console-like mixer features. )

Also, I am aware of extensions like the SWS stuff. But I tend to try to avoid as much non-default stuff as I can. Via OSC we can easily trigger SWS actions, although there is one practical difficulty: their action IDs are not reliable (i.e., they can change). Also, for the purposes of using OSC, I have no idea if such actions provide me with enough feedback. And it isn't hard at all to replicate such behavior via OSC. Thus, I was thinking it is probably preferable to manage state in the same place that is responsible for adding plugins. Not because I dislike SWS actions, but because it seems to make more sense to integrate the 'intelligence' in one place somehow.

Perhaps we can turn it around somehow, and use SWS (or something similar) to manage starting up a headless Pd running as a background process, and configuring a patch in it to achieve CV-like functionality in REAPER much more transparently to the end user. But not yet.
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ

Last edited by Banned; 04-21-2012 at 06:09 AM.
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2012, 02:44 PM   #91
gofer
-blänk-
 
gofer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,074
Default transfer from tracker IID#2817

Quote:
Originally Posted by danfuerth
Hope one day I will see VCA groups in Reaper, this is a critical feature in mixing that only 2 Daw's have Protools v10 and Sequoia v12

12345678
gofer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 11:02 AM   #92
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Just outside of Glacier National Park
Posts: 11,968
Default

Just a freindly bump.
__________________
Kontakt Vid Tutorials->Create Outputs / Create Templates -|- SMDrums Free drums -|- Elk Video Productions -|- Tod's Music
Tod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2012, 07:16 PM   #93
danfuerth
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,824
Default

Yet another needed bump in the face of SSL!!!

Still waiting for this to be a part of reaper and then a part of history as every Daw under the sun would add VCA groups by the following updates due to Cockos taking the initiative to say NO TO SSL tactics.
danfuerth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2012, 08:56 PM   #94
danfuerth
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,824
Default

posting on this as it needs more votes, the ghost fader on Sequoia is very nice and I believe it looks more better than Protools.

I love Reaper, I can do things in it that NO OTHER DAW can do not even Protools 10!!!

I am getting fond of the pins in/outs and becoming very good with them, as I Believe the pins ins and outs are the killer reason why I use Reaper along with the tracks channels!!

Knowing the pins in an outs allows me to mix without several buses. By using the Pins of the FX's and routing the Pins to Reasurround I can place my fx pins outs anywhere I want in the stereo field.

The pins idea for FX's is SUPERB!!! allows Fx's to be routed without using FX BUSES!! due to the tracks having 64 channels that is what makes sending FX Out's to anywhere you want.

So an Fx from a vocal track ( Reverb+ Chorus) the reverb be routed directly to the master track which has Reasurround, while the Chorus goes into an FX bus which then is routed mixed to the Reasurrond back on the master track. All this with only using the Pins of the Fx Outs.


I use the Pins a lot it cuts down on FX BUSSES


This control along with VCA Groups would take Reaper to another level!!!
danfuerth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2012, 05:30 AM   #95
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,162
Default

What hasn't been addressed is what happens with the Read/Trim, so let's address it.


Read/Trim mode on a track that is a VCA master will be added to the outgoing offset that is then applied to all the VCA slave tracks on playback and recording.

The symbolic equation for "VCA group X" thus looks something like this :

VCA X Master Volume Envelope (in dB) + VCA X Master Read/Trim fader value (in dB)
is added to the current volume of all VCA X Slaves

This the volume level of any VCA group X slave is:

VCA X Slave volume level =

VCA X Slave volume envelope + VCA X Slave Read/Trim fader value
+
VCA X Master Volume Envelope + VCA X Master Read/Trim fader value
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom

Last edited by airon; 11-12-2012 at 05:53 AM.
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 01:19 AM   #96
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,162
Default

I've added an implementation idea to the request, born from disucssion in this thread:


A way to implement the VCA functionality
  • Designate tracks as a VCA master with an attribute in the track manager, which basically does nothing until you also give it slaves to add to its control.

    The VCA flag in a column of the track manager makes it very easy and intuitive to find.

  • The Group Matrix, or its own matrix page is used for configuring what tracks fall under any kind of control of the VCA track. In the example mockup below I've simply tacked it on below the group matrix.

  • The VCA matrix is populated by both groups that are actually doing something and all tracks.

    This might be a problem if you don't actually want to link anything except control some stuff with a VCA. Then again you can just check the tracks individually, but that'll increase management time when you want to add tracks to a VCA influence.

Please note that basic routing/group/vca matrix improvements like swipe-setting patch points and row/column highlights as suggested in the routing matrix request will help this work more effectively.

A simple mockup :

__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2013, 04:28 PM   #97
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,162
Default

A quick bump and some simpler info on how this implementation idea would work.
  1. Any track can be a VCA master. It's just an attribute of a track, controllable from either the track manager or the context menu of the track/mixer control panels.

  2. Nothing changes about what that track can do other than the VCA functionality.

  3. All tracks with the VCA attribute set, appear in the VCA matrix, as shown in the previous post

  4. VCAs can control any group and/or any other tracks by checking a box in the VCA matrix.

  5. The tracks they control have volume automation of the VCA track combined with their own during playback and recording.

That's it.

Current slave track volume = VCA track volume + slave track volume during playback.

Ghost faders in Sequoia and Default faders in Protools display this 'combined' track volume with faders (or translucent fader graphics), so the user gets an idea of what the final track volume is, but that is an optional feature.

It need not be the fader moving, but it might be a nice thing to indicate in some way that the track volume is being influenced by a VCA.


The next step would be to enable VCA-like behaviour for plugins present on the VCA and the slave tracks. This would be more complex, since value reference points would need to be defined for each and every parameter of any plugin you wish to mess with.

For the volume envelope that reference point is 0 dB.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 08:54 AM   #98
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,162
Default

Simplified the request a little more, with a description of what VCAs technically are in a DAW.

VCA masters will be sending their volume (= trim + volume envelope) as a stream of 32-bit floating point values to the VCA slaves.

There the volume state of the VCA master is simply added to the VCA slaves volume parameter, in reference to 0 dB.

Hopefully that's not too big a challenge, though it might be interesting to hear from the devs where audio sent from other tracks arrives in the processing chain.

This of course is a completely new set of routed data and needs to be as live as possible .
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 09:19 AM   #99
semiquaver
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,903
Default

seems like 32 bits is excessive!

16 would be more than enough I would imagine...
semiquaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 10:18 AM   #100
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,162
Default

It's just what the volume of every track uses. Single-precision floating point values.

It's probably faster than 16-bit integer math.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 10:49 AM   #101
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,217
Default

Slightly off topic, but semi-related ...
If (fat chance of that happening) I was involved in the creation of a new DAW I'd do what (apparently) nobody does, from the get go. I'd make all the track gain stages and similar (faders, pans, sends, send pans) totally independent in the architechture, and easily connect/disconnect and/or switch them at will or group them at will to anything else... as a fundamental default architechture.

The internal software "hub" would be one big invisible patch bay and grouping matrix that can connect any audio stream to any channel and can link any UI control to any other... by default.

At the risk of repeating myself too often, a good digital console does many useful things that most DAW consoles simply cannot do. There is no valid reason for it that I can see other than people coding the DAWs simply don't want to bother to code those things in software. Curiously enough, the digital hardware consoles hardware parts are also fully driven from software. The only difference is they have real physical controls.

A software mixer is 100% virtual, no physical connections or parts at all ... and yet you can't even do something as basic to a real digital console as flip the faders because they're (apparently) all literally "hardwired" to their audio streams in the code.

You can't do something as simple as flip faders to digital channel input gain or reverb sends or flip faders and pans to cues to not have to click on tiny little send faders to mix cans. You can't do... well... a lot of really useful things that good digital consoles easily allow that improve the general workflow a great deal.

VCA's are but one thing in a pretty long list there so I'm not sure (well, I am kinda) why it gets so much relative focus.

__________________
"I, Bozo The Clown, do solemly swear to uphold the Consti.. consti... uh, how do you pronounce that again?".
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 12:08 PM   #102
danfuerth
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,824
Default

Perhaps when you have 50 fuckin Automation lanes on the slaves because they do not follow the Masters automation lane?

Is that acceptable to you enough??????????????

A live project runs all pretty much by itself with VCA groups

Obviously not many people here are running Reaper as a Live Mixer and as such should stop making excuses or silly arguments as to "What for"

Other Daw's have added VCA Groups years after Product Launch ( Magix Sequoia) so I do not want to hear the BS of " Can't be done or workarounds"

We have already too many Workarounds in Reaper.



If you do not mix live then you do not know how and why VCA groups are NEEDED in live uses for many Reasons.


This is not a one person Request here, there are thousands of people who need and must have VCA groups for reasons I already explained in terms of needing less hardware as control faders.
danfuerth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 12:25 PM   #103
semiquaver
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,903
Default

...easy boy...
semiquaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 01:01 PM   #104
danfuerth
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,824
Default

Nothing pisses me off then having software options not added.

This is not hardware, you are not building anything, no wires, no circuit boards NOTHING!!!

You are telling reaper to follow some lines of code

There are plugins being developed for VCA groups inside Reaper, still in Beta stages, but it proves one thing : Cockos can put them in at any time they wish
as has been proven by those plugins.
danfuerth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 01:22 PM   #105
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,162
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
At the risk of repeating myself too often, a good digital console does many useful things that most DAW consoles simply cannot do. There is no valid reason for it that I can see other than people coding the DAWs simply don't want to bother to code those things in software. Curiously enough, the digital hardware consoles hardware parts are also fully driven from software. The only difference is they have real physical controls.
I'd like it if it were that easy. That kind of flexiblity, like automated patch points can't work as well as we'd like if we need the kind of latency compensation we have, or all you can use are zero latency plugins.

I am interested in hearing about what the digital consoles you know can do, no matter how useful. I know that Harrison can create patch buss assignments for tracks, sort of like creating a send and removing it right away.

They have all their DSP patched in and it's all organized towards a set of useful workflows for post production most of the time(the MPC4-D console anyway). Nuendo has begun to dabble in automated bus assignments. Is that part of what you see in other digital consoles ?


Btw, Dan is right in that the VCA JS plugin prooves that Justin knew what VCA functionality was all about. Now it's just a question of integrating it in to the grouping system and running it with zero latency, at least for already recorded volume automation. When they get to it, they get to it.

The whole thing just came up in conversation and sometimes that sparks ideas, like this simplification of the request. Sure hope the midi editor gets finished at least for a while soon.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 02:41 PM   #106
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airon View Post
I am interested in hearing about what the digital consoles you know can do, no matter how useful.
It's too much to list, especially when you get into the better and more expensive consoles. I already mentioned fader flipping, something most DAWs seem totally incapable of which would obviously make a short docked mixer in a single screen view much more useful than having to keep expanding the console.

I'll fire up my d8b and make a good list. I haven't mixed on it in awhile.
__________________
"I, Bozo The Clown, do solemly swear to uphold the Consti.. consti... uh, how do you pronounce that again?".
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 03:08 PM   #107
danfuerth
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,824
Default

Yep d8b is an example of features that can be done in software and thus then not needing those in hardware

A lot of software is replacing hardware and in some cases Total Replacement.

So if the Console Features are becoming available in software only then they are not needed on the hardware.

Which begs the question : If most of the Console features are put in a Software Daw, then clearly there is no difference in running a console with VCA groups or one without.

It is a question of how to get Reaper in the Studio. In order to do this, Studio workflows and tools are going to have to be added to Reaper.

That means VCA groups, that means control interfaces support such as other Daw's have done.
danfuerth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 03:49 PM   #108
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,217
Default

Okay Airon, general list from the d8b, an old discontinued console.

Snapshot & Event Automation With Timeline Markers
Two different things, snapshots work much like SWS except it has more filters and it's on the timeline to be moved anywhere directly.

The event track is similar, but discreet, to load plugins, track presets, or snapshots. Also directly on the timeline to move, slide, edit or lock at a time position like a marker. You can also manually trigger an event.

You can also "commit" events to automation envelopes for detailed editing.


Metering:
Pre-Fader, Post-Fader, Post Mute and Fader

Faders to Tape:
Flip the Faders to Digital Input Trims.
Pans flip to aux pans and cue pans

Channel Linking:
Fader, Mute, Pan, Phase, Pan, Eq's, Comps, Gates, Busses,Auxes

Modify Levels (all selected channels):
The available parameters are too many to list, every parameter of every Fader, Pan EQ, Comp and Gate, Expander, Surround Pan, etc. Trim any or all at once by a specific amount, along with automation.

Trim or Set or Min or Max + Include Automation

Clear Automation:
Everything or any combination of anything on the channel, per option box.

Full Screen Panner:
Shows nothing but all pans in the project.

Mix Editor:
Show automation for channels or parameters while putting any other channel or parameter behind the ones you're editing. Like showing fader, pan and mute for Lead Vox while at the same time showing ghosted Fader pan and mute behind those three tracks from any other mixer channel... and being able to flip the pages and edit at will... anything on the front page, anything behind it.

Snap to Cues:
Make automation drawing snap to cues (snapshots and event markers on the timeline which are visible)

Master Dim:
-20, -30, -40, -inf

Morphing:
EQ morphing between A/B settings, with a "time field" of how long it takes. This is a really good substitute for EQ automation in many cases. Set up the alternate EQ on B and have it morph there (the morph time is directly editablewith a 2 sec default) when you need it to switch over, instead of automating the EQ, and morph back to setting A later.

Cut (reset)/ Copy / Paste Between Channels:
Full channels, any plug.

Metering:
All comps and gates have VU meters

Track Sheet:
Full Tracksheet that exports to HTML or text

Solo:
AFL/PFL/Mixdown solo modes. Control room solo without breaking cues. Independent solo level control.

Pre and Post FX:
On every channel, even auxes and FX returns

Direct Channel Patching from any Channel to any other.No sends involved.
And of course the usual collection of storing and recalling plugin presets, fx chains, track and song templates, etc, etc, etc.
__________________
"I, Bozo The Clown, do solemly swear to uphold the Consti.. consti... uh, how do you pronounce that again?".

Last edited by Lawrence; 03-15-2013 at 05:39 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 09:33 PM   #109
danfuerth
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,824
Default

Nice mixing console there, great features.
danfuerth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2013, 05:46 AM   #110
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danfuerth View Post
Nice mixing console there, great features.
Yeah it is. Even being old and outdated compared to more modern digital consoles. DAW functionality has a long way to go to match a good digital console.

Most of the stuff users go bananas over in DAWs (track templates, snapshot automation, etc, etc, etc...) is pretty standard fare in any decent digital console... and of course, even some of the small Yammy's have VCA's / DCA's.

So my only point there was not to vote against or dismiss VCA's, that would be pretty dumb, but just to widen the focus to the other great stuff we generally overlook.
__________________
"I, Bozo The Clown, do solemly swear to uphold the Consti.. consti... uh, how do you pronounce that again?".
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2013, 03:02 PM   #111
danfuerth
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,824
Default

A big Bump

Can not for the life of me understand why Cockos is ignoring VCA groups in Reaper

At least add functions to the Group matrix

Either way the VCA group Master Slave functions have to be on a button the tracks themselves that is how all Daw's that have them work

Best one I see is the Magix Sequoia VCA groups very easy to use and setup.
Smokes the Protools ones out of the water, and includes the Ghost Cap Fader UTTER GENIOUS!!


If you are going to add VCA grouping system with Automation please look at Magix Sequoia for inspiration.
danfuerth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2013, 06:45 AM   #112
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,162
Default

Improved the illustration of DCA Masters and added a Trim Volume Envelope illustration.


DCA Masters



Track Volume Envelope




__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2013, 07:04 AM   #113
Banned
Human being with feelings
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airon View Post
Improved the illustration of DCA Masters and added a Trim Volume Envelope illustration. [...]
Very illustrative, thanks!

I'd also like to see a more general version of it, though, replacing "volume" with "(arbitrary) parameter name" or "(arbitrary) parameter value", "fader" with "control element (for that arbitrary parameter)", and "track gain" with "application of control signal to target parameter". That would mainly be different with regard to per/post fader sends, I guess.

A few other remarks:

- Where it now says "static [Read/Trim Volume]", I think you're referring to the fader position, right? If so, I would mention more explicitly that it refers to the GUI control element.

- Should the "+" signs not be multiplication signs? With a trim control at its minimum position, the resulting value should also be at its minimum, even when the value of the envelope is not at its minimum. With a simple addition, that would not be the case.
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2013, 08:08 AM   #114
semiquaver
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned View Post
- Should the "+" signs not be multiplication signs? With a trim control at its minimum position, the resulting value should also be at its minimum, even when the value of the envelope is not at its minimum. With a simple addition, that would not be the case.
but adding gain is the same as multiplying level as db is a log scale!
semiquaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2013, 08:58 AM   #115
Banned
Human being with feelings
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by semiquaver View Post
but adding gain is the same as multiplying level as db is a log scale!
Even when using a log scale, I still don't see how multiplication would equal addition. I'll admit that I suck at both maths and electrical engineering, though.

But even regardless of that, again, one should not assume that gain / level are the only possible targets of a control (voltage) signal. Imho the flowchart should ideally also be applicable, for example, to a VCA group that controls panning / balance.
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2013, 09:12 AM   #116
semiquaver
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned View Post
Even when using a log scale, I still don't see how multiplication would equal addition
.
ahh that's the very nature of a log scale log (x * y ) = log(x) + log (y) - this is why "-inf" needs to be used for 0 !
semiquaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2013, 10:09 AM   #117
Banned
Human being with feelings
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by semiquaver View Post
ahh that's the very nature of a log scale log (x * y ) = log(x) + log (y) - this is why "-inf" needs to be used for 0 !
Thanks for the maths explanation / memory refresher.

But that leaves the same basic question, I guess: if we can express this relation both as multiplication and addition, then why not use multiplication?

As far as I understand (again, corrections much appreciated), that would seem to be more appropriate for describing a more general case, where we should arguably drop the assumption that we're using a log scale (and that we have a minus infinity value at one extreme of the range).
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2013, 12:20 PM   #118
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,162
Default

It's a symbol to express "add it together". It's meant for the devs and those with a general knowledge of how the logarithimic scale works, i.e. adding and subtracting dB values.

Generalizing this is no big deal. You just need add stuff about reference values to the description.

For example:

EQ band gain has a reference value of 0 dB, just like track gain does.

Now the user gets to setup reference values for every parameter she wishes to assert offset control over with a DCA master.

Then the question arises of whether or not the plugin has to be present on the DCA or not, or does it just generate values from some kinda of special source which in itself may be an asio-block-bound plugin, or perhaps something entirely new that is sample accurate.

Fun stuff to figure out. Designing and implementing DCA master functions just for volume and mute/solo overrides is easy by comparison, which is why that is the goal in this request.

You're welcome to write a request for general parameter offset control. I think it has a small chance of being implemented if added to this existing DCA request. I am up for discussing it though.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom

Last edited by airon; 05-17-2013 at 12:28 PM.
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2013, 12:24 PM   #119
semiquaver
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,903
Default

I wonder how much infrastucture for Banned's request might already be there in the existing parameter modulation.

And I think that it is a very very interesting request for electronic music

for implementation reasons though it may well make more sense as a separate request as Airon suggests...
semiquaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2013, 12:35 PM   #120
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: City
Posts: 10,162
Default

This could take a form of value envelopes that belong to no plugin, but can be sent anywhere in the session, targeting any plugin parameter. This might involve so-called automation sends that Bungle and I were talking about a few days ago.

This does sound like a major version update feature, since it could involve some major new plumbing.

Managing this stuff is the big deal.

You'd have to decide what the reference level your offset source is running at, what the reference level of the target parameter is, which is especially delicate for frequency values for example, and then how to control it.

Then people will want to send from one plugin parameter to another.

All this is partially already there for stuff local to tracks, but you can't do jack shit across tracks yet. We're talking envelopes, not midi CC editing, which they're currently working out.

You guys may want to spark up a new thread for this. "Parameter offset control across tracks" or something.
__________________
Dialogue/FX Editor & Re-Recording Mixer
(Video)Using Latch Preview
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.