feature request Group TRACK

[Will.]

4 hours ago, IgoRr said:

As for the convenience and speed of work, you did not pay attention to the fact that in Cubase, when creating a Group track, the final track itself is created with one click, and all routing of outputs from the designated tracks is automatically organized, that is, LITERALLY EVERYTHING is done in 1 click,

You even said it here what i've asked. ?  

[IgoRr]

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw

Please focus. YOUR SCREENS show tracks, folders and shins, and ALL THIS IS CLOSED, so clearer? And even with everything closed, there is very little space for intensive work with the material, and if you still open 2-3 folders and several tracks, there will be almost nothing left in the upper part, you will have to jump between individual tracks, which again slows down the work.

Let's finish, you obviously do not understand what I am talking about and why I am proposing what I am proposing.

[IgoRr]

@Will_Kaydo   And at what point was I "rude" to someone here?

[Light Grenade]

38 minutes ago, IgoRr said:

@Light Grenade

Only you forget that to get INPUT from the BUS to the AUX track, you have to assign the OUT from the bus to this AUX track, and then what is the use of the created chain? I need an option as with ordinary audio tracks - when the output from the track goes to the master (for example), but you can also add sending to the AUX track, or do you not understand why this is needed?

In addition, all the same, buses and tracks are in different sections in the interface, I already answered this to another interlocutor, but you do not understand this either. I need to work comfortably and quickly, and I learned how to work with both hands at the same time, and I can say for sure that if you add group tracks, you can work even faster.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you. 

However, like I stated, you can totally ignore the use of busses and only use aux tracks for submixing. This for one solves the issue of the busses being in a different section of the mixer panel. Aux tracks can be placed wherever you want. 

If you choose to only use aux tracks, the process would be the video below. All selected tracks feed to the aux track, and the aux track feeds to the master channel. 

Are you looking for essentially this, but instead of the aux automatically routing to the master, the new aux track routes to where the tracks where originally pointing? So, for example, if you have three tracks routing to a 'Drum Submix', you can route these channels to a new aux track, and this aux track automatically routes to the original 'Drum Submix'? 
 

Edited December 9, 2021 by Light Grenade

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

24 minutes ago, IgoRr said:

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw

And even with everything closed, there is very little space for intensive work with the material, and if you still open 2-3 folders and several tracks, there will be almost nothing left in the upper part, you will have to jump between individual tracks, which again slows down the work.

I have a 3 screen setup so screen space is not an issue for me. It's just easier to show everything closed for clarity.

26 minutes ago, IgoRr said:

Let's finish, you obviously do not understand what I am talking about and why I am proposing what I am proposing.

I understand I just don't think it's needed. YMMV

[IgoRr]

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw

That's why you don't understand that you have 3 monitors, and I have one. And it’s not even a matter of the monitor, but the convenience of work. But you never got it.

[IgoRr]

@Light Grenade

This is unbelievable ... I am Russian, and I do not speak English, maybe that is why you are not able to understand that I want to SIMPLYFICATE grouping tracks. I know all the current ways to do this, but they all involve a COMPLICATION and take a lot of time. In addition, I / O routing is noticeably more complex than it would be if there was such an option as in Cubase.

Can you add such a function to Cakewalk? If not, why are you proving something to me, if I have known all this for many decades?

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

3 minutes ago, IgoRr said:

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw

That's why you don't understand that you have 3 monitors, and I have one.  it.

I reccommend buying at least a 2nd one for serious DAW work, they are so cheap nowadays.  

I'm not sure how much work you do but I write, mix and master at least 100 tracks per year for TV so I am all about workflow and producivity.

[IgoRr]

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw

I have a luxurious 32-inch Samsung monitor with 3840x2160 pixels, which is more than enough for MY work. And my suggestion here was not to hear the advice "buy another monitor", but to try to make my favorite program even better and more convenient.

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

13 minutes ago, IgoRr said:

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw

I have a luxurious 32-inch Samsung monitor with 3840x2160 pixels, which is more than enough for MY work

That's fine but you were complaining about not having enough screen space - more screens is the solution in that scenario

I would still recommend a 2nd because a 2 screen setup is far more ergonomic and will speed up your workflow. Track view on one screen, console on another.

[IgoRr]

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw

That's what I was talking about - you absolutely (!!!) did not understand what I was proposing and why. Are you unfamiliar with the concepts of "simplify, speed up, make more convenient"? Or does it all come down to the number and price of monitors?

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

6 minutes ago, IgoRr said:

Or does it all come down to the number and price of monitors?

Whatever's easiest. Quicker to buy another screen or two than wait for a feature that may never be made 

[IgoRr]

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw

I was not mistaken, for you it all comes down to the price and the number of monitors. I wasted a lot of time explaining simple things to a person who doesn't even think about such concepts.

[Quick Math]

I've never used Cubase but 

In Bitwig Studio

-Select tracks

-Control + G 

And it's done. 

It creates a new folder that works as an aux track fed from selected tracks' outputs.

This is much faster than selecting tracks and assigning them to a new aux track on right click  menu.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Xoo]

1 - Select tracks

2 - Hold down control

3 - Change track output or add send to new or existing aux track, patch point or bus.

I don't consider this much different from BitWig's approach or speed.

[Quick Math]

2 hours ago, Kevin Perry said:

1 - Select tracks

2 - Hold down control

3 - Change track output or add send to new or existing aux track, patch point or bus.

I don't consider this much different from BitWig's approach or speed.

 

3-1 - locate your mouse to "output"

3-2 - click to open menu

3-3 - locate your mouse to New Aux track

3-4 - click it 

Yeah, only one extra step I guess.

 

 

[imstre]

Hi IgoRr

If you run out of space,
you can hide non-editable tracks?

Может и хорошо было так, я то просто скрываю готовые треки,

и есть место для тех которые редактирую  а те звучит хоть и не видно

думаю тут  не большая проблема для быстроты, главное качество.

[Bill Phillips]

17 hours ago, IgoRr said:

@Will_Kaydo

GROUP THESE TRACKS lets you easily control volume, pan, and more. at the same time, but does not apply to routing, don't you know? Moreover, in Cakewalk, you can easily do all this even without creating groups of tracks, highlighting the necessary tracks and holding down the CTRL key. This is not at all about that.

The translator may be a big contributor to the communication difficulties here but we're stuck with it.  I'm going to attempt to summarize your concerns and respond to them again hoping that it might help.

I'm not a Cubase user either, but I did read through this whole thread. It's clear to me that, in Cakewalk, several track outputs or sends can be sent to a single bus or aux track in one operation. It appears that Cubase provides the same functionality for group tracks. Same function, different name. I don't see a difference.

 

17 hours ago, IgoRr said:

@Will_Kaydo

GROUP THESE TRACKS lets you easily control volume, pan, and more. at the same time, but does not apply to routing, don't you know? Moreover, in Cakewalk, you can easily do all this even without creating groups of tracks, highlighting the necessary tracks and holding down the CTRL key. This is not at all about that.

You can do the same thing on the aux track or bus.

18 hours ago, IgoRr said:

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw   

You have ALL (!!!) tracks closed, and all (!!!) buses closed, but how to work in the editing process when all tracks are open and the entire visible space is occupied by 5-6 tracks, even a little open?

What do you mean by "all tracks closed"?  Are you using the Track or Console view? In either view press the H key to display a track manager that will allow you to choose which tracks are shown. If you are using Console view, click on the arrowhead in the ProChannel field to open/close the ProChannel. You can use quick groups to open/close ProChannel for a group of tracks. Select the tracks that you want to open/close ProChannel for. Then with Ctrl depressed click on the ProChannel arrowhead in one of the selected tracks.

 

18 hours ago, IgoRr said:

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw   

I will repeat once again: group the track would be much more convenient to be in the location of tracks, and not buses, because you still have to open another window with buses.

Then use aux tracks as the Cakewalk equivalent of Cubase group tracks. Give it a try it works in either Track or Console view. Select the tracks you want to group. Then with Ctrl depressed click in the output or on the send + on one of the selected tracks and choose new aux track at the destination .

[IgoRr]

@Bill Phillips 

Are the concepts "track" and "bus" the same for you? And why in all (!!!) DAWs tracks and buses are separated into different sections?

I will describe for you the number of actions for the fastest way to group multiple tracks in Cakewalk:
1. Open the Console. *
2. Select the required tracks.
3. Hover the cursor over the "Exit" field and then "Send to... new patch point (for example). **
4. Create a new audio (aux) track.
5. Rename (name) the new patch point.
6. Assign inputs to this track from the created patch point.
* If you do all these operations in the "Tracks" mode, the necessary tracks will have to be scaled to open the "output" field, therefore, it is more convenient to do this from the console.
** If you send the outputs to the aux track initially, then the routing control of audio streams in the pre/post fader modes differs from the audio track.

If you send the selected tracks to a new BUS, it will be in a different section, and not in the "Tracks" section, which is not so convenient in work, I talked about this earlier.

In Cubase, this whole operation is performed like this:
1. Select the required tracks.
2. In opened options window - name the group track (optional!) 'designate "stereo" or "mono" mode' .
3. Press "ok".
I will add that in Cubase it can be done from the "tracks" mode even with completely closed tracks, and in just 3 actions, after which NO ANY action is required at all, isn't it more convenient? And this group track remains in the "Tracks" section.

I do not work in Cubase, everything is much more complicated there and in general, it is not so convenient and slower to work in it. But there are several functions that are perfectly implemented there, one of them is the creation of group tracks, so it seems to me that my beloved Cakewalk would become even more convenient with such a function.

 

Edited December 10, 2021 by IgoRr

[msmcleod]

27 minutes ago, IgoRr said:

@Bill Phillips 

Are the concepts "track" and "bus" the same for you? And why in all (!!!) DAWs tracks and buses are separated into different sections?

I will describe for you the number of actions for the fastest way to group multiple tracks in Cakewalk:
1. Open the Console. *
2. Select the required tracks.
3. Hover the cursor over the "Exit" field and then "Send to... new patch point (for example). **
4. Create a new audio (aux) track.
5. Rename (name) the new patch point.
6. Assign inputs to this track from the created patch point.
* If you do all these operations in the "Tracks" mode, the necessary tracks will have to be scaled to open the "output" field, therefore, it is more convenient to do this from the console.
** If you send the outputs to the aux track initially, then the routing control of audio streams in the pre/post fader modes differs from the audio track.

If you send the selected tracks to a new BUS, it will be in a different section, and not in the "Tracks" section, which is not so convenient in work, I talked about this earlier.

In Cubase, this whole operation is performed like this:
1. Select the required tracks.
2. In opened options window - name the group track (optional!) 'designate "stereo" or "mono" mode' .
3. Press "ok".
I will add that in Cubase it can be done from the "tracks" mode even with completely closed tracks, and in just 3 actions, after which NO ANY action is required at all, isn't it more convenient? And this group track remains in the "Tracks" section.

I do not work in Cubase, everything is much more complicated there and in general, it is not so convenient and slower to work in it. But there are several functions that are perfectly implemented there, one of them is the creation of group tracks, so it seems to me that my beloved Cakewalk would become even more convenient with such a function.

 

There is a quicker way, if I'm correctly understanding what you're trying to do...

1. Select your tracks
2. Hold down CTRL, and on one of the tracks and select "New Aux Track" from the output dropdown.

A new patch point is automatically created when you create an aux track in this way, so there's no need to create a separate one (unless I'm missing something in your routing requirements here)

Holding down CTRL with a selection will set the output for all of the tracks using quick grouping, e.g.: