Zynewave.
Zynewave@Zynewave wrote:
I’ve been thinking about adding a right-click “mixer minimize” track option. It would behave similar to the normal minimize button on the track lane headers.
After further thought, I think this is not necessary. The existing “enable audio mixing” track option would be perfect for this use. When you create tracks by dragging insert mappings, this track option is not enabled by default, although audio mixing is implicitly enabled in the engine when a device mapping is assigned to a track. I could add a “Show only audio mixing enabled tracks” option to the mixer view menu. You can then control if a track should be shown with meters in the mixer, by toggling the “enable audio mixing” option in the track properties. Thoughts?
LawrenceI’d like an option to just hide them completely. Is that possible or feasible? Maybe just slide them behind the main audio channel where they’re out of sight or something.
I just don’t want to see channels representing plugins in the mixer… just a button to get to the chain when I need to. On larger project there will be too many mixer channels to contend with already without all of those.
Thanks for the reply.
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
I could add a “Show only audio mixing enabled tracks” option to the mixer view menu. You can then control if a track should be shown with meters in the mixer, by toggling the “enable audio mixing” option in the track properties. Thoughts?
A good idea, but I think it would be even better if we had an option to just hide certain tracks completely. If we do not need to see them then I think it would be much better to simply hide them.
@Lawrence wrote:
I have three audio tracks loaded currently with a couple of plugs and it turns into 5 mixer channels.
That is exactly why I am so interested in the zGrid. Too many tracks are used in Podium IMO.
While the combination of the Group track panel and the Hide track lane feature, very elegantly display tracks in Podium (making them easier to manage) the issue of very high track counts compared to other hosts still remains.
I really think an option to hide certain tracks altogether is better. Of course the zGrid would eliminate most of these issues when it arrives.
ZynewaveI’d like an option to just hide them completely. Is that possible or feasible?
It’s feasible. One reason that I show minimized track strips (6 pixel wide) instead of hiding them completely, is to indicate solo/mute states in the track hierarchy. Every track can be soloed/muted and this state is inherited by any child tracks in the group. If you have soloed/muted a group track that is completely hidden in the mixer, then it could be confusing that you see ghost muted child tracks with no immediate way to access the solo/mute of the hidden track. Maybe it’s not that big a deal. I’ll probably put in an option to hide tracks completely.
ZynewaveWhile the combination of the Group track panel and the Hide track lane feature, very elegantly display tracks in Podium (making them easier to manage) the issue of very high track counts compared to other hosts still remains.
But what would you say exactly is the problem with the high track count? Is it the excessive number of track strips in the mixer? Is the problem also with the track handling in the tracks region? If the problem is only with the mixer, then there are a number of things that can be done to improve this, which would make zGrid less urgent.
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
But what would you say exactly is the problem with the high track count? Is it the excessive number of track strips in the mixer? Is the problem also with the track handling in the tracks region?
Yes and yes. š
More info…
1.Familiarity
The first problem with the high track counts is how unfamiliar it is. Of course we should not all copy everything else out there, but it can be unfamiliar to use, especially for new users. While I can use the current one FX per track set up now, it is not the way I ideally like to work. Many other users of other hosts may (or indeed have) expressed a preference for something far more familiar…the zGrid will meet that need. Multiple FX per track.
2.Creativity
I am far more likely to explore the creative possibilities the Zgrid offers than attempt something similar with the current set up. The zGrid offers some clever ideas that right now are not possible. My creative focus sometimes is drawn away into simply keeping track of FX tracks.
3.Speed
Simply adding an effect to a container or chainer like the zGrid I think will provide a much quicker way of working in general in Podium, far quicker than the current options we have IMO. The focus will be on just one track at a time, not up to 5 or more for each track you want to process.
Although the current system is quite capable of being used professionally and is displayed in a very nice way….the zGrid option IMO would still be IMO far easier to manage and would provide a far quicker and more intuitive workflow. If the zGrid will be a plugin (as has been discussed) then one can drag it to a track and drag any other mappings to the same track, very quick and simple while keeping track counts right down where they should be.
4.CPU usage
I have not run any detailed tests on this yet, but I doubt very much that Podium can have 5 times the track count of another host and maintain a similar level of CPU usage. I would guess that tracks that do not have audio mixing enabled might use less CPU but I doubt they will not use any. Even a small amount will build up in a busy project. A non issue with the zGrid.
5.Track names
When you wrap a track the default name is
6.Additional mixer strips
The mixer even now has a few tricks up it’s sleeve to reduce wasted space but as has been discussed, even with all the existing options in place there are still too many needless tracks that are visible. The zGrid would for instance change a track with 4 mappings (4 tracks) into just one mixer strip. Or 20 mixer strips from 5 tracks with various FX mappings for example into just 5 tracks! Just like other hosts.
7.Expanding group panel
When track levels grow in number the group panel can really expand to a point where if you have the mixer dragged even a third of the way up the screen you will not be able to access the map panel for instance as there will not be enough space for it to open.
I like having the mixer open and indeed need to with so many tracks to manage, so I have to keep switching the group panel off and on instead. Some sort of slider in the group panel would be useful here, perhaps also for the zGrid representation in the track panel area to avoid the same problem. Even so the zGrid would still mean less tracks to look after.
8.Drag and drop issues
This has happened to me on more than one occasion. When I try and move tracks around I have to be very careful to place tracks with FX on them in a busy mix in exactly the right place or it will cover the wrong track or feed into the wrong one. I would not have to think about that with “Siegried”.
9.Bounce tracks
When using Podium you really do have to be careful to keep track (no pun intended) of different track types.
With all the tracks I have to manage already with FX on them, bounce tracks are yet another track type to keep an eye on as you cannot have fades on bounce tracks so you have to move the sound event to another track e.t.c. None of this should be necessary IMO. It would be far less of an issue if multiple FX could be used on one track.
10.Busy projects and the Group Panel
When using Podium with say a 30 track + project, sometimes I want to access the controls from the track itself and hide the track inspector for more space, but doing that means I have to unhide tracks and the arrange view just gets filled up with FX tracks.
So way too many tracks are now visible in the arrangement view.
Every single one of these issues IMO would be addressed with the zGrid. No it is not a perfect solution but at a stroke it will eliminate many work flow issues IMO.
ZynewaveThanks for your feedback Conquistador.
I have not run any detailed tests on this yet, but I doubt very much that Podium can have 5 times the track count of another host and maintain a similar level of CPU usage. I would guess that tracks that do not have audio mixing enabled might use less CPU but I doubt they will not use any. Even a small amount will build up in a busy project. A non issue with the zGrid.
No need to worry about this. I have optimized this heavily. The engine mixing/routing is performed no matter if the UI displays individual track meters or not. The meter information comes ‘free of charge’ from the engine. The meter drawing routines will only use CPU if the meters are shown somewhere on the screen.
zGrid is high on my wish-list too, but there are still some sides to the existing track layout that can be improved in the mixer. For instance bus sends, which cannot be integrated into zGrid. I’m thinking about adding a ‘stacked chain’ option to the mixer. This feature will make a chain of plugins appear on a single channel strip. The channel strips will become higher than the current layout, but it would be perfect for putting a mixer on a second monitor. I think I’ll start experimenting with this in the next couple of weeks. I’ll post a preview once I have something to show.
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
Thanks for your feedback Conquistador.
š
No need to worry about this. I have optimized this heavily. The engine mixing/routing is performed no matter if the UI displays individual track meters or not. The meter information comes ‘free of charge’ from the engine. The meter drawing routines will only use CPU if the meters are shown somewhere on the screen.
Good news. Thanks. 8)
zGrid is high on my wish-list too, but there are still some sides to the existing track layout that can be improved in the mixer. For instance bus sends, which cannot be integrated into zGrid. I’m thinking about adding a ‘stacked chain’ option to the mixer. This feature will make a chain of plugins appear on a single channel strip. The channel strips will become higher than the current layout, but it would be perfect for putting a mixer on a second monitor. I think I’ll start experimenting with this in the next couple of weeks. I’ll post a preview once I have something to show.
Cheers Frits!
A few questions for you…
The “stacked chain” by the sounds of it could also appear on tracks. Even if it would add to the information already on tracks they can be easily maximised, minimised or even partially resized by dragging a track edge up or down, so would this “stacked chain” be a consideration at track level as well?
ZynewaveThe “stacked chain” by the sounds of it could also appear on tracks.
It’s already there in the form of the “hide track lane” feature. The rightmost track in the chain will be shown in the mixer with fader/meter. The hidden group tracks are shown as boxes above, without meters, but with gain/send/pan dials if enabled. Much like the group panel in the inspector.
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
The “stacked chain” by the sounds of it could also appear on tracks.
It’s already there in the form of the “hide track lane” feature. The rightmost track in the chain will be shown in the mixer with fader/meter. The hidden group tracks are shown as boxes above, without meters, but with gain/send/pan dials if enabled. Much like the group panel in the inspector.
So in effect “stacked chains” are a vertical representation of the hide track lane feature but in the mixer?
ZynewaveSo in effect “stacked chains” are a vertical representation of the hide track lane feature but in the mixer?
Yes. Although the hidden tracks are not just shown as a thin bar, but with plugin mapping and gain/send dials accessible, like in the inspector group panel.
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
So in effect “stacked chains” are a vertical representation of the hide track lane feature but in the mixer?
Yes. Although the hidden tracks are not just shown as a thin bar, but with plugin mapping and gain/send dials accessible, like in the inspector group panel.
Ok I understand it now. š That will definitely help but thankfully the zGrid as you said is high on your wish list too. I think that will really solve most of these track count issues.
The “stacked chains” suggestion you made is still a step forward from the mixer options we have now and will certainly reduce the no. of mixer strips that are visible in the mixer considerably. Looking forward to that and at some point also the zGrid.
psylevationI know this may seem like a very simple solution compared to what has been said above, but what about a simple function like ctrl+g like in the sequencer view. Where everything is hidden below the track you press ctrl+g on.
There could be a symbol or something on the mixer track that shows that there are tracks hidden beneath the track. So basically using the ctrl+g function in the mixer would do the same thing as in the sequencer. Completely hiding child tracks…
Just a thought…
Conquistador@Zynewave wrote:
The channel strips will become higher than the current layout, but it would be perfect for putting a mixer on a second monitor.
I wonder….would it not be possible to add a slider to the mixer when dragging it up (embedded) so that one could scroll up to see more of it, without needing to drag it too far up the screen?
I ask this because of what you said about it being “higher than the current layout”. The group panel would also benefit from a slider of sorts when more than 2 tracks are shown IMO so that it does not stop other track panels from being used when the embedded mixer is on screen at the same time.
So basically using the ctrl+g function in the mixer would do the same thing as in the sequencer. Completely hiding child tracks…
Just a thought…
Nice suggestion..or even an additional command in the in the View menu in the mixer Hide Group tracks, Hide Child tracks or something along those lines.
Zynewavewhat about a simple function like ctrl+g like in the sequencer view. Where everything is hidden below the track you press ctrl+g on
I may decide to extend the “hide tracks in group” track option to the mixer as well. Normally though it is the bottom track in a chain that you want to see in the mixer, rather than the parent group tracks.
I wonder….would it not be possible to add a slider to the mixer when dragging it up (embedded) so that one could scroll up to see more of it, without needing to drag it too far up the screen?
Yes.