Workflow on mixing tracks

[steve]

A muted (single) track on Export is no export - nothing happens except a warning message.

If Mix and Render did not ignore the mute/solo status, then I think it would be reasonable to show a warning if all selected tracks are muted, just as we do when exporting, as it is obviously a mistake.

Are you suggesting that Mix and Render silences the muted track, or its part in the mix?

That's a rather back-to-front way of looking at it
I'm suggesting that if a track has been muted by the user, then it should remain muted for the mix. I'm suggesting that Mix and Render should not override the mute setting that the user has applied. If we really need to retain the old behaviour, then there could be an option in Preferences:
"[_] Mix and Render ignores track mute"

Personally I don't see a need for that preference as I'm in the same boat as Jonnie - I laboriously go through each track, manually selecting the unmuted tracks so as to get the required behaviour. I'd much prefer to be able to just do: Ctrl+A (select All) -> Tracks > Mix Down.

I don't know who benefits from the current behaviour, or in what way they benefit, My guess is that it seemed like a good idea to someone some time last century, and resistance to change by some parties within the Audacity design team has prevented it from ever being improved.

[steve]

I think we have discussed something like that before, trying to address that what you hear is not always what you export.

Yes it was discussed, but inertia sent it off into the long grass, as has happened with so many good ideas.

If the monitor button is down, what do you hear when the Mute button is down? What do you hear when the Mute button is up but the track is greyed?

The idea of a "monitor" button is that it allows you to hear the raw audio data in the track.
It is pre-mute, pre-gain, pre-pan, pre-envelope, pre-time track, pre-anything else. What you hear is the raw data.
If the monitor button is down on more than one track, you will hear a mix of the raw audio data from each of the monitored tracks,

One obvious use for this is when working with large multi-track projects, the track gain may be so low in each track (to avoid exceeding 0 db in the mix) that a single track cannot be heard clearly when soloed. The monitor button would allow the track to be heard at its full, pre-track gain level.

[Robert J. H.]

A muted (single) track on Export is no export - nothing happens except a warning message.

If Mix and Render did not ignore the mute/solo status, then I think it would be reasonable to show a warning if all selected tracks are muted, just as we do when exporting, as it is obviously a mistake.

Are you suggesting that Mix and Render silences the muted track, or its part in the mix?

That's a rather back-to-front way of looking at it
I'm suggesting that if a track has been muted by the user, then it should remain muted for the mix. I'm suggesting that Mix and Render should not override the mute setting that the user has applied. If we really need to retain the old behaviour, then there could be an option in Preferences:
"[_] Mix and Render ignores track mute"

Personally I don't see a need for that preference as I'm in the same boat as Jonnie - I laboriously go through each track, manually selecting the unmuted tracks so as to get the required behaviour. I'd much prefer to be able to just do: Ctrl+A (select All) -> Tracks > Mix Down.

I don't know who benefits from the current behaviour, or in what way they benefit, My guess is that it seemed like a good idea to someone some time last century, and resistance to change by some parties within the Audacity design team has prevented it from ever being improved.

+1
It's annoying to chase for tracks that are currently muted but selected. My multi track projects have often an alternative drum groove, synth pad etc. that I don't want to be mixed in as well.
We don't have a mechanism to lock or freeze these tracks such that they can't be selected until freed again. That's perhaps also worth a thought...

[Robert J. H.]

I think we have discussed something like that before, trying to address that what you hear is not always what you export.

Yes it was discussed, but inertia sent it off into the long grass, as has happened with so many good ideas.

If the monitor button is down, what do you hear when the Mute button is down? What do you hear when the Mute button is up but the track is greyed?

The idea of a "monitor" button is that it allows you to hear the raw audio data in the track.
It is pre-mute, pre-gain, pre-pan, pre-envelope, pre-time track, pre-anything else. What you hear is the raw data.
If the monitor button is down on more than one track, you will hear a mix of the raw audio data from each of the monitored tracks,

One obvious use for this is when working with large multi-track projects, the track gain may be so low in each track (to avoid exceeding 0 db in the mix) that a single track cannot be heard clearly when soloed. The monitor button would allow the track to be heard at its full, pre-track gain level.

Yes, that's a fine approach.
What I miss though is a little bit more flexibility.
Let's imagine that we had a combo-box for the monitor behaviour:
Monitor:
"Raw"
"Pre-Gain"
"Pre-Pan"

An example for the third option:
It's a common mixing trick to listen to the tracks when they are dead center panned and asking "do I hear all tracks, do they clash at certain frequencies?". Here, one can raise the individual levels or EQ the tracks. If they are such treated and the maximum separation achieved, the monitoring can be switched off.
It's crucial that the gain (or automation, like an envelope) is respected by the monitoring for this kind of work.

[steve]

What I miss though is a little bit more flexibility.
Let's imagine that we had a combo-box for the monitor behaviour:
Monitor:
"Raw"
"Pre-Gain"
"Pre-Pan"

I think what we really need here is control surface support. Having real knobs and sliders make this sort of thing much easier. Rather than "pre-pan", you can quickly and easily twiddle the pan knob to the centre indent, then move it back again when your done. Hardware is just better at this sort of thing. (my 2 cents).

[Robert J. H.]

What I miss though is a little bit more flexibility.
Let's imagine that we had a combo-box for the monitor behaviour:
Monitor:
"Raw"
"Pre-Gain"
"Pre-Pan"

I think what we really need here is control surface support. Having real knobs and sliders make this sort of thing much easier. Rather than "pre-pan", you can quickly and easily twiddle the pan knob to the centre indent, then move it back again when your done. Hardware is just better at this sort of thing. (my 2 cents).

Do you want to ship a special Audacity control device?
Well, there's one in creation, at least for VI users, it seems.

I miss my big 48-channel mixer too, it was so easy to slide over the studio/solo/mute switches to turn them on or off.
Now, it's such a pain to e.g reset all the gain sliders if one wants to do the gain staging/ track balancing again (with 20+ tracks) and entering "0" in the gain/pan dialog box does not even work all the time (introduced bug with the value validation).

Another possibly worthwhile mix feature:
- Make gain/pan changes in all selected tracks permanent.
If one normalizes the tracks afterwards, he can do the staging again.
For re-panning, the normalization would have to be applied to the stereo channels independently (with the checkbox enabled).

[steve]

I miss my big 48-channel mixer too

I like the word "big"
What did you have? My favourite was an A&H GL2400, which only just counts as "big". Currently I usually use a little mixer with just 8 mic channels, but at least it's got 100mm sliders and some space around the knobs. I much prefer mixing on a hardware mixer.

[Robert J. H.]

I miss my big 48-channel mixer too

I like the word "big"
What did you have? My favourite was an A&H GL2400, which only just counts as "big". Currently I usually use a little mixer with just 8 mic channels, but at least it's got 100mm sliders and some space around the knobs. I much prefer mixing on a hardware mixer.

Slap me, but I can't remember the brand.
It was the bass players acquisition - he was the most addicted to all that fancy gear available and I was the tech-idiot that was happy playing his guitar - unplugged...
I only remember this little white "e-" on the dark grey background. Maybe it was an e-mu or something.
We had also a Behringer 8-channel mixer for the drum kit separately.
Unfortunately, none of the records back then came near professional - all clipped and distorted.

Audacity gives me at least the possibility to make my music from A to Z without any third party meddling with.
(For instance: https://soundcloud.com/vuplounge/jrinas-chant)

Having said that, it's perhaps time to get back to the original topic...

[Gale Andrews]

Are you suggesting that Mix and Render silences the muted track, or its part in the mix?

That's a rather back-to-front way of looking at it
I'm suggesting that if a track has been muted by the user, then it should remain muted for the mix. I'm suggesting that Mix and Render should not override the mute setting that the user has applied. If we really need to retain the old behaviour, then there could be an option in Preferences:
"[_] Mix and Render ignores track mute"

Personally I don't see a need for that preference as I'm in the same boat as Jonnie - I laboriously go through each track, manually selecting the unmuted tracks so as to get the required behaviour. I'd much prefer to be able to just do: Ctrl+A (select All) -> Tracks > Mix Down.

I don't know who benefits from the current behaviour, or in what way they benefit, My guess is that it seemed like a good idea to someone some time last century, and resistance to change by some parties within the Audacity design team has prevented it from ever being improved.

You'll always need to justify changes to me if there is no option for previous behaviour, because there are probably people out there who like it the way it is.

I know I rarely work with multiple tracks, but let me give one operation I do perform. I will have a stereo track and Split Stereo Track. I will mute one track and work with Envelope Tool on the other track (so I can hear that channel on its own). Then I will select both tracks and Mix and Render. I do not want one channel silenced, obviously. What is going to happen in your scheme?


Gale

[steve]

I will have a stereo track and Split Stereo Track. I will mute one track and work with Envelope Tool on the other track (so I can hear that channel on its own). Then I will select both tracks and Mix and Render. I do not want one channel silenced, obviously. What is going to happen in your scheme?

What if you had exported rather than mix and render? Isn't it confusing that mixing down to a file works differently from mixing down to a track?

You'll always need to justify changes to me if there is no option for previous behaviour, because there are probably people out there who like it the way it is.

Sure, and some people prefer oil lamps to electric lights, but I did say that perhaps there should be other options.