Does anyone else not use the mixer? - Page 2

bogo · 03-29-2012, 09:13 PM

I think that to really appreciate working with the MCP I need a second monitor.

Geoff Waddington · 03-30-2012, 01:00 AM

I use them both extensively for what they do best -- best being in my own humble opinion of course

Mixer (along with a control surface) -- for old analog cosole / tape functionality -- Tracking, Mixing, etc.

But when I want to get out the razor blade....

The mouse and the TCP are my buddies

White Tie · 03-30-2012, 01:04 AM

Very interesting thread, and I think the diversity of preference on show is evidence of just how different we all are, and what a strength it is that Reaper doesn't have a 'one size fits all' approach.

You will see themes best suited to one approach and themes best suited to the other. But I think we will always, in balance, see an MCP bias during design stage because so much more pure design is possible there when there is only one axis of resizing. The TCP needs to be endlessly liquid and flexible, which is time consuming to WALTER and rules out most of the designers creative flourishes. Its always worth mentioning to themers that support for a wide diversity of MCP/TCP working preference would be appreciated, but please be magnanimous if a themer doesn't show enormous enthusiasm for providing lots of options on the TCP which may well be, for him, the 'four times the work, a quarter of the opportunities' part of the theme.

I fool around with saying that people who mix on the TCP are criminal perverts, but of course the reality is that it would be great to be able to offer them a full service panel with the addition of a complete extended mixer, the sends and inserts being sadly missing as it stands.

For my part, I favour the MCP with just the bare bones on view on the TCP, or it removed entirely. The trade off on the TCP is it either needs to be very wide to show a decent range of controls, or each track be increased in height... which to me is a decision I would like to only make based on how large I want the waveforms to be, because a big y-axis size on the TCP translates to a massive amount of screen space used in the arrange. On the other hand, if you are paying that price in screen use in the arrange, I can see that you most certainly don't want to compound your problems by needing to have the mixer open.

------

One thing I hope we can agree on is that having all the controls visible on both TCP and MCP nearly doubles the amount of 'stuff' on view, which is profoundly wasteful and visually overwhelming, particularly for new users. I would be curious to know how many users actually work with that amount of redundant duplication clogging up their screen, because my expectation is that people are generally going to be of a 'one way or the other' persuasion.

airon · 03-30-2012, 01:27 AM

It's pure practicality. I do require a visual cue of where things are, because Reaper isn't a console-friendly app in the way the Icons(Protools only) or Euphonix(Nuendo, Protools, Pyramix) rigs are.

For this reason I mix most of the Top10 stuff I do in an arrangement view, with plugin access quite often done via the MCP, which I call up with a screenset that gives me a shared view of the arrangement and the mixer. This is where the default theme works very well.

The editing aspect is done with a combined view of the video, project bay, shortcut-pop-up media explorer.

For general balance issues I lean towards the MCP, and have a screenset that blows it up to use most of the screen. One day I'll have to terrorize Justin, John and Christophe about letting me kill off the arrangement view completely. System-window-less views are more efficient for almost everything I do. Live users worry about other things, but not about Windows-window frames scrambling the design of the theme author.

In Protools I only use the Mixer for setup purposes, and if I want to get an overview to trace a signal path. In my 15 years of using it, I probably spend 95-99% of my time in the edit window, which lets me bring in insert, send and I/O views as I need them. I know what plugins I have running in my session and most of the time I have an easy time getting to everything, especially with an Icon console. Reaper might get there with OSC controllers and future EuCon support. The MCP might then be relegated to setup duties in my workflow, just like the Protools mixer is.

rothchild · 03-30-2012, 03:50 AM

I've just finally got round to uploading my 'TCP Only' theme to the stash: https://stash.reaper.fm/theme/961/Rot...%20Default.zip

I'd be interested to know if there's a distinction between in the display monitors used by TCP only / MCP only / Mixed camps.

My suspicion is that mixed users are on large single panels. I know my TCP only approach really solidified when I got 2 monitors, where the split between the screens makes a natural break for the edge of the track controls and the arrange page.

I suspect if I went over to a single large display I'd be a lot more prone to using the mixer across the bottom and a small TCP header (probably with little to no info on it). But for now if it ain't broke etc...

Child

Argle · 03-30-2012, 12:31 PM

I require the mixer because of the inserts and sends. If we could have those on the TCP that would be pretty badass.

dea-man · 03-30-2012, 01:20 PM

The mixer has the inserts and sends, but the TCP has the envelopes.

Any other differences?

GermanFafian · 03-30-2012, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reno.thestraws

Just my 2 cents

1) remove master from MCP

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/30049114/1-%...from%20MCP.gif

2) Drag your mixer to the left docker

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/30049114/2-d...t%20docker.gif

3) in the mouse modifiers TCp context, set the defaul double click to action : SWS: show selected track in MCP, hide others

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/30049114/3-m...%20context.gif

a lot more ergonomic in my opinion...

AND you can still waltered you mixer track panel to your taste (only send and insert for example)

Interesting approach!
Thanks for sharing this.
I'm testing it right now and I find it quite nice for my workflow right now as I have a small screen laptop and have a lot of info right in front of me with this lay out.

bennisixx · 03-30-2012, 03:17 PM

@ WT - Criminal pervert, I guess if thats the label... I'm guilty.
I would almost venture to say options to toggle inserts/fx slots on both tcp and mixer.
Really though if I never had the mixer open it would not hurt my feelings.
I often wonder though, given reaper's roots, is it even possible to add slots to the tcp? I sure hope so.
I guess my workflow leans more towards working a handful of tracks at a time, not the whole project. Mixer not necessary.
I would ask if slots could be added could that be an option to turn off/on so the theamer doesn't have to fool with it if they don't want to

I have been using the mixer as an inspector sine the v4 alphas so I like that, but it is a complement to full tcp displays

Ben Zero · 03-30-2012, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill

we really do need this. I rarely use the mixer.

This.

I've been waiting since REAPER v1 for sends on the TCP. The space when you expand a track is there, and the code's there from the mixer, I'd think. How do we convince Justin and co that this would be such a fantastic improvement?

Ben

dea-man · 03-30-2012, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben Zero

How do we convince Justin and co that this would be such a fantastic improvement?

...via a feature request.

chip mcdonald · 03-31-2012, 06:22 AM

I never use the mixer. Takes too long to make the track>fader realization, and as a symbolic replacement for an actual mixer I don't see the point?

I do wish he TCP had the FX block displayed. Of all the buttons on the TCP, I use the FX button the most, getting to plugins. Likewise, it would be "nice" if there was a theme that had a larger button, OR - the TCP panels had the same functionality horizontally as the MCP does vertically.

semiquaver · 03-31-2012, 07:59 AM

I think that a commitment has to be made: does signal run L to Right or down to up or...?

The GUI should give a quick intuitive picture of what's actually happening!

signal flow is nowhere visually clear in REAPER - and having optional vertical or horizontal layouts is just confusing (traditional or no!)

Tracktion had a lovely interface: the plugs (and fader! were displayed to the right of the items inputs and track names on the left so signal flow was L to R inputs ->items -plugs

a really nice detail was that there was an assignable control ON the plugin slot (like REAPERS send knob on the MCP)

another nice one was that the plugs themselves were laid out L-R (rather than up and down) and would resize dynamicaaly if plugs were added / removed - kind of like

>comp>eq>reverb>

or

>comp > reverb >

REAPERs gui makes us hunt around to see what's happening - very hard on the brain!

MacFizz · 03-31-2012, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reno.thestraws

Just my 2 cents

1) remove master from MCP

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/30049114/1-%...from%20MCP.gif

2) Drag your mixer to the left docker

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/30049114/2-d...t%20docker.gif

3) in the mouse modifiers TCp context, set the defaul double click to action : SWS: show selected track in MCP, hide others

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/30049114/3-m...%20context.gif

a lot more ergonomic in my opinion...

AND you can still waltered you mixer track panel to your taste (only send and insert for example)

That's great !
Cubase has a similar funtionnality I was looking for in Reaper.

groovemaster · 03-31-2012, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben Zero

I've been waiting since REAPER v1 for sends on the TCP. The space when you expand a track is there, and the code's there from the mixer, I'd think. How do we convince Justin and co that this would be such a fantastic improvement?

Ben

Maybe one of the moderators can move this thread to the pre-release forum...

Ben Zero · 04-01-2012, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by groovemaster

Maybe one of the moderators can move this thread to the pre-release forum...

Good idea. +1 for that!

White Tie · 04-01-2012, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by groovemaster

Maybe one of the moderators can move this thread to the pre-release forum...

*cough* I think you mean the feature request forum. FRing in the pre forum is OK if its a little thing directly related to what's being worked on, OKish if its a big thing somewhat related to what's being worked on, and pure noise if its unrelated to what's being worked on. Choose carefully, or I will come round your house in the dead of night and dip your toothbrush in the toilet!

I'm sure if you search through the feature request forum you'll find a bump-worthy thread or ten on this very topic.