MIXBUS SOLO IDEA?

[Matt]

Thanks your help, but loving or not, exclusive or not, mixbus solo works as logical and expected in MB2 but fails in MB4.
https://vimeo.com/217720925

I do not know why something fine is always changed nowadays for some downgrade in all industries, period.
And I am sure Harrison do not need bodygurads to save what is wrong.

Have you tried the excl mode? I think Harrison is adding options. Not downgrading. Different people have different work flows. So sometimes you need to change a few options to meet your needs and expectations. But this way it can be customized for many more workflows and make more people happy. Which is an upgrade imo.

And not sure what the solo reset button does. But x42 knows a lot more about the inner workings than I do. So I would take his advice over mine any day. Haha.

[x42]

Pressing the "solo" button (which blinks when some tracks are solo'ed) resets the complete solo state: All solo off.

In some cases it can happen that there are "stuck" implicit solos (green outline). Some early versions of MBv3 had a bug: If you disconnect a track while up/downstream is soloed the implicit solo is not cleared.
"clear all" helps in this case.

[Tassy]

In groups the Shift is all right, I like it and use it a lot. But I use mixbuses for a number of other purposes and this solo issue masses up my mixing work flow.
For example, this "Trio Approach" of mine needs the mb2 behavior and idea of solo:
I even had to ask Harrison to put back the grouping option for mixbuses in MB4 (at lower part of the strip) .
Thanks for Ben they accepted my request and put it back.
So I think this mixbus solo might be also reconsidered. If solved it does not effect those who do not use it but helps us who would do use it.

here is my Trio Approach:
https://vimeo.com/213509123

I think it is worth a try for a lot of us
Tassy

Dear X42
PS: If MB2 hurts your eyes it explains why a lot great thing are destroyed in mb4. What a pity!
And if solo has not been changed, how it is that it behaves quite differently???? I see no logic in this reasoning of yours.
No hard feelings, only starting facts
Tassy

[x42]

Looking at that vimeo video, Mixbus4 does exactly what it's supposed to do and not solo individual tracks. All tracks are implicitly soloed. You asked for that, Mixbus complies.
Mixbus2.5 would do the same but you've asked it do something different..

Did you try to reset the solo state in v4 (and v.2.5) and then do the same steps in both (and reach different results?

[Studio Saturn]

In groups the Shift is all right, I like it and use it a lot. But I use mixbuses for a number of other purposes and this solo issue masses up my mixing work flow.
For example, this "Trio Approach" of mine needs the mb2 behavior and idea of solo:
I even had to ask Harrison to put back the grouping option for mixbuses in MB4 (at lower part of the strip) .
Thanks for Ben they accepted my request and put it back.
So I think this mixbus solo might be also reconsidered. If solved it does not effect those who do not use it but helps us who would do use it.

here is my Trio Approach:
https://vimeo.com/213509123

I think it is worth a try for a lot of us
Tassy

Dear X42
PS: If MB2 hurts your eyes it explains why a lot great thing are destroyed in mb4. What a pity!
And if solo has not been changed, how it is that it behaves quite differently???? I see no logic in this reasoning of yours.
No hard feelings, only starting facts
Tassy

Oh great Tassy. I just saw the video. Doesn't VCA do that?

[Tassy]

Looking at that vimeo video, Mixbus4 does exactly what it's supposed to do and not solo individual tracks. All tracks are implicitly soloed. You asked for that, Mixbus complies.
Mixbus2.5 would do the same but you've asked it do something different..

Did you try to reset the solo state in v4 (and v.2.5) and then do the same steps in both (and reach different results?

Yes I tried the reset but it will never overrule the "if mixbus soloed it solos all the sent tracks together" approach. I think this approach/idea is different from that of mb2. My issue is due to the fact that in mb4 is supposed to do something different. And I agree that mb4 is doing what is supposed in the program right, but I doubt whether the "new supposed" is a proper choice.

When I refer to mb2 I do it because I think it may help Harrison where to find a solution for something I would ask for, because it is easier to change/reset something if there is an example that and how it once worked (or was considered) in another brother software.

New approaches and considerations are not always good. It is a nowadays trend but shold not be followed, I think.
For exapmle. in the iPad OS a year ago the brightness of the screen was easy and normal: you touched the brightness slider and while dragging the brightness changed and you released the slider when the brightness reached what you wanted and done.

Whereas the upgraded "new Apple approach" in the OS is: you touch the slider and the screen burns out your eyes, it turns to maximum like the sun, then you slide it and it stays like burning like sunshine all the way, then you release it you do not know where and it turns to darker but naturally you have not found what you wanted for the first try and begin again: touching burning your eyes and release it random for another try.

Is not it foolish like hell? Is it a great newest "idea" of the OS guys? I am sure Harrison can learn from others' mistakes

best
Tassy

[x42]

"if mixbus soloed it solos all the sent tracks together" approach.

That is definitely wrong.
Do you have an direct connections from a Track to a Mixbus (not using Mixbus assigns)?
Which version of Mixbus is this (Menu > Help > About)?

[Tassy]

I do not think it is wrong since it was you who wrote "if a track feeds a bus and that bus is soloed. That implies soloing the track (otherwise you'd not hear anything).."
Maybe I worded in another way meaning that if the bus is soloed it solos all the tracks sent to this bus. That is the idea is in MB4 the latest I use. And this idea was different in mb2 I concluded. The videos speak for themselves. What I can do in mb2, (ragarding this solo thing) I cannot in mb4 in any way.
My request would be to reconsider it and make possible the version that was in the father of mixbus versions.
I use the send leds to send a track to a mixbus the easiest, great way that makes mixbus rather a console not just a daw. I may say we all love it.
https://www.screencast.com/t/pGaH572W

[x42]

To be clear: Bus = Aux-bus (not Mixbus) also Track -> Track connections inherit solo. Mixbus and Track/Bus solos are separate.

The video clearly shows that there are implicitly soloed tracks in your V4 session.
There's nothing to reconsider, since nothing has changed. Mixbus solos are separate just like they were in v2.

[Tassy]

Sorry I used the terms from the manuals, traditional name(v2) Mix Bus new name (V4) mix-bus as in the pictures, just to be clear
https://www.screencast.com/t/q3etCKEJp
I am a guy who RTFM

If cannot open screencast here it is the written from the manual:

"Mixer Window Overview
Mixer Sidebar
Signal Flow
Mixer Strip “Switcher”
Input Strip
Mixbus Strip
Master Strip
Monitor Strip
VCA Strip


Or another place form the manual:
"Solo’ing Mixbuses
Like a real console, the mixbuses are a separate mixing stage. Imagine the 8 (12 in 32C) mixbuses are like a second, standalone mixer. So when you solo a mixbus, the other mixbuses are “implicitly muted”. There’s no interaction between the inputs and the mixbuses, so soloing a mixbus does not implicitly mute or solo any tracks."

Just to be even clearer.

---

Regarding the " nothing changed, nothing to reconsider" here is my clear view and answer:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/o0urlnu0elp89b...d.doc?dl=0

Do not misunderstand me, I appreciate the fine work you are doing on Linux, Mac and Windows, customers service of Harrison...really but if there is some issue, bug or miss-consideration, we potential users and only we can call your attention and help you to make Mixbus even more user-friendly, work-flow-friendly and simpler to use.
Answers expressing "it is great as it is" is not my way of clarifying things, have never ever been and not going to be

thanks
Tassy