If you are using 2 screens, you can minimize the editor and move it to another screen and it'll stay maximized. I think they designed it like that.
I haven't tested it yet .. so many projects ..

I think Kurt Foster is or was using mixbus, he might know.

For now, I'm using the alt-tab command, which allows me to scroll through open windows running in the background, and then pick the one I want - but that's a Windows command thing, and not built into the MB program.
I'd still like to know how to do this inside the program itself. It's got to be something brain-dead easy that I'm missing - or perhaps a bug that needs addressed...in any case, it can't be considered "acceptable" by regular MB users, tho.
I don't recall ever having had this problem in MB 1 or 2.

-d

Very strange man. I'm curious to see what the answer is.

I haven't done the upgrade to MB3 yet, so I'm watching this carefully.

Boswell, post: 443554, member: 29034 wrote: I haven't done the upgrade to MB3 yet, so I'm watching this carefully.

While I don't consider myself to be an "expert" on any DAW system ( while it took me awhile, I'm pretty solid now with Samp pro X), I do consider myself to be a pretty knowledgeable guy with DAWs in general... but so far, this new version of MB is really eluding me.

So.... Another problem I've encountered, as of last night, is that I can't seem to figure out how to show more than just the first 4 buses at a time on the mixer screen.
Mixbus gives you 8 buses to work with. As of this writing, I have not yet been able to scroll horizontally to the L (or R) in the mixer window to get over far enough to the right to see those additional 4 buses.
Scrolling horizontally to show all the tracks hasn't been a problem, but I've yet to figure out how to get to those remaining 4 buses.

I dunno.. maybe it's just me, and these are simple tasks to do once you know the commands or shortcut keys... but I never had any of these problems on the original version of MB; I was able to pretty much jump in and get familiar with it pretty quick; certainly quicker than I was able to do with Samp - but at least with Samp, there were those exceptional Kraznet vids to watch, and, once you figured out the tasks, they made sense.
The other thing, is that I'm not entirely sure that I'm not also working against bugs in the program. While Samp is most certainly more complex, at least I wasn't fighting issues that were potentially a result of dicey coding.

This version of MB seems so, well, "clunky", for lack of a better term.

Here's the thing that bothers me most... These aren't - or at least they shouldn't be - "deep" commands or complex feature sets. This is basic stuff, guys.
Being able to switch views to different windows, or scroll horizontally to show what's going on with your entire mixer, really shouldn't have to be this difficult. This is like DAW 101 stuff.

So far this version is disappointing, because I really do like the "analog-ey sound" of MB's audio engine. It's an attractive option for me for certain projects where I want that type of vibe without having to add a bunch of analog modeling plugs to get that sound. And, I didn't break the bank to buy it. I paid $39 ( U.S.) for it. If I'd paid the going rate for most production platforms, I'd be really p i s s e d off... and not in the British sense, where that means "drunk", either... although the thought occurred to me last night that a shot ( or two) of a nice single malt would have made this a bit easier to take. LOLOL

(I'd like to hear from Kurt on this; I know he upgraded to vers 3 sometime in the past year... maybe he could shed some light... Kurt Foster )

If I do learn how to do these basic commands, I'll be sure to post them here... but for now, I'm most assuredly not someone here on RO who should be considered - or trusted to be - MixBus "literate".

FWIW,
-d

addendum...

While I have figured out a "work-around" to my original issue of not being able to switch between mixer-editing/timeline views within the program itself - this work around uses the "alt-tab" command, which brings up all the windows I have open ( but hidden) and then choosing whichever window I want to view - I think it should be made clear that this method is a Windows command - meaning, I could do this with any program in Windows ( 10) by using this alt-tab method. It's a "doable" work around, but it doesn't really address the problem of not being able to do this within the confines of Mixbus itself.

I'll likely submit a support ticket for these things mentioned - unless I figure out how to fix them on my own - but I think I'm gonna wait; I have a feeling that these are probably not going to be the only issues that I will face.
I'd rather wait until I have a list of issues/questions, as opposed to filing a support ticket for each problem individually.

-d.

i didn't do the upgrade. in fact i haven't even used it at all. i bought it when i got my new(er) laptop and then i never got it going. too much computer bullsh*t to deal with. i would love to have a nice little tape set up but then i have to ask myself why? i mean, there's nothing i would want to record happening around here and no one would pay because they all can do it themselves (or so they think) .... so what's the point? depressing. you're fortunate that there's still something to do where you live. i'm surprised that Eugene Oregon would be such a cultural wasteland. it's too white i think.

I really don't like when daws make things difficult to do basic functions like your describing d. It's my gripe w DP. I've been considering reaper as my secondary Daw lately. It's lunix compatible, and open source (not that I know anything about code) does video editing and multi channel surround higher than 7.1. You can install it on a cloud (like google drive or iCloud) and you can actually run the program on the cloud drive. Reaper is really doing a lot of stuff the expensive big names are doing.

The site says they purposely gonthru the code and keep it clean and concise.

I get your using mixbus for the sound, something reaper purposely tries not to do, but if your looking for another daw the new reaper has come leaps and bounds since I last HD it a few years ago.

kmetal Boswell pcrecord Kurt Foster ...

kmetal, post: 443613, member: 37533 wrote: I really don't like when daws make things difficult to do basic functions like your describing d. It's my gripe w DP. I've been considering reaper as my secondary Daw lately. It's lunix compatible, and open source (not that I know anything about code) does video editing and multi channel surround higher than 7.1. You can install it on a cloud (like google drive or iCloud) and you can actually run the program on the cloud drive. Reaper is really doing a lot of stuff the expensive big names are doing.

The site says they purposely go thru the code and keep it clean and concise.

I get your using mixbus for the sound, something reaper purposely tries not to do, but if your looking for another daw the new reaper has come leaps and bounds since I last HD it a few years ago.

I get that DAW manufacturers are all trying to add as many features as possible to their platforms, to compete with each other. It's the age-old approach to building a better mousetrap, and I like when they compete... BUT... not if making the platform feature-rich comes at the sacrifice of making the most basic of commands harder to do, or to find.

On that note:

DonnyThompson, post: 443587, member: 46114 wrote: So.... Another problem I've encountered, as of last night, is that I can't seem to figure out how to show more than just the first 4 buses at a time on the mixer screen.
Mixbus gives you 8 buses to work with. As of this writing, I have not yet been able to scroll horizontally to the L (or R) in the mixer window to get over far enough to the right to see those additional 4 buses.
Scrolling horizontally to show all the tracks hasn't been a problem, but I've yet to figure out how to get to those remaining 4 buses.

While I've still yet to figure out how to switch between the console view and the timeline view using any commands within the program itself (for now, the Windows alt-tab command is how I'm doing it), I have figured out how to show all 8 buses...
but, I didn't find out through the online manual, or by watching an instructional video... I just kinda "stumbled" onto it, out of pure luck and coincidence.

Here's what "fixed" it:

On the left hand side of the mixer screen, is a vertical list of all the tracks and buses in the current project. Next to these items are "check" marks, to show which tracks and buses you want ( or don't want) to be visible in the mixer view.
The remaining 4 buses were listed, but weren't "checked". I selected them, checked them, and the four buses I was previously unable to view immediately showed up on the mixer, adjacent to the first 4 buses that were visible by default..

The thing is, if the default template for MB shows the 8 allowable buses on the vertical screen... then why not just have them all set to be viewed and accessible by default? My suggestion to Harrison would be, "if you're allowing the user 8 buses, then just have them visible from the get-go. I can always right-click on buses ( or tracks) I don't want and remove them."

So...Is this a huge deal? Well, no, not really... it's not "mission critical", but it's just one of "those" little things - one of those "basic" commands - that I feel should just be set by default... or, at the very least, the instructions on how to show all tracks and buses on the mixer view should be more readily accessible.

Here's the thing... I do like MB. I like the coding of the audio engine. This is NOT a sonically 'transparent" platform, as Samplitude is, or Reaper, (so if you are looking for transparency in your DAW platform, you need to look elsewhere) ... but that's by intentional design. Harrison isn't claiming transparency with this DAW; to the contrary, they are very up-front about the fact that it's not transparent, and that its purpose is to provide that analog "vibe" of a console with sonic character. Those who use this platform - or at least most who use this platform - are doing so because it isn't transparent. It offers up the sonic texture of a console - in particular, supposedly the Harrison 32 - and I think they do this well*.

*( disclosure... I've personally never mixed on a Harrison desk - of any series - but I've mixed on plenty of other high quality analog consoles, and to this end, I think that MB accomplishes what they've set out to do. The fact that it's priced at $39 also makes it attractive. You're not breaking the bank to add this program as a mixing option to your system).

I don't believe that I would ever use this as a "main" production platform from start to finish. Samp is my go-to for that, because I've invested a lot of time and research to get familiar with that platform, and I really do like Samp...
But I also like having the option to export tracks from Samp ( or any DAW) and load them into MB to do mixes ( and remixes) for certain projects that I feel would sonically benefit from doing so. I'm not saying that I would do this with everything I work on, either. But there are a few projects here and there that calls out for the analog vibe that MB offers.

IMO
-d.

audiokid Boswell pcrecord @Brother Junk kmetal @Sean G Kurt Foster dvdhawk Davedog Smashh , et al...

Kurt Foster, post: 443598, member: 7836 wrote: i didn't do the upgrade. in fact i haven't even used it at all. i bought it when i got my new(er) laptop and then i never got it going. too much computer bullsh*t to deal with. i would love to have a nice little tape set up but then i have to ask myself why? i mean, there's nothing i would want to record happening around here and no one would pay because they all can do it themselves (or so they think) .... so what's the point? depressing. you're fortunate that there's still something to do where you live. i'm surprised that Eugene Oregon would be such a cultural wasteland. it's too white i think.

I don't want you - or anyone else here on RO - to get the impression that clients are blowing up my phone to book time, pal... because that's most certainly not happening. I get a few projects a year where I'm hired to produce, but I sure as hell ain't getting rich doing it. The days of the late 80's - and throughout the 90's - when I had sessions booked weeks ( and sometimes even months) in advance, and was producing multiple artists - often at the same time - are long gone.

I still have some clients, most of them have been clients for years - but I wouldn't be able to rely on studio work alone to make a living anymore. And, even if I dropped huge money on the best gear available, in my geographic locale ( Cleveland), there's just not enough work to justify the expense. Maybe if I was in L.A., or NYC, or Nashville... (but then again, there are a cluster-f**k number of studios - nice studios - on Music Row, all struggling to make ends meet... and these are well-equipped facilities, too).
----------------------------------------------
Side note: ya know pal, I'm not entirely sure that winning those 2 OMA's didn't actually hurt me a little - I hate talking about my awards, but I'll bring them up just this one time to underscore a point - and that is that I think it may have actually scared off some potential clients... I know for a fact that it scared one client of mine away; someone who I'd been working with for a very long time; I found out that she was working at another studio, and when I asked her why she wasn't recording with me anymore, she sheepishly told me that it was because she was sure that she wouldn't be able to afford me anymore; that she was convinced that I was going to jack-up my rates a a result of getting the awards... I had to tell her that my rates are exactly the same now as they were 10 years ago... the same rate that she had been paying all along.
---------------------------------------------
So, I've switched my tack, taken a different approach in the last few years, and that approach is that these days, it's just as important to me that I have the ability to record my own projects, as it is to record other people's projects. Actually, in that regard, I'm better off because I have more free time to do this. Back when A.I.R. Productions was running full-bore, I never had the time to do anything of my own. I was surrounded by really nice gear, nice drums, instruments and amps that were always mic'd up with nice microphones, already connected and ready to use, at a facility that I could use at any time, day or night ( I was zoned for this)... yet... I could count - on one hand - the number of times that I was able to use my studio for my own projects in a 5 year span. When I mentioned this once to a close friend of mine, she gave a great analogy for this... she said, "You're like a man standing in the middle of a pristine mountain stream yet you're dying of thirst." And she was right.

I asked myself... when did I stop being a musician, or a songwriter, or at least considering myself to be those things... and it was because that I had become so involved in helping other people realize their visions, that I ended up having sacrificed my own.

So these days, I look at time spent on my own projects as being personally fulfilling; and while that doesn't pay the rent, there's something to be said for having the ability to fulfill myself artistically, or, to work with close friends who I respect as both artists and people. I'm still getting "paid" - just not always with money. There are times I'm reminded of just how fulfilling - and fun - creating one's own art can be.

Here's the reason I mention this, Kurt... and it's in response to this:

>>"i would love to have a nice little tape set up but then i have to ask myself why? i mean, there's nothing i would want to record happening around here and no one would pay because they all can do it themselves (or so they think) .... so what's the point? " <<

How about simply for the art, and the fun of creating your own music? When did we stop being musicians, writers, artists? When did we become convinced that we couldn't be both musicians and engineers? Why have so many of us decided that we had to choose, to be one or the other? Okay, so maybe there is no money to be made in this business anymore... but you could still record your own stuff, and, have fun doing it.
After all, didn't we all pretty much get into this business as the result of wanting to record our own songs to begin with? Didn't we all pretty much start out as musicians ... long before we became engineers?

Just sayin'... ;)

-d.