Grouping faders in the client

[enorson]

When jamming with big ensembles (we had an entire 20 piece big band in a jam yesterday) it would be very valuable to be able to group faders, to have them move in "proportional sync". That way, mixing "on the fly" would be a lot easier with big ensembles - one could pre mix section per section in the band, and then use the groups to set the balance of the band. Even 4 fader groups would be plenty enough.

[corrados]

This is more or less a duplicate of #178. Both issues want to modify the order of the faders. If you agree I would like to mention your Issue in the #178 and close this one.

[enorson]

Sure! Although to me, moving the faders isn't as important as making fader groups. But yes, moving them would be nice as well! /Magnus Den tis 12 maj 2020 17:04Volker Fischer <notifications@github.com> skrev:

…

This is more or less a duplicate of #178 <#178>. Both issues want to modify the order of the faders. If you agree I would like to mention your Issue in the #178 <#178> and close this one. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#202 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APREXKNOY42UGT4XZKG46S3RRFQOLANCNFSM4M5X5JXA> .

[enorson]

To clarify: im not concerned with the order of the faders as such. I just want to be able to make groups like on a digital mixer, so that you can pull on one of the faders and have the rest of the group move in unison. Den tis 12 maj 2020 17:04Volker Fischer <notifications@github.com> skrev:

…

This is more or less a duplicate of #178 <#178>. Both issues want to modify the order of the faders. If you agree I would like to mention your Issue in the #178 <#178> and close this one. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#202 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APREXKNOY42UGT4XZKG46S3RRFQOLANCNFSM4M5X5JXA> .

[corrados]

Oh, I see. Then this is something different than in #178. So let's keep this one open then.

[corrados]

@enorson "Even 4 fader groups would be plenty enough": We have just implemented a grouping feature: #379. It looks like this:

If you switch on the grp for the faders, they are moved in sync. I know this is not the "4 fader groups" which you requested but I think this will help you. Do you think this implementation will be enough for you or do you really need the 4 fader groups to be productive?

[iainhallam]

That's a step forward but for mixing sections, multiple groups would really be needed, otherwise the person mixing will spend the whole session clicking Grp checkboxes to move them together, then clicking them again to change to another group selection for the next section of players. For me, the ideal would be to manually add faders for groups, then have a matrix view or drop down on the player faders that selects which group they go in. Have these group faders at the start of the list, and it would be very quick to adjust the mix of sections.

[enorson]

It's certainly a very welcome thing and a big improvement, but more groups would be even better! I play in the Swedish Jamulus big band, and what would be ideal for the big band setting would be to have one group for the sax section, one for trombones, one for trumpets and one for the rhythm section - for a total of four. The purpose of course being to get a better chance to keep up with the mic while rehearsing .. it's impossible to find time to manipulate 20 faders while playing, but one group per section is a whole different matter. Thank you for taking the time, and thanks for listening to all the suggestions you're getting - this is true top class! /Magnus Den lör 20 juni 2020 21:17Volker Fischer <notifications@github.com> skrev:

…

@enorson <https://github.com/enorson> "*Even 4 fader groups would be plenty enough*": We have just implemented a grouping feature: #379 <#379>. It looks like this: [image: grafik] <https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/46655886/85209820-37de9d80-b33b-11ea-8755-e50a80093da3.png> If you switch on the grp for the faders, they are moved in sync. I know this is not the "4 fader groups" which you requested but I think this will help you. Do you think this implementation will be enough for you or do you really need the 4 fader groups to be productive? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#202 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APREXKNEKR4TVLCOFAPUTXTRXUDNHANCNFSM4M5X5JXA> .

[WolfganP]

Can't the fader items be made selectable via standard Control-Shift-click gestures and that way have dynamic group controls?
Paired with the recent fader name-ordering changes, it may be a very flexible solution...

[enorson]

Just a drop down menu instead of the checkbox would get the job done for me.. like a drop down menu where you could either leave a fader unselected, or select a group number (1,2,3 or 4) /Magnus Den lör 20 juni 2020 21:38Iain Hallam <notifications@github.com> skrev:

…

That's a step forward but for mixing sections, multiple groups would really be needed, otherwise the person mixing will spend the whole session clicking Grp checkboxes to move them together, then clicking them again to change to another group selection for the next section of players. For me, the ideal would be to manually add faders for groups, then have a matrix view or drop down on the player faders that selects which group they go in. Have these group faders at the start of the list, and it would be very quick to adjust the mix of sections. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#202 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APREXKPGDLCCSSEO62MUQBDRXUF23ANCNFSM4M5X5JXA> .

[enorson]

Hi again! Just tried out the fader grouping in the newly released 3.5.7. Unfortunately there's a problem with the way the faders move in relation to each other. Normally, grouped faders move whilst keeping the proportional relationship between them. So, let's say one fader is at max (1) and the other at 0.5, and then you group them. Now, when you move the louder fader down to 0.5, the other fader should end up at 0.25 thus keeping the mix sounding the same. In this version, however, an ABSOLUTE relationship is preserved. So, when performing the experiment above, lowering the louder fader to 1 makes the softer one "hit the floor" at zero. Keep on lowering the louder one and the mix changes so that the next time you pull the fader up again, the mix is changed. This, unfortunately, renders the grouping dysfunctional in this implementation. Other than that - nice update! I love the "sort by instrument" feature! /Magnus Den lör 20 juni 2020 kl 21:17 skrev Volker Fischer <notifications@github.com

…

: @enorson <https://github.com/enorson> "*Even 4 fader groups would be plenty enough*": We have just implemented a grouping feature: #379 <#379>. It looks like this: [image: grafik] <https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/46655886/85209820-37de9d80-b33b-11ea-8755-e50a80093da3.png> If you switch on the grp for the faders, they are moved in sync. I know this is not the "4 fader groups" which you requested but I think this will help you. Do you think this implementation will be enough for you or do you really need the 4 fader groups to be productive? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#202 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APREXKNEKR4TVLCOFAPUTXTRXUDNHANCNFSM4M5X5JXA> .

[corrados]

Now, when you move the louder fader down to 0.5, the other fader should end up at 0.25 thus keeping the mix sounding the same.

This, I do not understand. The unit of the faders is dB (since version 3.5.0). If you lower the volume of one fader in the group by, let's say, 3 dB, all the other faders are also lowered by 3 dB. What would that be in your proposed implementation? If you lower one fader by 3 dB, do you want the others to be lowered by 1.5 dB?

[enorson]

Found it difficult to put into words how I mean, so I made a little video clip. Hope this makes sense to you! /Magnus https://youtu.be/7oA4bHKCiF0 Den sön 28 juni 2020 kl 14:43 skrev Volker Fischer <notifications@github.com

…

: Now, when you move the louder fader down to 0.5, the other fader should end up at 0.25 thus keeping the mix sounding the same. This, I do not understand. The unit of the faders is dB (sind version 3.5.0). If you lower the volume of one fader in the group by, let's say, 3 dB, all the other faders are also lowered by 3 dB. What would that be in your proposed implementation? If you lower one fader by 3 dB, do you want the others to be lowered by 1.5 dB? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#202 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APREXKOYAQKGNIZE3GLR4XLRY43I5ANCNFSM4M5X5JXA> .