Has been asked for many times, but this basic function is sadly missing.
Bar settings changes that affect track volume and/or the RealTrack or MIDI Patch that is playing should be reflected in the mixer information display. This is probably even the most basic form of automation.

The software knows what track is playing and what its volume is. Why can't that information be sent to the mixer also?

I'll start.
+1
Any other takers?

+1

Absolutely! A big +1 from me. This is one of the biggest issue with the Mixer. From my standpoint, without some indication of what's going on, you are flying blind. It's almost unimaginable that this "feature" isn't already there.

Seems like a easy fix that would be appreciated by all.

Jeff

+1

I’m hoping that would lead to automated volume curves and Mackie control unit support. But this request would be a start.

+1

Hmmm.
+1/-1
Depends how it is implemented.
Last time when mutes where popping on/off on the mixer it was strange and counter intuitive.

See thread:
https://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=640237#Post640237

So +1 for volume fader reflection in the mixer, sort of automation as Matt noted and perhaps a future "learn automation"? or perhaps indication of some kind in the mixer that stuff is happening "at the bar"

-1 For touching solo/mute buttons on the mixer to literally correspond to bar settings. We need manual overrides. Perhaps change color of mutes when activated at the bar, but please do not touch the actual function.

I was deliberately trying not to complicate things. Just the track name and the volume - for starters.

Absolutely, this would be a good start.

VT,
and I deliberately opened this can

I believe it is a good idea to have all related items on table. Food for thought,
rather than make something fast and at later time try to completely re-imagine it, building up, but not wide.
Sort of... making a dog house for average size dog...but then deciding to adopt a Saint Bernard.

P.S. Many times it is much easier to implement other related things while "at it" than do another session(s), rebuilding something from earlier time.

Yes, I understand, but I don't want the developers to put this straight into the 'too hard' basket and do nothing.

Possibly. But since I requested automation support twenty years ago, I assume it's difficult to implement.

Maybe they forgot about it and just need a gentle reminder

Vt,
It is hard to fly to mars.
Developers need 3 things. Good mood, large cup of coffee and a bar of dark chocolate. And magic can happen. Do not confuse with Magix.

---
P.S you and Matt talked about volumes indicators and/or simplified visul automation. I'm ll for it, even if its only one way communication. (Both ways would be better)

I am just against messing with functions of mixer solo/mute overrides. That's all.

M.

Everything proposed here could be a user-selectable choice. If you don’t need it, don’t want it, or would find it distracting, turn it off?

That's reasonable. As long as we move forward and deliver a workable solution, with room to expand as necessary.

+1

I now understand that this probably cannot be implemented with the current design architecture. It appears that the Mixer volume settings and the <F5> Bar volume settings are not directly related at all.