is 'submix' in the mixer necessary?

ive been using ren for a while now, but one thing i dont understand is the submix.

my sound get routed to the submix when i apply effects.

submix are not able to route to different outs but only to main outs.

they are not able to multiout on daw.

they dont seem to share fx setting for routed tracks.

whats the point of this?

is there some necessary algorigthm to reduce cpu or something?

dont quite understand the mixer routings in mpc.

It's poorly thought out. Or an idea only half implemented.

The submix becomes effective if you can control where you route it and can add inserts plus control sends. In essence turning it into a buss/group channel.

At the moment it acts as another volume control and nothing else. Let's hope this changes in the forthcoming updates because it will go a long way to improving mixdowns within the MPC software.

this things been out a year and a half, what are they waiting for to fix the mixer!?!?!

I like to think of the Submixes as Group channels that don't have FX inserts or metering of any kind. You can route lets say all of your kick/bass stuff to Submix 1, then drums to Submix 2, leads to Submix 3, pads/strings to Submix 4, etc... and control their volumes as a group. When mixing it's easier to work in groups (less to keep track of at once). So you balance all of your drums together, then use a submix to control their volume as a whole to balance them with your kick, bass, and other sounds and vice versa. This leaves their relative balance that you worked so hard on alone while balancing all of the sounds as group with the Submixes. It just makes sense to reduce the amount of variables you are keeping track of, especially in larger high track count projects.

The reason they added submixes is because of the Track mixer. The track mixer is a unique mixer on every sequence so as you duplicate sequences while using the same programs with track mixer FX, the FX would be duplicated for every sequence using up your CPU before you get very far. This also makes it so that if you make a change on one sequence you'd have to make that same change one at a time to every sequence.

Submixes allow you to route programs to them so you can apply FX on the program just once rather than on the track mixer. When you duplicate a sequence it uses those same FX (on the program) and you don't have duplicated FX plugins on the track mixer using up all your CPU and complicating your mix. It has to do with coding and fact that there are a possibility of 16,384 tracks available in the MPC software which would require duplicating the audio signal up to 16,384 times which is just not feasible with today's computing power. Basically the Track mixer is better for doing a final mix on only one sequence, for example if you take all your sequences and turn them into one then start using the track mixer... or create your entire song in just one Sequence if you want to use the track mixer for putting FX on groups of sounds or whole programs.

Now the solution I see to all of these problems is to simply allow us to add FX inserts to the Submixes and preferably give us some metering on them. It would also be helpful if they gave us at least 8 more so we have 16 of them or allow us to create/name them freely. This would seriously solve the whole mixer issue and still let us take advantage of the track mixer and the benefits it provides while using a very modern way of producing using group channels aka aux busses...or in this case Submixes.

+1000 Airyck Good analysis

InspectahEX wrote:this things been out a year and a half, what are they waiting for to fix the mixer!?!?!

exactly.

InspectahEX wrote:this things been out a year and a half, what are they waiting for to fix the mixer!?!?!

It's a lot of work to make a new mixer with new features and still maintain compatibility with old projects, plus try to keep somewhat of a traditional MPC workflow and test it. It'll be interesting to see how it's pulled off once it's implemented. The real issue is that this all should have been thought out before Ren released IMO!

DJ Hellfire wrote:

InspectahEX wrote:this things been out a year and a half, what are they waiting for to fix the mixer!?!?!

It's a lot of work to make a new mixer with new features and still maintain compatibility with old projects, plus try to keep somewhat of a traditional MPC workflow and test it. It'll be interesting to see how it's pulled off once it's implemented. The real issue is that this all should have been thought out before Ren released IMO!

Have they actually said they are working on it?

Airyck wrote:Now the solution I see to all of these problems is to simply allow us to add FX inserts to the Submixes and preferably give us some metering on them. It would also be helpful if they gave us at least 8 more so we have 16 of them or allow us to create/name them freely. This would seriously solve the whole mixer issue and still let us take advantage of the track mixer and the benefits it provides while using a very modern way of producing using group channels aka aux busses...or in this case Submixes.

This ^^ plus

I wonder if Globally linking Tracks across sequences as a option would work/hard to code in

Ie....

if you change the pgm on track 3 in seq 4 it changes the pgm on track 3 in every seq .... .. So would apply to everything on track layer... (volume pan fx inserts.. sends... etc )
Feels like this mixer thing is talked to death... Definalty needs attention and implementation...

kaydigi wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:

InspectahEX wrote:this things been out a year and a half, what are they waiting for to fix the mixer!?!?!

It's a lot of work to make a new mixer with new features and still maintain compatibility with old projects, plus try to keep somewhat of a traditional MPC workflow and test it. It'll be interesting to see how it's pulled off once it's implemented. The real issue is that this all should have been thought out before Ren released IMO!

Have they actually said they are working on it?

I can't say! But what I can say is they are fully aware of the current mixer issues and the extreme demand for a new one!

dazastah wrote:I wonder if Globally linking Tracks across sequences as a option would work/hard to code in

Not sure, but it already does it in Song Mode, using the track mixer settings of the first sequence in the song and applies them to the rest of the sequences within the song, so to me, it seems possible, and not hard.

SimonInAustralia wrote:

dazastah wrote:I wonder if Globally linking Tracks across sequences as a option would work/hard to code in

Not sure, but it already does it in Song Mode, using the track mixer settings of the first sequence in the song and applies them to the rest of the sequences within the song, so to me, it seems possible, and not hard.

It's definitely not easy. There's a important things to consider with this feature: how will the software handle the same track having different program settings (be it drum, plugin, or keygroup) in different sequences, yet still have the same mixer, or will that even be possible or will each sequence have to have the same program assignments?! How will old projects be handled? Will they load properly and still sound the same? How will plugins be handled, specifically when you use a plugin on a track in one sequence, but maybe a different plugin on that same track in another sequence? Or will that even be possible using a global mixer?

And that's just to name a few things off the top of my head. Sounds easy, but in practice I don't think it's as small a feat as we may think given the nature of the sequence based MPC workflow! It's much easier on something like Maschine because the pads are the actual tracks and the pads are effected the same way globally. With the MPC, you have pads that you can use on many different tracks that can be effected in many different ways depending on the users desire. So it's pretty complex, but I'm sure it is possible.

DJ Hellfire wrote:It's definitely not easy. There's a important things to consider with this feature: how will the software handle the same track having different program settings (be it drum, plugin, or keygroup) in different sequences, yet still have the same mixer, or will that even be possible or will each sequence have to have the same program assignments?!

Maybe the same way it has always worked in MPCs?

You use the same settings on each track, on the different sequences, when you intend to string them together into a song.

How does MPC Software Song Mode handle this at the moment? How is that possible?

DJ Hellfire wrote:How will old projects be handled? Will they load properly and still sound the same?

Some sort of Master/Sequence setting, old projects load up set to sequence, work exactly the same way they do now.

DJ Hellfire wrote:How will plugins be handled, specifically when you use a plugin on a track in one sequence, but maybe a different plugin on that same track in another sequence? Or will that even be possible using a global mixer?

How does it handle it now, in Song Mode?

DJ Hellfire wrote:And that's just to name a few things off the top of my head. Sounds easy, but in practice I don't think it's as small a feat as we may think given the nature of the sequence based MPC workflow!

Doesn't it already do what we want in Song Mode, use the settings of the first sequence in the song and applies it to all other sequences in that song?

If so, why is it so hard?

What simons Says!!!

SimonInAustralia wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:It's definitely not easy. There's a important things to consider with this feature: how will the software handle the same track having different program settings (be it drum, plugin, or keygroup) in different sequences, yet still have the same mixer, or will that even be possible or will each sequence have to have the same program assignments?!

Maybe the same way it has always worked in MPCs?

You use the same settings on each track, on the different sequences, when you intend to string them together into a song.

How does MPC Software Song Mode handle this at the moment? How is that possible?

Well, keep in mind that no other MPC has ever had a track mixer. There's only been a program mixer, which by it's nature, is already global. Your suggestion to keep all the sequences set up the same is the obvious one, and the method I have always used. The thing is, not everyone works this way. Some weird people like to have different shit on there tracks for each sequence. So some people would likely have to alter their workflow if they want to take advantage of a global mixer Have to consider that.

Song Mode isn't what I'm talking about, though. Talking about separate sequences, while creating.

SimonInAustralia wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:How will old projects be handled? Will they load properly and still sound the same?

Some sort of Master/Sequence setting, old projects load up set to sequence, work exactly the same way they do now.

This is a good suggestion!

SimonInAustralia wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:How will plugins be handled, specifically when you use a plugin on a track in one sequence, but maybe a different plugin on that same track in another sequence? Or will that even be possible using a global mixer?

How does it handle it now, in Song Mode?

Well, Song Mode is not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about when loading old projects.

SimonInAustralia wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:And that's just to name a few things off the top of my head. Sounds easy, but in practice I don't think it's as small a feat as we may think given the nature of the sequence based MPC workflow!

Doesn't it already do what we want in Song Mode, use the settings of the first sequence in the song and applies it to all other sequences in that song?

If so, why is it so hard?

Well, if that's you want! But again, I'm not talking about creating a Song Mode. I'm referring to the behavior of separate sequences.

Why it could be difficult is partly due to the known issue that new code often breaks old shit. I'm sure they can make the software do whatever they can imagine. But you have to consider how it will impact current functionality!

You should chime in on the mixer thread I create a while back with your ideas: viewtopic.php?f=36&t=163023&p=1539641&hilit=mixer#p1539641