Transport and Meter toolbars dockable in the Mixer Board.

[steve]

Someone claims in that FR section that you can fade to silence

Do you mean this:
"Too fiddly/unintuitive to fade out to zero (3 votes). Pinching the point hard to the zero line makes volume fade to zero almost after the beginning of the fade. "


On further investigation, it depends if you are just fading out, or fading down and back up again.
When fading down and back up again I get the same result as you.
When fading the end of a track to silence it does go to absolute silence.

[billw58]

When fading the end of a track to silence it does go to absolute silence.

I cannot manage anything below -130 dB when in 32-bit float.

I didn't write on the FR page anything implying that you can fade to zero with the current envelopes. I maintain that you can't.

You can get very very close to zero but never all the way.
New project, 32-bit float
Generate tone amplitude 1.0 length 30 seconds
Envelope point at t=0, level=1
Envelope point at t=30, drag it down as far as you can
Select last two seconds
Apply Amplify until you can amplify to new peak level of 0 dB.

There's still some audio there, even right at the end.

This also demonstrates

Pinching the point hard to the zero line makes volume fade to zero almost after the beginning of the fade.

My proposal page is here: http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Propo ... elope_Tool

-- Bill

[steve]

You can get very very close to zero but never all the way.
New project, 32-bit float
Generate tone amplitude 1.0 length 30 seconds
Envelope point at t=0, level=1
Envelope point at t=30, drag it down as far as you can
Select last two seconds
Apply Amplify until you can amplify to new peak level of 0 dB.

There's still some audio there, even right at the end.

New project, 32-bit float
Generate tone amplitude 1.0 length 10 seconds
Envelope point at t=0, level=1
Envelope point at t=5, drag it down as far as you can
Mix and render
Select last three seconds
The Amplify effect says the new level is -infinity, indicating that it is true silence.

I'm not suggesting that this is intuitive or useful, just that fading to zero is not impossible.
So now let's say that you want to create , non-destructively, a linear fade from t=0 to t=10 on a 10 second track. It's very fiddly to get a reasonably close approximation and as Bill says the end point is not silent.

My proposal page is here: http://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Propo ... elope_Tool

All good points imho.

[steve]

Floating an idea here:
Perhaps a first step to fader automation could be to have a "Master Fader" track with a corresponding "Master Fader" slider in the Mixer Board.

For users that have no use for this option, the Master Fader functionality could be enabled or disabled in the Tracks menu.

Selecting "Rec" in the Master Fader mixer bar (or the Master Fader track) would cause envelope points to be created in the Master Fader track in response to moving the Master Fader slider.

When not being moved by the user, the Master Fader would follow the envelope in the Master Fader Track.

"Locking" the Master Fader slider would prevent accidental adjustment of the slider, though the envelope points on the Master Fader track could still be moved in the usual way using the Envelope Tool (This is possibly one place that logarithmic fades makes sense as linear motion of the slider will create a logarithmic (equal dB steps/time) fade).

Moving the Master Fader slider would cause all other fader sliders to move by the same amount.
For example, moving the Master Fader slider down by 3 dB would cause the gain sliders in all tracks to move down by 3 dB from their current position (very useful if a mix of multiple tracks was clipping).

The new Mixer Board, with Master Fader enabled, might look something like this:
(note also the transport toolbar and meter toolbar docked at the bottom of the Mixer Board)

mixer-board-plus.png (164.29 KiB) Viewed 2078 times

[billw58]

Floating an idea here:
Perhaps a first step to fader automation could be to have a "Master Fader" track with a corresponding "Master Fader" slider in the Mixer Board.

Yes, that's a good place for the master fader.

For users that have no use for this option, the Master Fader functionality could be enabled or disabled in the Tracks menu.

Yes, turn it off if not needed. Can we assume if it is disabled it will be set to unity gain, even if previously set to a different value?

Selecting "Rec" in the Master Fader mixer bar (or the Master Fader track) would cause envelope points to be created in the Master Fader track in response to moving the Master Fader slider.

When not being moved by the user, the Master Fader would follow the envelope in the Master Fader Track.

"Locking" the Master Fader slider would prevent accidental adjustment of the slider, though the envelope points on the Master Fader track could still be moved in the usual way using the Envelope Tool (This is possibly one place that logarithmic fades makes sense as linear motion of the slider will create a logarithmic (equal dB steps/time) fade).

Moving the Master Fader slider would cause all other fader sliders to move by the same amount.
For example, moving the Master Fader slider down by 3 dB would cause the gain sliders in all tracks to move down by 3 dB from their current position (very useful if a mix of multiple tracks was clipping).

There seems to be a contradiction there: either the Master Fader draws an envelope, or it moves all the gain sliders in sync.

For this function I would still prefer the Pro Tools "controller level" model for the master fader envelope. I would still prefer linear fades. Recording automation from fader moves requires writing many points, then smoothing the curve.

I don't like it moving the gain of all the tracks in sync. That's not what any DAW does. It also means that very small changes to the Master Fader could cause large changes in the mix volume in a project with many tracks (8 tracks each reduced by 1 db?).

The "Lock" button is not needed. Have "Rec" and "Play" buttons. If "Rec" is selected you are recording fader automation. If "Play" is selected you are playing back fader automation. If neither is selected the current setting of the Master Fader applies.

That said, I like this solution for "where to put the master fader". It could be implemented in stages. First without automation, then automation added if it is thought worthwhile.

-- Bill

[steve]

Can we assume if it is disabled it will be set to unity gain, even if previously set to a different value?

That's how I would program it (if I could )

There seems to be a contradiction there: either the Master Fader draws an envelope, or it moves all the gain sliders in sync.

No contradiction, it would do both.
The envelope that is drawn is only on the Master Fader Track, not on the individual audio tracks. The Master Fader Track does not contain audio, just "controller data". The envelope in the Master Fader Track causes the Master Fader to move up/down, which in turn adjusts the audio track gains.

For this function I would still prefer the Pro Tools "controller level" model for the master fader envelope.

That is another possibility, but I'm not sure that it fits so well with the Audacity model. The paradigm for ProTools (and most other DAWs is one of real time processing, which is not what Audacity does. It makes sense for ProTools to mix, then adjust the mix volume in real time, but for Audacity, what I'm suggesting is that moving the Master Fader adjusts the track gain for all tracks and, in consequence, adjusts the mix level.

The "Lock" button is not needed.

You could be right.

Recording automation from fader moves requires writing many points, then smoothing the curve.

Yes.

It also means that very small changes to the Master Fader could cause large changes in the mix volume in a project with many tracks (8 tracks each reduced by 1 db?).

I may have the sums wrong (the "math") but I don't think it works like that.
I think what happens is that if you reduce the level of all tracks by "x" dB, the the level of the mix also reduces by "x" dB (irrespective of the number of tracks).

[Gale Andrews]

Can we assume if it is disabled it will be set to unity gain, even if previously set to a different value?

That's how I would program it (if I could )

I thought of that (as I initially wanted to hide Master Fader from the unwary), but what if someone uses the Master Fader to adjust their mix, then turns it off because it's now in the way, then exports? Clipped export?

I don't think you should need to open Mixer Board to get to the Master Fader slider.

It also means that very small changes to the Master Fader could cause large changes in the mix volume in a project with many tracks (8 tracks each reduced by 1 db?).

I may have the sums wrong (the "math") but I don't think it works like that.
I think what happens is that if you reduce the level of all tracks by "x" dB, the the level of the mix also reduces by "x" dB (irrespective of the number of tracks).

That seems to be correct. If I have two tracks that clip at +4 dB (as tested by mixing them and looking in Amplify) then I have to reduce the gain sliders on both tracks by -4 dB to prevent clipping.


Gale

[billw58]

It also means that very small changes to the Master Fader could cause large changes in the mix volume in a project with many tracks (8 tracks each reduced by 1 db?).

I may have the sums wrong (the "math") but I don't think it works like that.
I think what happens is that if you reduce the level of all tracks by "x" dB, the the level of the mix also reduces by "x" dB (irrespective of the number of tracks).

Oops Right you are. I should know better. Log scale ...

-- Bill

[billw58]

Actually, in my experience it is very rarely that you want to automate the master fader. Perhaps for a slow fade out of the entire mix, but that's about it, which can be accomplished with one of the Fade tools. You're much more likely to be twiddling the individual instrument/vocal faders. So getting a simple non-automated master gain functionality into Audacity would definitely be a good start.

Gale makes a good point about the user who adjusts the master gain then hides it - what happens? So I'll go back to my original suggestion that the master gain and record sliders be integrated into the meter toolbar, and the mixer toolbar contains just the playback slider (which is, in effect, a monitor gain control).

-- Bill

[steve]

I don't think you should need to open Mixer Board to get to the Master Fader slider.

With the scheme that I'm suggesting you wouldn't need to. You could adjust it from the "Master Fader Track".

what if someone uses the Master Fader to adjust their mix, then turns it off because it's now in the way, then exports?

If they delete the Master Fader Track, then there will no longer be any Master Fader control points, so the master gain will revert to unity.

I'll mock up a graphic of the Master Fader Track to try and make it clearer what I have in mind.

Actually, in my experience it is very rarely that you want to automate the master fader. Perhaps for a slow fade out of the entire mix,

Yes, fade-outs are exactly the user case that I had in mind.
I would eventually like fader automation for all audio tracks. The Master Fader Track automation is proposed as an initial implementation where the feature can be worked on without messing up how normal audio tracks behave. The developers may find it easier to work on track automation for all track, or initially "trying it out" on the Master Fader Track only. That would be their decision.

Gale makes a good point about the user who adjusts the master gain then hides it - what happens?

"Hiding" the Master Gain is not relevant because that's the same as "hiding" the Mixer Board.
"Disabling" the Master Gain is the same as deleting the Master Fader Track. If there is no Master Fader Track then there are no Master Fader control points, so the master gain reverts to unity.

One of the benefits of the Master Fader controlling the Track Gain levels is that if the Master Fader Track was deleted, then the user could see the Track Gain sliders revert to their unmodified positions. There's nothing going on "hidden in the background".

Mock-up graphic to follow.