Hi,

Does anybody know how to link the volume sliders in the mixer section of Realband so that when you move one they all move in unison.

Andrew

Probably assign the channels to a sub group, but I am just guessing as I never wanted to do that. Kind of defeats the purpose of what mixing is.

I think this might be a question for PG Staffers, but it is a good one.

I am not sure this is possible in Real Band unless I am missing something (perhaps I am).

In Sonar, if I have group of instruments I want to move as one it is easy to create and add tracks to a group by simply right clicking on a track, but I do not know if that function to group tracks exists in Real Band and if so, where it is.

Staffers?

I know that in Sonar you can link faders to move in unison or to move opposite....

I'd suggest looking in the help menu and if it's not there, call PG tech support.

Herb is right,

If you go under help and click user's guide, it is on page 184.

It is a little hard to follow though and does not have the ease of Sonar where you just right click and add the fader to a group with a color scheme.

Someone may want to request this as a feature upgrade in Real Band.

It seems a little too hard for such a simple task, quite frankly.

Anyway, it is on page 184.

Maybe someone on staff has an easier way to explain it than I see in the manual.

Let me know if you are able to follow the instructions and if they make sense to you or if a call to tech support is needed. I am interested in the answer. Thanks!

Hi David,

I contacted PG and this was their reply.

That doesn't appear to be possible, but you can do something similar using subgroups on the mixer.

First, you'll have to go to Options - Preferences - Audio, and check the box marked "Unassigned Output Ports Work As Subgroups". Then you can assign each audio track to a specific subgroup, by right-clicking on them, going to Port, and selecting something out of the list. You can then control the volumes of the subgroups by using the volume sliders marked A1, G2, G3, G4, etc.. on the right side of the mixer.

You could assign all the backing tracks to A1 and assign the lead to G2, then use the the A1 and G2 sliders to balance them.

Hi There,

Did you try this and did it work for you? If you master this, maybe you can be our "go to person" if anyone asks a similar question.

I don't mix in Real Band, so I haven't taken the time to learn this.

If you plan on learning this let me know and I might ask you to write a short step by step

1
2
3
4

etc for rest of the world that probably wants clear instructions.



I think they ought to make this a really easy feature.

It is a pretty basic need for a mixing board.

Thanks!!!

Below is how it is done in Sonar. The thing is, it is really easy to group and ungroup a cluster of instruments at the touch of a button, and it seems like that requires some work in Real Band.

Maybe something they would want to add to wish list.

Hi,

I have not tried it out yet. I normally use Guitar Tracks Pro to do my recordings and final mixing. I've only starting using Real Band as it came free with BIAB 2016 which I have just upgraded too.

Ok thanks.

In my experience A-J pretty much nailed it.

This method has always worked here.

The real complexity comes into play when you want those same Subgroup sliders to NOT be subgroups, but rather be (physical) multiple outs on the interface itself. It is only then you have to make a choice. This is part of the Prefs options A-J described.

RB implements various things differently for many reasons, and this particular choice/setting is part of the how/why RB behaves the way it does currently.

The "Unassigned Output Ports Work As Subgroups" setting normally defaults to enabled, so this should work for most users.

Real Band is a very, very basic DAW. PG has a lot of work to do to it if they are interested in competing in the DAW marketplace.

This and other things are the reason I use Sonar as my DAW and use RB to generate my tracks in audio form.

PG has an awesome piece of software with BB & RB because they do what no other DAW in the world can do, and that is to create the music in a very realistic manner. I don't know that they would gain much by trying to compete in the DAW world since the other DAW companies really have all the bases covered quite well. I think PG should focus on what they do best and work on making it better and larger. Why be the small fish in the big ocean when you're already the only fish in the other ocean?

Hi Guitarhacker. Can some of these DAWs manage your mixes in real time? That would be neat for live shows.

Sure.

However, for a live show I always recommend mixing the tracks to waves and use some sort of wave player. The less stuff you have in the loop for a live gig, the less chance you have that one of those links will quit in the middle of the show.

If I was doing a live show, I'd have 2 laptops booted up and ready to go. I'd use one for the music and the other would be a backup in the event of a crash. Both would have the same music and the same player.

Using a DAW in a show doesn't give you any advantage. What are you going to do? Adjust levels in the middle of the song you're playing? Nope.... mix the songs, polish them up with Ozone, and put them into a play list and do the show. The fewer things you have to worry about in a show the more you can concentrate on the job at hand, which is entertaining the paying customers.

Yes, I just saw in the RB help files that you could automate the mixers. I'm awaiting my VoiceLive 3 Extreme for live shows, so all the BIAB/RB wave files go onto that along with real time changes to guitar and vocals. All in one box that plugs into the PA. Only worry is if it fails. Back to singing and an acoustic. No pedals, no nothing except the VL3 Extreme. I might try the automated mixing in the studio for streaming shows. I guess I could have just bought a Karaoke Player..... lol

Hi Guitarhacker. Can some of these DAWs manage your mixes in real time? That would be neat for live shows.

"However, for a live show I always recommend mixing the tracks to waves and use some sort of wave player. The less stuff you have in the loop for a live gig, the less chance you have that one of those links will quit in the middle of the show. "

Herb is correct. But--- if you are feeling ambitious and money's no object, you might want to try out Jason Aldean's FOH mix....

In The Mix With Chris Stephens, Jason Aldean FOH

Herb is correct. But--- if you are feeling ambitious and money is a consideration, you might want to try this setup:


Behringer X32 Rack


All of the X32 Console's software and capabilities at half the price.

Although the X32 Core is less expensive, it has to be paired with a digital snake (SD8,SD16 or SD32), any will increase the cost to more than the rack.

The X Air models are less but don't have all the X32 console features.
Some models will work as 16X16 audio interfaces.

This will work as an Audio interface for DAW's with 32X32 ins/outs.

You can record 32 inputs of your live gig into a computer while recording a separate stereo mix to a flash drive.

It will provide a minimum of 16 monitor mixes.... Every duo needs that...

Charlie

We could do that years ago .. OK, in reality we only recorded 16 in's for audio to the computer, but we did route all of them via a stereo mix out to another soundcard (SBLive) and record an actual live stereo mix at the same time. If I had more Delta 1010s at the time we could have done more tracks.

If I recall, on some songs the W-30 was the sync source and on others it was PT (as far as MIDI), but the Deltas were always linked inside the box. One card can be the actual clock for all the other 1010 cards.
No bit/clock wandering that way.
Or you can use a word clock .. but never did that in a live setting.

Yes Rharv, it's not been that long ago when Presonus did a YouTube video recording a live Tower of Power show using Racks of 1818's daisy chained to get 32 tracks.

I'm a bit amazed at what $600 and a USB cable can now bring into the home recording studio.

Using an X32 model can go a long way in reducing the computer resource barrier many enthusiasts encounter. I don't recall ever seeing an X32 mentioned as a home studio controller/audio interface option here on the forum. The price for a X32 Core and an Xtouch is the same. The X32 Core may offer more functionality between the two.

Charlie