Skip to content

fix(editor): soloing a transcription track isolates it — one solo rule across both bands#351

Merged
ChrisBeWithYou merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
fix/solo-isolates-across-bands
Jul 22, 2026
Merged

fix(editor): soloing a transcription track isolates it — one solo rule across both bands#351
ChrisBeWithYou merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
fix/solo-isolates-across-bands

Conversation

@ChrisBeWithYou

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What

Soloing a transcription track now actually isolates it: the Master Mix (and any other unsoloed audio track) goes silent, the same way stems already did under #348's rule. Solo means isolate, everywhere.

Dogfood report (Christian): solo a transcription track → the audio band ignores it and the full-mix recording keeps playing over the part you tried to isolate.

Why the carve-out goes

#348 made the master join the solo rule within the audio band but deliberately kept it immune to transcription-part solos (the D5 "reference stays audible while charting" reading). In practice that reading is wrong-way-round: when you solo a part you're asking to hear that part alone — the recording bleeding over it defeats the gesture entirely, and the mixer looks broken ("I soloed this, why is the song still playing?"). The workflow D5 protected still exists, now as an explicit gesture: solo the master alongside the part to keep the recording as your reference. Mute still always wins.

The mechanics reduce to one whole-map rule — _mixerPartAudiblePure loses the 'audio:master' special case, and _mixerAnyAudioSoloPure (whose only job was scoping that carve-out) is removed. Every playback path already reads this rule through host.partStripState / applyStemMix, so no engine changes.

Changes

  • src/mixer-panel.js — drop the audio:master carve-out; remove _mixerAnyAudioSoloPure; comments describe the one-rule model
  • src/audio.js, src/host.js, src/track-session.js — comment-only: stale D5 references rewritten
  • tests/mixer_panel.test.mjs — the pinned rule test now asserts both directions: a part solo silences the master and the stems; master's solo silences unsoloed parts; part+master both soloed → both sound (the new reference recipe); mute-wins and malformed-map safety kept
  • tests/stem_engine.test.mjs — the live partStripState hook test flips its D5 assertion (part solo → master audible: false)
  • docs/USER-GUIDE.md — mixer bullet rewritten ("Solo means isolate…")
  • CHANGELOG.md — new [Unreleased] Fixed entry (the fix(editor): soloing an audio track actually isolates it (master joins the audio-band solo rule) #348 entry is left as history)

Tests

  • npm test: 308 pass, 2 fail — the two failures are mixer_meter_teardown and song_fit, both already failing on main (pre-existing, unrelated)
  • npm run lint: 0 errors (3 pre-existing warn-ratchet warnings in untouched files)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_0178CGdtptemWd4tUbjkYDhH

…e across both bands

Soloing a transcription part left the Master Mix (and the song) playing
over it: _mixerPartAudiblePure's 'audio:master' carve-out scoped the
master's solo gate to audio-band solos only. Solo now means isolate
everywhere — any solo silences every unsoloed strip, master included,
exactly as the stems already behaved. Keep the recording as a reference
by soloing the master alongside the part; mute still always wins.

Removes the now-unused _mixerAnyAudioSoloPure, updates the pinned
mixer/stem-engine suites both directions (part solo gates master, master
solo gates parts), and rewrites the User Guide mixer bullet.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0178CGdtptemWd4tUbjkYDhH
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

@ChrisBeWithYou, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 24 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 1e9b3ed8-9fd5-45c6-afeb-77f1c2339a87

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between ba4f924 and 1549c17.

📒 Files selected for processing (8)
  • CHANGELOG.md
  • docs/USER-GUIDE.md
  • src/audio.js
  • src/host.js
  • src/mixer-panel.js
  • src/track-session.js
  • tests/mixer_panel.test.mjs
  • tests/stem_engine.test.mjs
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch fix/solo-isolates-across-bands

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@ChrisBeWithYou
ChrisBeWithYou merged commit ee7f95e into main Jul 22, 2026
4 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant