logic 9 Arrange window doesn't match Mixer

Hi

joemamawhite wrote:

I want (without messing with the environment) to have my arrange window track names and order match my mixer.

This is actually the default behaviour for the Mixer "Arrange" setting.

What are you missing?

CCT

I COMPLETELY agree. I'm making the move from Pro Tools because it doesn't give me the professional tools that I need to make the music I want. I do like how the mixer and the arrange window line up in PT quite well. Just like Ableton Live...... but Logic?

I hit the Arrange button in the mixer and it's all screwy. It doesn't show every track as a midi track like in PT. If there's a good reason for this, I'd like to hear it. I love everything so far about Logic but the Arrange --> Mixer window really blows. I've looked everywhere, spent alot of money in learning resources and non of them talk about how the Arrange --> Mixer relationship works. Also, right clicking and reassigning the output on a track that's just midi is also somewhat backwards.

I'm posting here for someone to prove me completly wrong and show me why this is a better workflow and a better way to view the "Arrange to Mixer" window like this.

-Started an empty project

-Created a Software Instrument track 16 multi timbral

-I see 16 tracks in the arrange window

-5 channel strips in the mixer: prelisten, Inst 1, Click, Output, and Master

One track is Inst 1 in the mixer, where are the other 15? You're more than welcome to call the names of faders/track relationship useless, now tell me WHY it's useless.

I'm not diagreeing with you, I'd just like to know. There are so many features in Logic that trump PT, but I've read many a thread on stuff like, how using VI's and doing something simple like automating their volume can be a real pain in the ***. I'm not the only one who feels this way, and there are many pro Logic users that feel the same way too.

Routing better be improved in the next version of Logic (If there IS going to be one). I've had many a Logic fanboy tell me how easy it is. I still don't get how it works. I think almost every DAW on this planet follows the track order/mixer strip order philosophy. The more I use Logic, the more I think it's more powerful than PT, but the biggest and I mean BIGGEST drawback of all (and I'm a huge Apple fan) is the lack of track order and signal rouring simplicity compared to every other DAW out there. Very unApple like. You would think that with the simplicity of figuring out signal flow in PT it would be Apple ProTools. How long have you been using Logic? I plan to make small video tutorials about moving your PT workflow to Logic.

In PT when you create a send, unless you take another step to create an AUX you'd be wondering where this 'send' is going to. Don't forget to create a Master Fader while your at it. Oops, wonder why your project is in mono? Look - you created a mono Master Fader. Move over to Cubase and you will have to make other adjustments to do simple things (I had to look in the manual to figure out why option-drag didn't just copy a region).

Point is, PT does things confusingly if you are used to working in a different environment. In Logic, when you create a send an aux is automatically created for you... but it is not put into the arrange. If you want to see it in the arrange you have to put it there yourself, then you can slide it up and down to be before/after whatever track you want it on and have it show up in the mixer in the 'arrange' view. You can't select more than one track in the arrange at a time for moving the order of, and you can't move the order of tracks in the mixer (both common complaints). You can select multiple channels in the mixer and do things to them all at once. This is maybe where the "all" view could come in handy. Choose 'all' - it groups by type, drag select your aux's, and put them all in the arrange at once, for instance.

Halfsemitone: your questions about multitimbral vs. multi out might be better answered if you started a new thread devoted to that topic.

Thanks for your reply. I DEFINITELY don't want to start a thread about Multitimbral vs multi out. I'd want to save the world of the debacle of starting ANOTHER thread about that.

If you're in Protools and wanted to create a stereo Master Fader but made a mono one right after they gave you a choice in the dialogue box, well, you're an idiot. Seeren, you're not an idiot, but if someone were to choose mono when they wanted stereo, would be.

On an actual mixing desk before the world of digital, when you sent a signal there were two common places you would send to, an aux (which you only had a limited number of) or out to one of your outputs (again limited, even today you would be). Of course, we know this which is why I wonder why Apple stuck with this method.

I don't think Logic does things confusingly because I'm used to PT. In fact, Logic does more things way easier than PT. I'm not going to list them here, but there's lots. That's why I made the switch. I just think that there are so many DAWs out there that follow that convention because it mirrors the old school way of doing things. I still haven't heard a good answer as to why Logic would do this. If there is tell me. All I get from the Logic fanboys is "if don't like it, don't use it". What a dumb answer and a great way to turn someone off of a piece of software if they are a beginner to audio.

The fact that protools makes an aux track in both the edit and the arrange window is nice. The fact that logic puts one for you in the mix window only isn't. That's one more step. One more step isn't a big deal, it's when you have to start looking through manuals or even online to find it. Also, that's not enough to make me switch back to PT.

halfasemitone wrote:

If you're in Protools and wanted to create a stereo Master Fader but made a mono one right after they gave you a choice in the dialogue box, well, you're an idiot.

I was more pointing out an easy mistake that a lot of beginners make their first session. It's easy to do.

I DEFINITELY don't want to start a thread about Multitimbral vs multi out. I'd want to save the world of the debacle of starting ANOTHER thread about that.

I don't think that would be a debacle, it's not like it's an "everyday, same question as yesterday" type of subject.

On an actual mixing desk before the world of digital, when you sent a signal there were two common places you would send to, an aux (which you only had a limited number of) or out to one of your outputs (again limited, even today you would be). Of course, we know this which is why I wonder why Apple stuck with this method.

I don't think Logic does things confusingly because I'm used to PT. In fact, Logic does more things way easier than PT. I'm not going to list them here, but there's lots. That's why I made the switch. I just think that there are so many DAWs out there that follow that convention because it mirrors the old school way of doing things. I still haven't heard a good answer as to why Logic would do this. If there is tell me.

I don't see any difference between Logic & PT in this regard. You create a send and assign it to a bus, or you set the output of a channel to a bus. You create (or one is created automatically) an AUX channel which uses that bus as its input. You can create several AUX's to receive input from the same bus, or have no channels use the bus at all. I'd like Logic to be able to use Instruments in side-chains without sending to a bus (like the way audio channels are treated).

The fact that protools makes an aux track in both the edit and the arrange window is nice. The fact that logic puts one for you in the mix window only isn't. That's one more step. One more step isn't a big deal, it's when you have to start looking through manuals or even online to find it. Also, that's not enough to make me switch back to PT.

PT makes you do an extra step by having to create the AUX (which actually involves a couple extra microsteps). 6 of one, half dozen of the other.

joemamawhite wrote:

I love logic. That's why I use it. However, obviously, in its attempt to be all things to all people some basic common sense stuff gets overlooked. Us old cats like everything on our board and every channel strip to match the tracks on the "tape" track 1 is fader 1' etc.

what's useless to me is why logic would have the tracks in any other order than my arrange window when "all" is selected, or why there would be any missing channels,clck,inst etc when "arrange" is selected. I am trying to create a 16 trk multitrack set-up template. And this little "feature" cannot be rationalized in my world.

Thanks for hanging in with me on this..

I don't know if this helps or even if this pertains to what you're setup.

The Arrange page is a direct reflection of the Environment if an object is in the Environment, it can be brought up in the Arrange page. So, when setting up a template I find it's best to think of the environment taking the lead and the arrange will follow. Right click on an audio track header, look at the "reassign track" function, you should notice everything that resides in the environment. Perhaps this is because I've used Logic in some form or other since 2.5, this is how we had to create the arrange 20 years ago, the objects had to first be created in the environment. Apple has turned this around so that environment objects are automatically created vwhen a track is created but it's actually the other way around.

Any track can be reassigned to an environment object.