Ivosight Forums
some feature suggestions - Printable Version

+- Ivosight Forums (https://ivosight.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Audio Software (https://ivosight.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Soundop (https://ivosight.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: some feature suggestions (/showthread.php?tid=364)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7


RE: some feature suggestions - ivosight - 02-03-2022

(02-02-2022, 04:37 AM)balanced Wrote: Also selecting several tracks at once (by control clicking single tracks or shift clicking an area of tracks) and operating on those together would be helpful. So you could adjust parameters (volume, pan etc.) for multiple tracks by selecting several tracks and then adjusting for example one volume pot on one of those tracks. The adjustements should be controlled in a relative way then though, so that the parameters of all tracks would't just jump to one value.

Another simple use for selecting several tracks at once would be to just deleting them together.

Thanks for the suggestion. We will consider adding this feature.


RE: some feature suggestions - ivosight - 02-03-2022

(02-02-2022, 01:35 PM)balanced Wrote: Routing track/bus output to more hardware outputs than default "Output Device" in Mixspace would be more more than useful. It would also be great to be able to select individual tracks, busses or master track as input sources for tracks. Then one could for example arrange a separate headphone bus, use external hardware gear and create more complex routings. Dealing with feedback scenarios would be something to consider then of course.

There may be some synchronization problem to route output to more than one hardware device. And we are not sure whether it helps to mix tracks.

We are not sure about the details of select tracks as input of tracks. Is there any software that has a similar feature? Thanks.


RE: some feature suggestions - balanced - 02-04-2022

(02-03-2022, 08:16 AM)ivosight Wrote:
(02-02-2022, 01:35 PM)balanced Wrote: Routing track/bus output to more hardware outputs than default "Output Device" in Mixspace would be more more than useful. It would also be great to be able to select individual tracks, busses or master track as input sources for tracks. Then one could for example arrange a separate headphone bus, use external hardware gear and create more complex routings. Dealing with feedback scenarios would be something to consider then of course.

There may be some synchronization problem to route output to more than one hardware device. And we are not sure whether it helps to mix tracks.

We are not sure about the details of select tracks as input of tracks. Is there any software that has a similar feature? Thanks.

Sorry maybe I was vague. I meant it would be good to be able to route audio to different harware outputs on the same audio hardware (soundcard). With pretty much all multitrack software using ASIO this is kind of basic functionality. I'm not sure if i'm missing something but with the current version of Soundop I can't select which outputs of my sound card I want the audio be routed to from a track or bus. I was expecting to see a selectable submenu of outputs on my sound card, when selecting "output device". Instead I see only this "Output device" selection and audio is routed to the same default main outs as master out. Is this intended?

Concerning routing tracks, buses or master channel to individual tracks, it just gives you more flexibility and enables more uses for the software. If you have the ability to select wether audio is routed from the source track before or after (pre/post) effects that would be even more flexible. I for example would have needed now to route master channel (after mastering chain) to a separate track that has my headphone correction processing (vst). This channel would have been routed to separate output channels on my RME sound card, in order to feed my headphone amp. Because I don't want my headphone correction plugins to affect my main outs. This is just one simple studio scenario though. I could also imagine myself using Soundop for simple multichannel real time processing. If multiple sound card outputs and tracks as input sources would be enabled, you could setup for example a session, where multiple audio sources are routed through Soundop (from certain ins to certain outs) and separate recording tracks (with tracks as inputs) would be setup to save that real time audio.

I know this latter example might not be something you aim to, but I'm just saying enabling more flexible routing allows more specific user cases for studio work also to take place. And when you add this kind of flexibility users are probably going to find uses for it you did't anticipate in the first place.


RE: some feature suggestions - balanced - 02-04-2022

(02-03-2022, 08:16 AM)ivosight Wrote: We are not sure about the details of select tracks as input of tracks. Is there any software that has a similar feature? Thanks.

At least Bitwig, Ableton Live and Reaper, perhaps others as well but these are the ones I have been mostly working with. These are more full daw-kind of software without single sound file editor side. Great software, but I always miss the audio file editing that I have now integrated in Soundop. For mastering it's great. Or maybe it's rather the multi channel view that's integrated into audio editor in Soundop  Big Grin .


RE: some feature suggestions - balanced - 02-04-2022

(02-03-2022, 08:02 AM)ivosight Wrote:
(02-02-2022, 04:22 AM)balanced Wrote: I´m starting my first mastering project (with video) using Soundop to get more familiar with it.

One thing that I found immediately is that you can't group tracks in it I believe? I mean just visually set some tracks as subtracks for another (like folders inside folders). Of course routing could also follow this, so that the topmost track could become a buss for contained tracks. By grouping tracks you could also minimize or hide the contained tracks completely if topmost track is minimized. Would it be hard to implement this?

I get that you have already implemented bus tracks and you can route audio to those. What if bus tracks could also act as group tracks so that when you grab a track and drop it on top of a bus track it becomes a subtrack for that bus? The output routing for that track could be automatically set for that bus? I believe this way you could use bus tracks in traditional mixer kind of way as you have implemented it now, but also as track groups that work as busses. If busses inside busses would be enabled this would create even more freedom for the user.

When working with bigger sessions that include several versions of parts you work on this would be helpful. You could just quickly hide the things you don't need and you would find your tracks easily inside the busses, if required.

Another useful feature would be to enable activating and deactivating tracks. This can also work together with what I described above. In Bitwig this is implemented so that you can activate or deactivate tracks and track groups and select with just one button if all deactivated tracks/groups are shown or hidden. This way it's really easy to have shown only the tracks that you actually work on. You don't have to delete tracks if you want to just set them aside in case you have to go back to them.

Would implementing any of this seem useful to you, or would it break any existing functionality?

Cheers!

Hi,

We have suggestions from other customers to add folder tracks, which is only a simple one to organize tracks. However, using bus tracks to group tracks may break something we already supported, such as side-chains and sends.

Thanks for the suggestion to activate and deactivate tracks. We will consider adding it.

Ok I see. Further suggestion: Would it break anything if group tracks and bus tracks would be separate concepts, but while group tracks would visually gather the included tracks, they would also act as audio processing "buses" (or group "main" channels, to differentiate it from bus concept) for the included channels. You could change this by selecting a different output for an included channel, but the default output for a channel inside a group would be the group main channel. You could easily make groups of channels that you assign sends from and effects to this way by just modifying the main group channel. The bus concept could be left alone as it is? If groups inside groups would be enabled, that would further enhance the flexibility (for example a drum group that has further groups inside it for percussion and the main drumset).  Or maybe you already thought of something like this?


RE: some feature suggestions - balanced - 02-04-2022

(02-03-2022, 08:04 AM)ivosight Wrote:
(02-02-2022, 04:37 AM)balanced Wrote: Also selecting several tracks at once (by control clicking single tracks or shift clicking an area of tracks) and operating on those together would be helpful. So you could adjust parameters (volume, pan etc.) for multiple tracks by selecting several tracks and then adjusting for example one volume pot on one of those tracks. The adjustements should be controlled in a relative way then though, so that the parameters of all tracks would't just jump to one value.

Another simple use for selecting several tracks at once would be to just deleting them together.

Thanks for the suggestion. We will consider adding this feature.

Thanks for considering.

Also, making changes to clip properties in Mixspace might benefit from this same logic. Now one needs to mute every single audio file individually. It would be handy to select a bunch of clips and then mute, loop etc. them by just pressing that button once.


RE: some feature suggestions - balanced - 02-04-2022

I think buttons for moving the cursor to next or previous markers would be useful. Perhaps integrated to Transport or as a Toolbar? Integrating those to Markers panel might not be so convenient, if you want them to be always quickly accessible.


RE: some feature suggestions - balanced - 02-04-2022

When you solo a track in Mixspace it would be convenient to have all the bus tracks that are fed by sends from it to solo together with it. So when you want to solo an instrument/track, you would also hear the reverbs, delays etc that you have built for it. However, only the soloed track(s) sends should feed the buses during soloing. Otherwise you hear sends from all un-soloed/muted tracks being fed to buses together with your soloed track.

If I have not missed something it's very complicated now to hear a soloed track with the sends you're using with it. First you have to solo the track. Then you need to solo all the sends that are used by that track. Then you would need to disable all other sends from every track in your Mixspace to avoid feeding them to your buses while listening to your soloed track and sends for it. Muting manually all other tracks than the soloed one seems to work too. Anyway then you would have to undo all these changes..

Track sends seem to get muted now when you mute a track. But for some reason they stay active when a track is muted (the blue mute button is active) because of some other track being soloed. Maybe this behavior could just be changed? In addition to making the buses the soloed track feeds to soloed too?


RE: some feature suggestions - balanced - 02-04-2022

In Mixspace, would it be possible to continue effect processing after you hit stop so that you would hear plugin reverb tails and other time-based processing as long as they produce sound? This is kind of standard behavior I believe. People also use it to check how their reverb or other time based processing sounds.


RE: some feature suggestions - balanced - 02-06-2022

Found a bug: If send is created, the send amount adjusted (let's say to -15 dB), play is then pressed and during the playback send destination is selected, it will send @ 0dB even though the amount of send is adjusted to -15dB.