is 'submix' in the mixer necessary?

DJ Hellfire wrote: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.

It is the way many/most MPC users, who work with joining multiple sequences together in Song Mode, or with the Next Sequence Mode or feature, have always worked. It is in the MPC60 manual, that is what you do when joining different sequences together, it has to be done like that. Joining sequences together, in Song Mode, Next Sequence, or Pad to Next Sequence modes, often requires it. This is basic MPC functionality, that is what MPC users expect, that is why it is so often requested.

DJ Hellfire wrote: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.

If there is a Master/Sequence mixer setting, they don't have to change anything if they want to continue working the way they are, they leave it set to Sequence, it operates the way it does now, there would be no issue.

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

My point about Song Mode is that it already does what is required in the current MPC Software, it lets you play multiple sequences using the same mixer settings, those mixer settings of the first sequence in the Song. Since it already does it, I don't see what the problem is, why some think it would be so difficult to implement.

It doesn't need a whole mixer redesign, just a setting for a Master sequence to use for the mixer settings, as it does in Song Mode where the first sequence mixer settings are used for all following sequences. Surely they could add a setting so you could do the same in Main Mode, choose which sequence is used as the Master for the mixer settings, and/or have a separate Master mixer.

DJ Hellfire wrote:

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.

When old projects load, they might default to the Sequencer setting for the mixer, and would operate exactly the same as it does now.

DJ Hellfire wrote:

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.

I am not talking about Song Mode as the answer, I am saying that it already does what is required for a global mixer in Song Mode, it just has to have a Master/Sequence mixer type setting in Main Mode so that you can choose to do the same in Main Mode, if you want. When set to a Sequencer mixer setting, it behaves exactly the same as it does now.

SimonInAustralia wrote: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!

It will not impact on current functionality, it might default to a Sequencer mixer setting on loading existing projects, and work exactly the same way as it does now, without needing any mixer redesign at all.

SimonInAustralia wrote: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

I have said this exact same thing so many times already. I really don't see why it is such a massive problem to overcome.

The thing about Song Mode is that this step isn't taken until the beat is complete. That's not the issue. The issue is having all sequences follow the same mixing while you are still creating the sequences. If I'm not done with the beat, there is no song mode. Currently, you are almost forced to wait til you're done with the beat to create a song mode and start mixing. But people want to start mixing and adding effects BEFORE the song mode is even a thought and in the current situation, that is an extreme pain in the ass, especially when you want the tracks you have so far to sound the exact same in every sequence. I don't want to have to wait all the way until I create a song mode for my second sequence to easily sound the exact same as my first. So Song Mode isn't the issue. It's the mixing during the creation process!

DJ Hellfire wrote:So Song Mode isn't the issue. It's the mixing during the creation process!

I am not saying that Song Mode is the issue or the answer.

I am saying that it already acts as global mixer in Song Mode. It already operates where all the sequences in Song Mode use a single mixer, from the first sequence in the Song. So this is already possible, without any mixer redesign at all.

It just needs a setting in Main Mode to do the same as it does in Song Mode if you want, or to operate the way it does now if you want.

SimonInAustralia wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:So Song Mode isn't the issue. It's the mixing during the creation process!

I am not saying that Song Mode is the issue or the answer.

I am saying that it already acts as global mixer in Song Mode. It already operates where all the sequences in Song Mode use a single mixer, from the first sequence in the Song. So this is already possible, without any mixer redesign at all.

It just needs a setting in Main Mode to do the same as it does in Song Mode if you want, or to operate the way it does now if you want.

Yes, but song mode is not the global mixer in the asking you are thinking. Song Mode currently is no different than copying bars from one sequence to the end of another and basically combining the mix of the two sequences. Song mode just does it in a less manual manner and on a larger scale.

DJ Hellfire wrote:Yes, but song mode is not the global mixer in the asking you are thinking. Song Mode currently is no different than copying bars from one sequence to the end of another and basically combining the mix of the two sequences.

How does Song Mode combine the mixer settings of the two sequences?

What mixer settings does it use when combining them?

SimonInAustralia wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:Yes, but song mode is not the global mixer in the asking you are thinking. Song Mode currently is no different than copying bars from one sequence to the end of another and basically combining the mix of the two sequences.

How does Song Mode combine the mixer settings of the two sequences?

What mixer settings does it use when combining them?

It uses the settings of the first sequence. This is the same thing as manually copying bars from sequence 2 and 3 and pasting them at the beginning or end of sequence 1. Song mode just puts everything in a new sequence. But song mode is useless on an incomplete beat.

DJ Hellfire wrote:It uses the settings of the first sequence.

Exactly.

It uses one mixer setting, a 'global/master' mixer setting, in that case it is the mixer settings from the first sequence in the song, and applies those mixer settings to all the other sequences in the song.

This is possible with the current mixer configuration, it doesn't need a redesigned mixer to accomplish it.

DJ Hellfire wrote:But song mode is useless on an incomplete beat.

Exactly.

It needs to have a similar function in Main Mode, a Master/Sequence setting, so that you can choose for it to operate LIKE it does in Song Mode, and use one 'global/master' mixer setting for all the sequences, if you choose that.


Can't you see, I am not asking for it to operate like Song Mode, simply an option for it to operate in Main Mode in the way that Song Mode does with the mixer settings, in that it uses one set of mixer settings and applies it to all the other sequences?

SimonInAustralia wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:It uses the settings of the first sequence.

Exactly.

It uses one mixer setting, a 'global/master' mixer setting, in that case it is the mixer settings from the first sequence in the song, and applies those mixer settings to all the other sequences in the song.

DJ Hellfire wrote:But song mode is useless on an incomplete beat.

Exactly.

It needs to have a similar function in Main Mode, a Master/Sequence setting, so that you can choose for it to operate LIKE it does in Song Mode, and use one 'global/master' mixer setting for all the sequences, if you choose that.


Can't you see, I am not asking for it to operate like Song Mode, simply an option for it to operate in Main Mode in the way that Song Mode does with the mixer settings, in that it uses one set of mixer settings and applies it to all the other sequences?

Yeah, I see what you're saying. But the idea is not to copy the settings of the first sequence. The idea everyone has in mind is to be able to control the mix from the mixer in any sequence. The last thing we need is another offline process like that.

DJ Hellfire wrote:Yeah, I see what you're saying. But the idea is not to copy the settings of the first sequence. The idea everyone has in mind is to be able to control the mix from the mixer in any sequence. The last thing we need is another offline process like that.

So they program it so that when the Master mixer option is chosen, all the mixers are linked together, you make a change on one, it makes changes to them all.

Or, there is a Master mixer, and when the Master mixer option is chosen, all the sequences use those Master mixer settings. Then there is the option to copy those Master mixer settings out to the sequences if you want to change back to Sequencer mixer option and use the same settings. That would make it more flexible than having them all automatically change to the one Master setting, and you could have some sequences set to the Master mixer option, and some set to the Sequencer mixer option, at the same time, if you wanted to.

When the Sequence mixer option is chosen, it operates exactly the same way as it does now.

The basic functionality is already possible with the current mixer design, as demonstrated by how it works in Song Mode, it just needs to be programmed to work the way you/we need it to in Main Mode.

I think that you are making it seem harder than it needs to be.

SimonInAustralia wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:Yeah, I see what you're saying. But the idea is not to copy the settings of the first sequence. The idea everyone has in mind is to be able to control the mix from the mixer in any sequence. The last thing we need is another offline process like that.

So they program it so that when the Master mixer option is chosen, all the mixers are linked together, you make a change on one, it makes changes to them all.

Or, there is a Master mixer, and when the Master mixer option is chosen, all the sequences use those Master mixer settings. Then there is the option to copy those Master mixer settings out to the sequences if you want to change back to Sequencer mixer option and use the same settings. That would make it more flexible than having them all automatically change to the one Master setting, and you could have some sequences set to the Master mixer option, and some set to the Sequencer mixer option, at the same time, if you wanted to.

When the Sequence mixer option is chosen, it operates exactly the same way as it does now.

The basic functionality is already possible with the current mixer design, as demonstrated by how it works in Song Mode, it just needs to be programmed to work the way you/we need it to in Main Mode.

I think that you are making it seem harder than it needs to be.

The problem with just copying the settings between sequences:
1) You still need to have multiple copies of each vst on each sequence which will use up your one CPU core power very quickly. So take your vst CPU usage and multiply by the number of sequences you have.
2) There are no real standards between 3rd party vst fx when it comes to changing parameters or saving presets (some don't even have preset systems). This would be a real problem to try and figure out how to get all the copies of a particular 3rd party vst to update when you update a different one. Also what about when you add a new vst, does it automatically load that vst in the same slot in all the sequences? This is a big crash just waiting to happen. It's bad enough when you load one, let alone 20 at a time.

I still think the best solution from a user AND coding perspective is the inserts, metering, and increased count submixes.

Airyck wrote:The problem with just copying the settings between sequences:

Single mixer when the Master mixer option is chosen, just like Song Mode.

SimonInAustralia wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:Yeah, I see what you're saying. But the idea is not to copy the settings of the first sequence. The idea everyone has in mind is to be able to control the mix from the mixer in any sequence. The last thing we need is another offline process like that.

I think that you are making it seem harder than it needs to be.

I'm sure if it were as simple as we would think, it would have been implemented several updates ago!

DJ Hellfire wrote:I'm sure if it were as simple as we would think, it would have been implemented several updates ago!

Lots of basic/simple things that should have been implemented several updates ago, and/or designed into it from the start.

I really don't see the difficulty, it can do it in Song Mode, shouldn't be to hard to do it in Main Mode.

If it is that difficult, it is because they have not thought it through enough in the first place.

SimonInAustralia wrote:

DJ Hellfire wrote:I'm sure if it were as simple as we would think, it would have been implemented several updates ago!

Lots of basic/simple things that should have been implemented several updates ago, and/or designed into it from the start.

If it is that difficult, it is because they have not thought it through enough in the first place.

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!

SimonInAustralia wrote:I really don't see the difficulty, it can do it in Song Mode, shouldn't be to hard to do it in Main Mode.

You keep mentioning song mode! You don't seem to understand that song mode is not doing anything to unify the mixer. It's just copying bars from one sequence to the next, nothing more. It's like you making a copy of sequence 1 onto a blank sequence, then copying the bars from sequence 2 to the end of that new sequence. That's all song mode does. If you move a fader or adjust a plugin in your song mode sequence, the change does not happen in any other sequence. If you make a song mode from a sequence that uses plugins, all the plugin instances get duplicated, sucking more CPU. And if you tweak a plugin in the song mode, that change is not taking place in that plugin on any other sequence. That is not a unified mixer. Even if I could copy all mixer settings to the clipboard and paste them to another sequences' mixer, that is still not a unified mixer. A unified mixer is when I have up to 128 sequences and I move a fader in one of them, that fader moves in all the other 127 sequences without me having to copy any settings from sequence 1. A unified mixer is when I have up to 128 sequences and I use a plugin on track 7 of all the sequences, I don't end up with 128 instances of that plugin.

Why this is not as simple as you think? Well for one, coding new shit breaks old shit almost all the time. That's just the nature of programming. Secondly, we're talking about the possibility of changing the entire architecture of the mixer engine if they end up doing what we are requesting. They would basically be taking an application that has up to 128 sequences with 128 individual mixers, and somehow making all 128 sequences recall a single mixer as well as share plugin instances.

damn... We all want the same thing really.. I like the idea of parameter grouping across sequences... I voted that up in the feature link you posted hellfire...

I agree that a new(not added) fixed uni mixer would break old projects(live sets with multiple beats as seq) If this where to happen, then you would need some way of choosing which track to start seq and pgm import on incrementally to counter a fixed mixer...

If they can apply the same technique like pad grouping to tracks across sequences that would be really dope... You just group all tracks from when starting and just copy the sequence everytime you need a new one.. Its what i do and expect everyone else does to make variations..