Odd behaviours on joining and splitting stereo tracks

[Gale Andrews]

The problem is that the users who complain are expecting the channel allocation to be respected (which would still respect left above right but requires the right channel to "jump down").

A mixed track already "jumps down" to the bottom of the screen, so I have no problem at all with the right channel jumping down in this case...


Gale

[steve]

but requires the right channel to "jump down"

I'd find it deeply disturbing if it did that.

A mixed track already "jumps down" to the bottom of the screen,

I know, and I find that disturbing (and other users have commented on the same).
I doubt that many new users expect that when they "mix down" tracks that the tracks will mix "down to the bottom".
If that is what's causing the confusion then I think it would be better to fix that.

[billw58]

A mixed track already "jumps down" to the bottom of the screen,

I know, and I find that disturbing (and other users have commented on the same).
I doubt that many new users expect that when they "mix down" tracks that the tracks will mix "down to the bottom".
If that is what's causing the confusion then I think it would be better to fix that.

The mixed and rendered track has to go somewhere. It can't replace the mixed tracks because you might have a discontiguous selection of tracks. The only other option is for the mix to go to the top of the project window. Newly-added tracks go to the bottom of the project window so putting the mixed track at the bottom is consistent.

-- Bill

[steve]

It can't replace the mixed tracks because you might have a discontiguous selection of tracks.

Mix and Render is always applied to the entire track(s), so why not replace either the first or last track that is selected?
In most cases it is likely to be adjacent tracks that are mixed, in which case the effect would be the same as replacing the tracks.

If there are a lot of tracks in the project and you want to render just one of the tracks (for example if you want to apply an effect to a track that has an envelope) it's a pita to have to scroll down to the bottom and drag it back up to where it was before (which is probably where you want it).

[whbjr]

The mixed and rendered track has to go somewhere. It can't replace the mixed tracks because you might have a discontiguous selection of tracks. The only other option is for the mix to go to the top of the project window. Newly-added tracks go to the bottom of the project window so putting the mixed track at the bottom is consistent.

How about having the result go where the uppermost track was? E.g, Mix and Render tracks 3, 5, and 27 => Result is (new) track 3. That, too, might be surprising to users, but I think it would be a bit less surprising.

[steve]

E.g, Mix and Render tracks 3, 5, and 27 => Result is

There may not be a "perfect" solution, but in my opinion the order of how expected/surprising the result would be (least surprising result first):

1) Result = New track replaces track 3.
2) Result = New track replaces track 27.
3) Result = New track at bottom.
4) Result = New track at top.
5) Result = New track in random position.
6) Result = All tracks shuffle into new order.
7) Result = a fish.

I think that I would find option 1 (replaces track 3) to be the most intuitive and the most useful.

There's also the question of "Mix to New Track" (Ctrl+shift+M). For this I would expect the current behaviour of a new track created at the bottom.

[billw58]

What if track 3 is a mono track but the resulting mix is a stereo track?

-- Bill

[steve]

What if track 3 is a mono track but the resulting mix is a stereo track?

Does that make a difference? When using Mix and Render the track(s) is/are being replaced not updated.

As an example, say I've recorded a string ensemble:

violin I
violin I
violin I
violin I
violin II
violin II
violin II
viola
viola
'cello
'cello
double bass

If I mix down the violin I group what I will want is:

4 x violin I (stereo mix down, panned a bit to the left)
violin II
violin II
violin II
viola
viola
'cello
'cello
double bass

[solanus]

Wow, I didn't even KNOW there was a Mix and Render to New Track - it's not in the menus (unless I missed it), just in the keyboard shortcuts.

Alright, so the takeaway I've gotten from this long discussion is:
1. "Make Stereo Track" is an extremely simplistic (big-crayon) way of making a single track and the one immediately below it into a stereo track. No matter if the tracks are initially designated MONO or LEFT or RIGHT, that is ignored, and the top one becomes left and the bottom one becomes right. Not recommended for tracks where you want to set the Pan and Gain beforehand.
2. "Mix and Render" is much more sophisticated, and can be used to create a stereo track out of multiple single tracks. MONO, LEFT and RIGHT designations are honored, so it mixes all the LEFTs into the left channel, all of the RIGHTs into the right channel, and all of the MONOs are mixed into both left and right channels. If you Pan the single tracks to the left or right, that will be reflected in the amplitude of the sound from that track in the final mixed channel. The Gain setting is also incorporated into the final mix.
However, if all of the single tracks are MONO, everything gets mixed down to a single MONO track.
and

Thanks.

[steve]

To me that looks like a pretty good analysis of the discussion so far. I particularly like the "Big Crayon" description - made me chuckle

I don't think that it's "graphically impossible to mark the tracks with an L and an R" but I don't think that we've really come up with a totally satisfactory way of doing so, and as (was it Bill?) said, it would be bananas for the channels to be the opposite way round from the meters (which are labelled).

There is, in my opinion, room for improvement in the features being discussed here, but no easy answers.

BTW, "Mix and Render to New Track" is in the manual here: http://manual.audacityteam.org/man/Keyb ... s_commands Personally I think it should also be a menu item.