Being a vMix newbie I am still wondering how those of you that use vMix's audio mixer manage it during live production. Things like that the mixer uses a lot of screen estate, and is cumbersome to control levels while mixing video...

Those of you who call for more "submix outputs" - do you mean separate buses (ie to which one or more inputs can be fed) or simply a way to get the input's audio routed to a separate sound output device (eg a USB output)?
Compare my feature request for Selectable audio routing for inputs modules

I think you may need to start a new thread to discuss this further.
My understanding is VB has no internal audio mixing and requires an external audio mixer for everything.
If you would like to use vMix in the same way, you can do so using the advanced setup described below:

http://www.vmix.com.au/help12/RecordingAudio.html

Some posts from the vMix 13 thread added here for further discussion!

See the Advanced setup here:

http://www.vmix.com.au/help12/RecordingAudio.html

This is how you can run all audio through an external audio mixer and go crazy!

The diagram is a starting point, you can use any audio mixer you like and plug in as many inputs as necessary.

All vMix needs is an output from the mixer and one input channel to feed in video audio.

Hi Peter,

Ok then, just to confirm you want to send out individual video clips audio separately to an audio mixer?
If so, from my understanding that is only a very new development in VB. The advanced setup I talked about
is the standard setup they have been recommending for years.

In any case, I am trying to understand the benefit of sending video clips separately to the audio mixer?
Would it not be better to have them all going to a single audio channel in the mixer, rather than have the audio mixer operator
hunt through every channel for the current clip that needs to be playing?

To be clear, only video clips audio is what needs to be sent to the speaker output, all other types of audio can usually
be sent to the mixer directly.

P.S By the way this is how it works with most Tricaster installations including StudioTech. All internal audio sources on the Tricaster
are output over a single channel to the mixer.

Regards,

Martin
vMix

Sorry for not coming back here until now, but I have been unusually busy (good for business ;)

Generally I agree with Peter's comments, including that one regarding being constructive here and support the development of vMix as an already wonderful application!

One of the advantages with vMix is the in-built audio mixer. I am not the only one who have asked for the possibility to mix audio in VidBlaster (VB). As already noticed here, VB is designed to be used with an external mixer. But in some situations a very basic audio mixer is sufficient, eliminating the need of extra hardware. Imagine a ENG situation, with vMix it's super easy to mix audio from the camera with an external USB mike! But that type of relatively simple productions is not what we are discussing here.


Interesting. I have learned, the hard way, that an external mixer is generally the best way of managing the audio. For many reasons, let me come back to those.

Meanwhile, I did re-visit the Teradek NAB 2014 nstudio tour (again congrats Martin!). Look, there is an external audio mixer at http://youtu.be/OpYrOgYPHHk?t=5m46s. And I would be very surprised if no one touched it's sliders after the show started. I've stared until my eyes started to bleed at around 4m18sec in order to understand how audio was setup in vMix at NAB. That's why I began this topic with a question - how do you do it??? Because, maybe I missed something...

VB have for a long time had a feature where you for some modules (eg a video player) could define to which audio device the audio should be sent. As Peter points out, this is really nice as it allows you to channel that device to it's own input on an external mixer. Around a year ago the audio part in VB was redesigned (still demanding an external mixer). Among the new features for many modules (eg recorder and streamer) was the option to specify which audio device should be used as input. VB also support multiple streamers, which means one could stream to one channel with regular audio, and another with audio descriptions added (or one with Australian and the other with English ;).


Absolutely, assuming that you only play one clip at a time. But with a little bit of crazy thinking, a whole new world opens up! (hang on, explained below)


My bad, when not sufficiently motivating the second request in "Selectable audio routing for input modules". I just briefly mentioned "Video, FLASH/RTMP, and Streams".

Video clips are of course obvious. It might be far fetched to imagine two video inputs for which each has a separate audio route to an external mixer. But if possible, I think it might result in some interesting use. Flash is perhaps not the audio engineers favorite tool, but can contain audio. The possibility to separately manage audio output from different stream's inputs is even more interesting. Think of a Big brother like production, with multiple inputs coming over IP, where the audio mix is as important as the visual mix. In sum, being able to separately route audio out from all input types (that can contain audio) would mean everything from extremely useful to a creative spring board.

So, when using an external audio mixer, it's output needs to go back into vMix (or any PC based tool). Is that a problem? Yes, many...

To begin with, one of the biggest problem we have is ground loops. Hooking up a PC to a professional audio mixer in a public venue seems to always imply ground loops. Even worse, the noise is sometimes introduced in the last mile, that is, between the mixer's main out and the PC's input (eg Line in). That means, if you listen to the mixer's headphone output, you are clueless. If you can't hear what actually is going to be recorded, then you need to make a sample recording and listen to that recording. And that does not help if a new ground loop is introduced when a new camera, or some audio equipment, is added during a live production. Therefore, it is critical to be able to actually monitor what is being recorded/streamed. Both with ears and eyes. (The latter was possible in VidBlaster, before v3 and it's new audio design).

Explained differently. Why are there audio level monitors in vMix? Because they are a useful indiciation of that there is audio there (or not). But why are there only monitors showing what is coming in, when all external monitors also have output level monitors? Perhaps by a limitation in Windows?

We have also found it most important to being able to adjust the audio we get from a venue's house audio mixer. Both those that are operated by an audio engineer, and those that are automatically mixed (including low cut and compressed). This adjustment is typically needed frequently, immediately and in unexpected situations. Therefore we always connect via our own external audio mixer, as it's knob/slider is faster to operate than a mouse. Forthermore, this allows for simultaneous audio/video mix operation.

Peter has already pointed out that you typically need to monitor (hear) the audio before it is delayed. (One of the possible exceptions might be streamed inputs). Therefore, if it was possible to hear what is being recorded/streamed, then the audio delay should be introduced after the monitor signal.


On a side note. I am talking about audio routing. Other forum members have asked for more advanced audio mixing/processing capabilites inside vMix. My personal view is to keep vMix audio mixing/processing to a minimum. Delay, gain, and compression is already available and sufficient. The only one more thing that I consider being worth spending limited development time/resources on is low cut. But of course, if it was possible to use the output from a MultiTrack Recording software application (MTR, like ProTools, Cubase, etc) as an input to vMix - whow!!!! (given that vMix could route it's audio from input modules to the MTR's inputs ;)

Hi Richard and Peter,

Would it be possible for you guys to separately put together a simple schematic diagram of an audio setup you would be most comfortable working with.
Based on this I can then look at how to best implement it into a future version of vMix (not 13 obviously!)

In vMix 13 you will have the ability to route two stereo outputs, one for the main mix the other for headphones solo feature.
So you could solo a particular input you want to send to a separate channel as something to get started with.

So this could be expanded in the future to do matrix grouping, say up to 6 stereo channels with the ability to define
from the vMix audio mixer, which channel or multiple channels to send that group to.

The most interesting application to me is the ability to do mix minuses internally, but it would also allow for the setup Peter has described.

As for the Teradek NAB show setup, it was really quite simple, I think in a lot of cases there is the thinking
that things need to be far more complicated than they need to be.
Click Here for a diagram.

Regards,
Martin
vMix

Hello,


Not the main issue discussed here but speaking of the "real estate" the vMix audio mixer is taking I have some suggestions to improve it:

a) Having the audio items collapsible just like the main modules
For example we do not use the internal mic of the cameras in the live production.
Yet we keep the audio available as a back-up solution in case there are problems with the sound provided by the venue system. This saved us a couple of times.
So, while we do not use them, we prefer to keep them available but collapsed.

Also, it is the case for several video clips that we use.

b) Having the ability to re-arrange the order of the audio items

Right now they follow the order of the main input modules but there is not the same rank of importance for video inputs and audio inputs.
For example, we have an USB audio input from the hardware mixer. We have to position it before the camera inputs in order to have the audio item shown upper in the audio mixer on the right.

c) Of course, the need for preset to memorize those settings in the the audio mixer is even stronger in the a) and b) customization


P.S. The audio monitoring setting is gold for us as we use an external mixer with usb input ( and usb to phones button ) . Thank you!

I think that the audio routing and workflow would benefit from a minimalist approach. I think it may be unrealistic to try to make a program like vMix function as an all encompassing audio routing and switching software. When you get to the point of needing to do multiple aux feeds and routing setups, a more fitting audio solution should probably be found.

Being an audio engineer at the core, there is a reason that companies like Avid, Audinate, DigiCo, Ect, have very expensive solutions for live broadcast applications, both in monitoring and in processing/routing.

Depending on the features, adding more depth of control to the audio inside vMix may be the wrong solution for the applications where these features are being requested. Like Martin said, it would be nice to see a flowchart of what some of you guys are mentioning.



That is the exact setup that our church is running. We are running 24-30 track into the Behringer X32 mixer for our FOH mix as well as monitoring for musicians. We then send all audio tracks raw live into a Pro Tools session on Computer 1 over USB2. This allows us to have a separate mix for broadcast. By sending all of our audio tracks into Pro Tools, we are able to process all the audio tracks using high end Waves plugins.

From there we send the final L/R mix back over USB to the X32. From there, we send this final 2 Track over the AES/EBU output of the X32 into an UltraMatch Pro SRC2496 which converts the AES into SPDIF and then is sent to our streaming computer's audio card.

This is one example where you can use a DAW for audio mixing. With the available number of digital consoles that are supporting Dante, the possibilities are becoming endless. The X32 now supports a Dante card which would make the board that much more broadcast friendly.