alexkyrlis wroteThere are no grouping options. If I group a number of channels, everything I do affects all channels.

I don't come from the Pro Tools world, but I thought that was the point of grouping channels.

To make a change on a single Channel, [ temporarily bypass the grouping] hold down the ALT key on PC. I think that translates to option key on a Mac

Can you put your specs in your signature. It really helps us with troubleshooting. You may be on a Mac. It seems from your post that I did some checking and grouping does not seem to be working very well at all on a Mac. It certainly works on Windows. On Windows there are the options that are available. On Mac I cannot seem to get even basic grouping options to work. Can some other Mac users confirm before I report this as a bug.

I had seen the same behavior with groups not a bug just a limitation of Studio One 4 I confirmed it with the documentation. In Protools your can not only create a group but select/deselect from a list of groups. This includes for instance having an ALL group that would include tracks from the entire project incluing other groups. It's just a much more robust feature in Protools not a bug in the Mac version of S1.

Link groups in Cubase also is more developed with checkboxes exactly what parts you want grouped.
If chosing VCA-faders this is reduced to a couple fixed ones, though.

I most often use it like selection groups only - handy for having a spread of clips over a track like background vocals or similar.

Sonar is even more developed - you can insert rules like one pan is reverse another etc. Very sofisticated approach. How scale grouping on dB or absolute values and similar.

As I recall Reaper also has more options like Sonar.

So if there are known feature requests for StudioOne on these things - please provide a link for us to vote.

Hello,

No, this is not a bug. Simply a missing feature.

couldn't find a similar request, so I created it:

https://answers.presonus.com/37358/grouping-options

Thanks
Alex

This is one fr that covers some useful stuff
https://answers.presonus.com/10916/grou ... 916#q10916

I just voted for both FR's, Group, and the Group clutch matrix as provided above.

I also came from PT (and others including Cubase, Nuendo), and this is a necessary feature.

Scaling dB, phase polarity, and items such as FX sends could be adjusted / viewable within such a matrix.

Jemusic wrote [...] It certainly works on Windows. [...]

Jemusic, does this still hold true?

Groups are just as limited on Windows as the Mac so to answer your question no it's not True

ennbr wrote[...]so to answer your question no it's not True

Which leads me to my point: so why say what isn't true? (not you, of course).

Hopefully not just to offset a negative post about S1 — to counter bad publicity. But I find that someone is usually quick to counter a negative post as though to do damage control. Hope it's just my imagination / conspiratorial mindset. [You know, like that Presonus hides little cameras in your faderport to see how much porn you watch each day...]

But let's face it, many DAWs have had excellent grouping capabilities for years. Most of us "mature" folks know this because we've used a lot of different software over the years. And yeah, there's no reason why S1 is lagging behind on this issue, given that it's not some groundbreaking new idea. And moreover, it's a useful feature.

Just doing my duty.

I'm not looking for an argument or being critical about anything especially S1 you asked a question I provided an answer. I'm well aware that S1 will mature in it's own time. I'm a retired software engineer and know the process well with 40 years of experience.

Guys,

Studio one has such fantastic grounds, any feature that we are missing, I’m pretty sure will be added. And they are not many.

Alex

alexkyrlis wroteGuys,

Studio one has such fantastic grounds, any feature that we are missing, I’m pretty sure will be added. And they are not many.

Alex

Developers, at least some, came from Steinberg doing Cubase - so they know what they are doing.

And seems to me incredible improvements and are low on resources and very light on system. Feels like I upgraded computer, kind of.

Only Reaper compete on resource usage, if not doing video.
If doing video, StudioOne wins by far - you don't even know video is there - that's job well done, I think.

If going by workflow - StudioOne wins easy as well. I've done almost a project all through now - and it's a bliss.

Very pleased with S1 4.1.x

It's okay to speak out and say when the Emperor is not wearing any clothes.
Not just in these forums, either...

Roland1 wrote: many DAWs have had excellent grouping capabilities for years. Most of us "mature" folks know this because we've used a lot of different software over the years. And yeah, there's no reason why S1 is lagging behind on this issue, given that it's not some groundbreaking new idea. And moreover, it's a useful feature.

We certainly want the same thing. What seems to be a constant in this DAW's growth is while Studio One does a lot of things fairly well, there's no push to catch up with features from other DAW's that almost can't wait to cover new features or added options. Acquiring non ground breaking options have little to do with anything, given Studio One's history thus far. As much as we legitimately want those "missing" features added. I have a few head scratchers, believe me. Only, I've given up on expecting anything. Truly.

Example, the mixer has had little growth, other than the VCA faders and the overall design isn't far from v1! Sure there's color (very. 3.0), but that was an overall and sorely needed enhancement. So if users asked for things like skins, varied docking options, snapshots, channel and track icons, channel notes, a movable Master channel, all of which are in most other DAW's, well for better or worse it hasnt happened in S1. I wouldn't have to convince most of you, that an FR for such inherently basic things hasn't been asked for in droves in either a discussion, or a concerted effort by submitting as a feature request. So the idea of it will just happen because A) the other DAW's do it, or B) they know what they're doing here, or C) it just makes sense to add these items, is all ideal in our own way of finger painting what we just want (nothing wrong with that, btw). The wall if you will is the technical side of change (allowance within the language, structure of programming, capabilities, trade-off's, etc.), and the Philosophy of Presonus, where they want to position the DAW to varied end users (home, small Studio, education, and a growing film producing market).

So I'd say, stay optimistic, keep the great ideas coming, because those suggestions just might resonate, and shape themselves further as we are doing here.

Given past experience around this DAW, there seems to be a less is more, or at the very least elegant philosophy, so huge menu driven, over laiden options just aren't going to happen. Take the colorize panel as an example. It's painfully basic, and the colored swatches perhaps even more painfully limited. However, the groups idea here, within a grid could be something that would be very streamlined, and give information quickly, and change at a glance. So I think this discussion has merit. :thumbup

Until then, we use S1 for the good it delivers on, which is pretty nice. Especially with ARA integration. :

Studio One's channel grouping is really basic. No clue why anyone would suggest otherwise.

Having said that... "things come as they come". There's always something still left to do and there's always a push and pull with different users about what should have already been done or not and what should take priority or not and those opinions tend to vary.

But yes, more advanced track/channel grouping would be nice.

What's been adressed here is pretty basic as to what's needed, respectfully. Definately, some coming from PT, Performer, Sonar, Logic, Cubase and what not will miss some feature set they were used to, or have asked for. The group ideal here is understood. Let's see what blossoms. Good subject matter.


The FR links for some general group enhancements are in this thread for any interested. Two currently.

Let's keep the groups enhancement dialogue going.

Yep. FR's for better grouping are pretty old in Answers. One of the issues with some of those FR's is that some users don't search or read there first so there are duplicate requests all over the place so the votes get all split up and it never rises up..

Here's one from 2016: https://answers.presonus.com/12765/more ... 765#q12765 and even that one from Dec 2016 was a duplicate... https://answers.presonus.com/10916/grou ... bal-clutch

And you'll probably also find requests for it that pre-date the Answers website in the old forum archives and in the closed FR forum here.

All we can do is wait and see what happens down the road.