Will.

What if it reads as an overall reduction meter for the channel? and not just for a certain plugin? Does it come down to the same coding problem?

+1 for the original idea in this topic.

You two that argue so about four bands sn eight bands - i bet: if both should get the same project to work on one will definitely use more thsn 4 bands because he picks more resonance than tbe other one. Your environment play's a huge role in this. There no right or wrong EQ. What works for you - works in your workflow. Even the top engineers never uses only 4 EQ bands | or | only one EQ on a guitar or vocals - depending on the song and vocalist even with the most perfect take ever. Piano for me is a great example in EDM. because EDM and Piano are so dynamic in their own ways - I hardly boost (depending on other elements around it) the piano. I often ending up doing a 10/12 band narrow cut to remove sharp resonance my "MONITORS" exposes to my in my "environment" to get tge piano sit perfectly its space without boosting. Same with vocals. Because certain recording environment are so well treated and its location its situated in - you sometimes end up with the mixing engineer just doing cuts abd not boosting any frequencies. All because of the feel of the song. If I want and "AIRY VOCAL" im just gona boost the highs and do narrow cuts in the mid and lower mid region. That normally gets me 6 bands excluding hi and low pass. Mixingis all about personal preferences. Inserting 3 EQ's is not wrong. Using 8 band not wrong. Mixing with only 4 bands not wrong at all. It all depends on genre and feel. If you want that Beatles feel . . . by all means use 3 Bands. Another Example that might not interest you. Take HIPHOP rappers most vocals are recorded in their bedrooms or open living rooms. Known hiphip producers here on uses two compressors (one with character and other linear, ) saturation and of course auto-tune sitting 1st in the chain. That alone gives a clear vocal with NO EQ. So you can stop arguing about 4 or 8 bands. I bet you in METAL you gona use more than 8 bands. Whether you use two EQ's with 4bands in the chain to get the sound you want - that's more than 4 bands you're using. Using the "hi pass and low pass filters" guess what? that's two extra bands you're using with your 4 bands.

Definitely not a bad idea, but also a feature to remove the widgets to distinct it from the others - with the option to switch between stereo and a surround buss.

Dude? That wasnt even directed your way. That's in reply to someone else.

Woah. This is going to be a lot of graphic and cpu resources for those with limited systems. Imagine having 32 vocal takes on the chorus and that happens. ? with other tracks that has been grouped and automated. It would be awesome for us that are sorted with 32GB memory, 8GB graphic cards and i7-6th gen and up.

"Hide/Disable/Delete" either way. Potato - Patato | Tamato - Tomato. ? Even if that feature can be added with a lock feature - Meaning: To stay in place.

Dude . . . I'm not insulting you. Never did. "Dedicated" I've said it numerous times. It's in the topics heading too. Never insulted you. I meant well when I said read carefully.

If you open the console and go to the "Module Tab" theres options to remove the widgets you dont want. Problem with this is - it's globally not per buss or per track. It's only the "Strips Volume" Meter that you can hide per buss or track.

Wont the purpose of it be Stereo that why only the interleave will stay put. For when you do your A/B comparison in the Master process between mono and stereo? This is exactly why I brought this up. Cause I'm routing digitally in this sense. There's also a few steps and ideas digitally you're giving here with this - to work only with the CbB console in that sense. ☺ True not everyone works in CbB as advance as others. Some barely scratch the surface of CbB. That's why I sometimes go crazy here ? But that's because I use CbB to its full potential "digitally" and because there place for improvement.

Thats why we create 2 or 3 Master tracks in the mixing process to control and balance out certain elements or to further create headroom space when giving the illusion something has been recorded "live" - when it was not. As for your "surround sound track" You that on the mix buss and Master it on your Dedicated Master track. That is why this will be an OPTION for you to choose and save it to your blank/empty template.

Read carefully! The ability to "Disable/Hide" them (the controls) - is already there. That is what I said. Why would I want to do that? When the topic is to have a dedicated MASTER TRACK that cant be deleted. ?

Hide it how? Meaning, how will that benefit the user? It can be hidden now, but I'm trying to understand how it will help.

Thats already there. Why would I want to hide the features if a dedicated track tbat you can't delete would be a choice. If tracks are not highlighted by selecting them - your files don't get printed. A dedicated track prevents that too. You just need to wrap it with your loop markers.

Wow! You have a lot of problems with your OS. Which build are you on? Try this: Click here And definitely watch this video. A MUST!!! That windows defender? It's a pain in the butt! I've been disabling for 2 years now and smooth running here ever since.

Well, it'll be as the heading reads. A dedicated MASTER track. Here you will do your final writing to your track. Just your interleave and Fx bin to it. This will prevent accidental tweaks on your "FIXED MASTER BUSS" as it is now. I sometimes come across finding this I had accidentally panned lowered the gain or Volume on my Main Master Track/Buss/ Strip/Channel. You can still create your Master 1/2/ but that dedicated Main Master track will be where you print/write/burn your final project from. You'll have the option not to use it. Some of us will prefer to use it. I bet you that you dont even use the hardware system strip - I do.

Why would they come on forums when in the HipHop or EDM genres, theres thousands of new mixing concepts on youtube used by popular nominated young genius producers/mixing and mastering engineers giving tips on Youtube? Also CbB lacks one cruscial tool "A sample editor." The importance of tranposing an 808 or any sample to them with a built-in editor without using third plugins for this -- thats the 1st thing they ask for in a DAW (Can you transpose samples?) This puts you off from convincing them to get onboard, cause you know what the answer will be. I'm satisfied with CbB. I Started using Sonar LE in my early 20's when FL Studio was already sitting at number one in studios in those genre's. Most tracks you heard then - seen on TV and that won awards in the EDM and HipHop genre's were strictly made / recorded / and mixed in FL.

Who thinks a strictly straight forward stripped down dedicated "Master bus track" would be a great addition to the DAW - with only the Mono/Stereo interleave and FX bin on it?

Which ever one will be the easiest coding for the bakers. ? Although: a sub folder with a pop-up window to the section highlighted in red, will look cleaner. ☺

Bumping up. Can't we place this section highlighted in red, in a Category/Sub folder on this menu? To keep things organized and to have easy access to section that's highlighted in green?

Yes, during playback - while nudging the moving, or opening it in the PRV while it's playing. I've never come across this before. Isn't it a bug?

Does anyone experience an annoying cutout on synths when nudging, delete, move / or / make changes to other files in the project?

Nice to see you too. Yeah. ? All the request has been answered in this update. I'm grateful and enjoying them to the max! Mixing is so much fun now and I Love them. ☺ I still have a big one to pray for and two small requests i'd like to see this year. Anyway . . . Yeah. The ability to transfer/move all the plugins (3rd party plugins too,) that are in your ROCK template, to your custom template for jazz in one-go. Taking whats in your FX BIN to a different template and empty project. Like a "replace template" setting that keeps all your plugins.

Idea came from another topic on here. I don't know how others might feel about this, but let's give it a shot. Requesting a feature to copy all effects in "ONE-GO" from a current project to a different empty template with "different settings" without saving them as a preset. I don't know if this will be possible or not, and what the complications might be to it. The idea is to copy all the effects with their settings "AS IS" to another template - new or empty. If it's possible, great - If not, awesome.