RE: vegas needs a proper mixer

stakeoutstudios wrote on 4/12/2002, 7:24 AM
Sorry but I have to agree with Sonic PCH and the majority of Vegas Users on this one. Oooh, this has got me wound up.

The purpose of Vegas is not to emulate a mixing desk visually. You can perform any routing task in Vegas that would be slower to do on something that looked like a mixing desk on screen.

Vegas is a 'Software' application, and hence, it has been designed so that it is quick to use with a 'Mouse'. That is the beauty of it!

I'm now doing work for a major record company in the UK, using Vegas - and the output is comparable if not better than my experiences with Pro-Tools, and Nuendo. I simply enjoy using the interface, and can get my work done quickly. Well.. they're happy! The interface is so quick to use that it's essential to the creative flow.

To get anything done quickly in any other application, a hardware control surface would be more of a necessity.

In terms of audio manipulation, there's not a lot (if anything) I can't do in Vegas.

What is definitely missing is MIDI and a piano roll. At the moment I have to use another app for this, which unfortunately interrupts the creative flow.

My one major audio request in terms of routing would be the ability to route multiple busses to one buss. This would help with the way I mix. I.E. from 8 drum tracks, I would route overhead mics (L+R) to BUSS A. Oversnare and Undersnare to BUSS B, Kick to BUSS C, Toms to BUSS D. I can then EQ and compress things together to save time, instead of EQing and compressing top and bottom snare, left and right oveheads, and each tom separately. Also saves on CPU time because less plugins are used; so can use higher quality plugs. Now if I could route BUSSES A, B, C, and D to Buss E, then I could compress and touch up EQ on the whole drum submix, and have even more control. Buss E would then be routed to the master BUSS. (Which was an amazing upgrade, and allowed the first truly commercial soundng mixes to leave my studio... and yes my clients are happy... one of the demo's got them a deal and a £3 million advance, and they want ME to record the album! I could go protools... but I won't)

Other useful additions would be Variable Phase (I've explained that before), DX plugin automation (would require MIDI I think), and a really intuitive way of sidechaining compressors etc. Oh and a reverse audio switch. Hardware control is less of an issue for me because I love the interface, and I use the right plugins.

Don't let marketing issues mask what is essentially an amazing product.

And yes. It should either just be called Vegas or be separated into Vegas audio + Vegas video.

that way the simple folks, and new customers wouldn't get confused.

If you don't like the interface, that's personal preference. Use a different app.

Jason

Comments

Former user wrote on 4/12/2002, 10:21 AM
Jason,

I am glad this has got you wound up a bit...

I agree with just about everything in your post. I am not questioning the audio quality in Vegas. I am not questioning it's ease of use...I love the app to track and manipulate my audio however, I am questioning SF logic on their layout to mix in Vegas.

When you work with a 20-24 track recordings (Judging by your thread and obvious experience, you probably have), tell me - do you really enjoy scrolling up and down all over the place to adjust levels with those tiny horizontal sliders? This is so awkward. Why can't I just add a track, have a standard channel strip automatically show up in a standard mixer panel and get it on? Is this too much to ask? And why does Vegas call the bus assignment panel a mixer? (At least that's what it says on this dialog box in Windows). So is the real mixer the horizonal sliders on each track or is it this bus assignment dialog box?

I guess I just prefer a vertical side-by-side view of all my tracks/sliders so I can get mixing without even worrying about which tracks are in view. Scrolling around in the track window is a waste of time. Adjusting track heights to the minimum for a 24 track mix so you can see all those tiny sliders is annoying (I use 21' monitors too.)For me, a typical session seems to involve just too much monkeying around with the interface to get into a good workflow. (Maybe I am missing something really big here - but I don't think so) One adjustment here makes for another one over there....pretty soon you are not mixing anymore - you are constantly screwing around with the interface.

And what would be so wrong with giving users the option of a "visual mixing desk"? Protools has one...Logic has one....Nuendo's rocks (although it could use a few enhancements...)Fact is - just about every audio app worth trying has a visual mixing desk...works for me and thousands of others...yet Vegas insists on harping on about how much flexibility their implementation has. Hey newsflash here - no question about the flexibility - it is excellent...just collect all this shit into one window (or one nice tabbed window like Trimmer, Explorer etc). The solution is right in from of their eyes. I would put a standard visual mixer on one tab, the bus assignments on another and everything would be handy.

One final point - "If you don't like the interface, that's personal preference. Use a different app". I already use different apps...tons of them - I don't need you to remind me of that fact. As SF users, I would hope that we can state our likes and dislikes about their products and maybe, just maybe someday SF might implement one or
two of our suggestions. Just because this mix design works for you does not mean it works for everyone.

Cuzin B
stakeoutstudios wrote on 4/12/2002, 11:42 AM
fair enough. Because of the way I mix through the busses, I very very rarely have to fiddle with track volumes etc. It works for me, but like you say, maybe it won't work for everyone!
Former user wrote on 4/12/2002, 12:08 PM
Jason,

Maybe you could share a bit of your knowledge on how you use the busses for mixing cause that's the way I have been trying to do it since I got this app. In an earlier post, Chienworks asked why I used buses at all. Well jeez - when you click View-Mixer and the Bus assignment dialog pops up, I thought this was the mixer the whole time.

Then others are saying Hey - why bother with all these busses? Busses are just to send several tracks to a singular point for level adjustment and FX etc...it's confusing. And I hope I am wrong but are there a ton of Vegas users who do their total mix using those tiny horizontal sliders on each track and leave only the Master Bus (VV3) or no busses at all (VA2)? visible. How do you interact with this?

My first question would be - What's your ballpark figure to set each track level? Do you mess around with track levels (horizontal slider) and then rework them at the bus level? (so called Mixer dialog)during your mix process?

Cheers,

Cuzin B
nlamartina wrote on 4/12/2002, 2:28 PM
Cuzin,

Don't mean to butt in, but this might make things a shade easier (if you haven't figured this out already)... I also found the track volume sliders a bit tedious, until I found out that you can use the mouse-wheel function to move them. Just hover the mouse pointer on top of the slider and scroll the wheel. Way easier and more practical to control. Same applies when selecting multiple tracks. Shift+Click (or Ctrl+Click) tracks, and scroll away. All slider positions stay relative. The process is even easier when you color code or group tracks visually so you don't have to go hunting around for stuff.

Hope this helps,
Nick LaMartina
Former user wrote on 4/12/2002, 3:00 PM
Nick,

Cool tip. I will try that out. Still trying to get a feel for how other users actually combine the track sliders with the bus panel to do their mixing. Are most of you just using the track slider or just the Bus/Mixer or both?

Cheers,

Cuzin B
JoeD wrote on 4/12/2002, 3:13 PM
You guys think the only problem lies within the BUSSES??

How's the weather on you planet. The bussing features are fine.

JoeD
Former user wrote on 4/12/2002, 3:30 PM
JoeD,

I have been following your issues for a long while now and I am aware of your concerns with 24 bit etc...I also know that the Vegas busses work fine - it's just that cranky response that Sonic-PMS gave me about a decent mixer that's got me a bit wired here.

Just wanna know how other users feel about mixing in Vegas and how to go about it in the most efficient manner. Any tips to pass along?

Cuzin B
Chienworks wrote on 4/12/2002, 3:45 PM
I haven't done any projects with large numbers of tracks, so perhaps this just hasn't been an issue that has bothered me yet. But, that being said, i do mix with the track faders since my projects tend to have 6 or fewer tracks (so far anyway). To make it easier to get more precise control, i drag the divider bar between the track headers and the track window over to about mid-screen. This makes the fader controls about 6 inches long and it's very easy then to set a precise level. Once i get the mix set i slide the divider bar back over until i need to readjust levels again. I can also double-click on the numeric volume display and type in a number. This is really handy if i want to start out all the tracks at, say, -9dB.
Former user wrote on 4/12/2002, 3:54 PM
Chienworks,

Thanks for the update. You see - my stuff is usually 12 tracks up to around 20...you can probably see the kind of situation a guy can get into at that track count...I have to move this, adjust that, lower this..etc etc...it becomes cumbersome when you have to move all over the place....I really want to stay within Vegas for the whole project but when track counts get high and I get frustrated, I usually move the whole shootin' match over to Nuendo, where I can have 20-24 tracks in the mixer panel at one time. It's a breeze to mix in Nuendo. Even small projects (6-10 tracks) go quicker.

Cheers,

Cuzin B
whtrabit wrote on 4/13/2002, 12:34 PM
I agree with you CuzinB. I have been using Vegas Video 3 for a little while now (never thought I would use a Sonic Foundry product) and I have been impressed for the most part but as you said mixing in Nuendo is much easier. I also like Logic a little more since Logic 5 came out. Again apps are tools and you use the best one for the job *but* it would be nice to have ONE tool for all.

jimmy