Login / Register
 
Five Tracks SIMULTANEOUSLY to ONE AUX - Help?
New Reply
Subscribe
Eternal_One
Thread Starter
#1
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #1
Gear addict
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 459

Thread Starter
Eternal_One is offline
Five Tracks SIMULTANEOUSLY to ONE AUX - Help?

5 vocal tracks.

Want them all to go to the same AUX, Bus 1-2, let's say reverb.

I DO NOT want to put Bus 1-2 on all 5 vocal track's channel strips.

I want to put the AUX, Bus 1-2, on only one of the vocal's channel strips and have it effect all 5 vocal tracks.

How do I do this, do I group all 5 vocal tracks? If so, what comes next?

Thanks
#2
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #2
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 11,680

narcoman is offline
You have to put it on all 5 or buss all 5 to one and put one send on that buss channel
#3
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #3
Gear maniac
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 260

JEK3 is offline
It depends a little on the software you are using, but normally you should set up an FX channel and use the sends of each vocal channel to route the signal to the FX channel. That way you can individually set up the amount of reverb for each vocal track.
I hope I understood correctly what you are trying to achieve.
#4
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,168

mattiasnyc is online now
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal_One View Post
5 vocal tracks.

Want them all to go to the same AUX, Bus 1-2, let's say reverb.

I DO NOT want to put Bus 1-2 on all 5 vocal track's channel strips.

I want to put the AUX, Bus 1-2, on only one of the vocal's channel strips and have it effect all 5 vocal tracks.

How do I do this, do I group all 5 vocal tracks? If so, what comes next?

Thanks
I think you're using terminology a bit "strangely" (I'm talking Pro Tools now). If I'm off here then someone please correct me.

The AUX is a track on which no audio region exists. It normally has an input and an output, as well as inserts and sends.

The BUS is what transport audio to/from AUDIO TRACKS and AUXES.

So you wouldn't put an AUX "on" an audio track. You would send a signal TO an AUX from audio tracks or other auxes, and you could do so by setting the output of the audio tracks/auxes to an AUX, or by using the send.

So like someone said earlier, it sounds like what you need to do is create an AUX track and put a reverb on an insert (instantiate the reverb). On this AUX you set the input to "Bus 1-2". Then on the individual vocal audio tracks you use the send and send a signal to "Bus 1-2".

Now all your vocal tracks send a copy of their signal to the AUX and through the reverb. You can change the amount of reverb individually for each vocal audio track by adjusting its send level. And you can change the overall reverb level by adjusting the level on the AUX.
#5
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #5
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 602

samsam is online now
Depends on your software. Caps don't help.
#6
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #6
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,168

mattiasnyc is online now
Quote:
Originally Posted by samsam View Post
Depends on your software. Caps don't help.
Caps always helps. Not as much as the above, but still.
Eternal_One
Thread Starter
#7
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #7
Gear addict
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 459

Thread Starter
Eternal_One is offline
Should have stated Pro Tools.

Make an AUX track for reverb, right? Then assign it as Bus 1-2.

Now my 5 vocal tracks all need this reverb.

I can put Bus 1-2 on the first vocal track and then drag/copy down Bus 1-2 to the other 4 vocal tracks, but this is what I'm trying NOT to do. I want to put Bus 1-2 on one vocal track and have it effect all the tracks at once. That's why I was assuming you'd have to group the 5 vocal tracks but even so, it seems what I'm trying to do is not possible in PT.

Is my only option putting Bus 1-2 on each of the 5 vocal tracks respectively (one by one), as narcoman stated above?
#8
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #8
Gear maniac
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Location: Utah
Posts: 182

dcwave is offline
Your explanation is hard to follow. If I understand what you want to do:

Create an AUX channel. Call it VOX All Set it's input to Bus 1/2
Create an Aux channel. Call it Verb, set it's input to Bus 3/4
Set the output of the 5 vocal channels to Bus 1/2
Create a send on the Vox All channel to Bus 3/4 and now you have all 5 vocal channels being sent to the verb at once.

Did I understand what you want to do?
#9
29th December 2012
Old 29th December 2012
  #9
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,168

mattiasnyc is online now
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal_One View Post
I can put Bus 1-2 on the first vocal track
I think people are confused because you're not using the terminology in a way that makes sense. You don't put a bus "on" a track. A bus is something you use to transport a signal from/to somewhere.

You have a couple of options. If you do what dcwave just wrote then you can control the level of all five vocals at the same time, as well as the reverb level all vocals get (either by adjusting the send or by adjusting the reverb output). The drawback with this approach is that you can't adjust the level of reverb of the vocals individually. Why would you want to? Well, maybe you want one singer to sound more present and the others to sound like they're "behind" that "front" singer.

If you send from each track you have the option of doing that in addition with adjusting all vocal levels on the AUX that has the reverb on it.

Again, you should go through how the terminology is used because you'll get more accurate and relevant replies if you express what you want to do more clearly.
Eternal_One
Thread Starter
#10
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #10
Gear addict
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 459

Thread Starter
Eternal_One is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by isawsasquatch View Post
Why not?
Because if I have anywhere from 10-15 vocal tracks that need Bus 1-2, to have to copy the Bus to every channel is annoying and time consuming. Plus it's probably using more CPU. Why not group all of them, send Bus 1-2 to one of the tracks which tells Pro Tools that all these vocal tracks are now effected by Bus 1-2...
#11
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #11
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 23

On Axis is offline
If you have a Reverb Aux with inputs being buss 1-2, have the effect at 100% mix, and when you bring in a new vocal channel, add a send to buss 1-2.

If you already have the 30 vocal tracks and want to assign a send to all of them all at once, highlight all the vocal tracks channel names, and while holding shift and option, put a send on one of the selected channels. Presto, all the vocals have a send on them. Make sure you select a send input that does not already have another send on it as the old one will get blown over.
Eternal_One
Thread Starter
#12
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #12
Gear addict
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 459

Thread Starter
Eternal_One is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcwave View Post
Your explanation is hard to follow. If I understand what you want to do:

Create an AUX channel. Call it VOX All Set it's input to Bus 1/2
Create an Aux channel. Call it Verb, set it's input to Bus 3/4
Set the output of the 5 vocal channels to Bus 1/2
Create a send on the Vox All channel to Bus 3/4 and now you have all 5 vocal channels being sent to the verb at once.

Did I understand what you want to do?
Yes, you certainly did.

So just to reiterate:

1- Send all 5 vocal tracks to an AUX called "Vox All", set its input to Bus 1-2 and ALSO set the output of all 5 vocal tracks to Bus 1-2

2- Create an additional AUX called "Verb", set this ones input to Bus 3-4

3- Send the "Vox All" AUX to Bus 3-4

Now all 5 vocal tracks where have their inputs as "Vox All" are being ran through "Verb", therefore allowing the "Verb"s fader to be the master control for all 5 vocal tracks simultaneously.

YES!
Eternal_One
Thread Starter
#13
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #13
Gear addict
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 459

Thread Starter
Eternal_One is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
I think people are confused because you're not using the terminology in a way that makes sense. You don't put a bus "on" a track. A bus is something you use to transport a signal from/to somewhere.

You have a couple of options. If you do what dcwave just wrote then you can control the level of all five vocals at the same time, as well as the reverb level all vocals get (either by adjusting the send or by adjusting the reverb output). The drawback with this approach is that you can't adjust the level of reverb of the vocals individually. Why would you want to? Well, maybe you want one singer to sound more present and the others to sound like they're "behind" that "front" singer.

If you send from each track you have the option of doing that in addition with adjusting all vocal levels on the AUX that has the reverb on it.

Again, you should go through how the terminology is used because you'll get more accurate and relevant replies if you express what you want to do more clearly.
Thanks for input. I likve dcwave's way, I think that is the solution I was looking for. Apologies for the terminology, I'm used to just "putting" Bus 1-2 on a vocal track when it's really sending/transporting.

Yes, I understand that by using dcwave's way, all 5 vocal tracks will be effected as a whole, that is what I was looking for, REALLY in terms for equalization... just happened to used reverb as an example.
#14
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #14
Lives for gear
 
sardi's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,405

sardi is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal_One View Post
Because if I have anywhere from 10-15 vocal tracks that need Bus 1-2, to have to copy the Bus to every channel is annoying and time consuming.
Not trying to be rude, but in the time it took to create this thread and the subsequent 15 hours that have passed, you could have copied the routing a thousand times over.

Quote:
Plus it's probably using more CPU.
No it's not. Sends don't use more resources. You still only have the same amount of plugins active.

Quote:
Why not group all of them, send Bus 1-2 to one of the tracks which tells Pro Tools that all these vocal tracks are now effected by Bus 1-2...
Route all the outputs of your vocal tracks to Bus 1-2. Create an Aux track and change it's input to Bus 1-2. Create a send from that track and feed it to Bus 3-4. Create an Aux track and change it's input to Bus 3-4. Insert desired effect on this Aux track. Adjust the send from the first Aux track (vocal buss) for how much you want to send to the second Aux track (FX buss).
__________________
Available & forthcoming releases:

http://www.myspace.com/sardisonics
#15
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #15
Lives for gear
 
sardi's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,405

sardi is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcwave View Post
Your explanation is hard to follow. If I understand what you want to do:

Create an AUX channel. Call it VOX All Set it's input to Bus 1/2
Create an Aux channel. Call it Verb, set it's input to Bus 3/4
Set the output of the 5 vocal channels to Bus 1/2
Create a send on the Vox All channel to Bus 3/4 and now you have all 5 vocal channels being sent to the verb at once.

Did I understand what you want to do?
Whoops. I just said the same thing dcwave did.

But yeah, this is the quickest way, but you won't have individual wet/dry control for each vocal track as you have sent them to the FX as a single source.

Last edited by sardi; 30th December 2012 at 03:31 AM.. Reason: Predictive text on iDevices sux...
Eternal_One
Thread Starter
#16
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #16
Gear addict
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 459

Thread Starter
Eternal_One is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by On Axis View Post
If you already have the 30 vocal tracks and want to assign a send to all of them all at once, highlight all the vocal tracks channel names, and while holding shift and option, put a send on one of the selected channels. Presto, all the vocals have a send on them. Make sure you select a send input that does not already have another send on it as the old one will get blown over.
This is a cool option as well, thanks for the response.

However, in a case where you do have 30 vocal tracks, if you put a send on all of them, doesn't that use up (much) more CPU? Which is the point of my whole thread... If I had 30 vocal takes and wanted them ALL to have the same EQ with the same exact settings, I could theoretically highlight all 30 vocal tracks hold down shift+option and put the send on each track.

But why do this when you can simplify it by routing all the 30 tracks as a whole as dcwave has explained.

Does this make sense or am I overcomplicating it? I just feel it saves CPU power so your session won't run slower for having 30 sends on 30 tracks.
Eternal_One
Thread Starter
#17
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #17
Gear addict
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 459

Thread Starter
Eternal_One is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by sardi View Post
No it's not. Sends don't use more resources. You still only have the same amount of plugins active.
Ahh okay, my assumption was that it's using more CPU power because you have x amount of sends on x amount of tracks.

Thank you for all your input. It's confusing to envision all of the routing but it does make sense and I am looking forward to trying it tonight.
#18
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #18
Lives for gear
 
sardi's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,405

sardi is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal_One View Post
Ahh okay, my assumption was that it's using more CPU power because you have x amount of sends on x amount of tracks.

Thank you for all your input. It's confusing to envision all of the routing but it does make sense and I am looking forward to trying it tonight.
If you were instantiating the same EQ/Reverb/Delay etc. on every track, then it would use more CPU.

What you are doing is sending multiple tracks to one EQ/Reverb/Delay etc. Sending won't utilise more CPU. Well, none that you will ever notice.

TBH, unless you need individual wet/dry control on each vocal track, sending them to a buss and using that to send to your FX is a cleaner and more organised way of doing it. Less things to stay on top of.
#19
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #19
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 23

On Axis is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal_One View Post
This is a cool option as well, thanks for the response.

However, in a case where you do have 30 vocal tracks, if you put a send on all of them, doesn't that use up (much) more CPU? Which is the point of my whole thread... If I had 30 vocal takes and wanted them ALL to have the same EQ with the same exact settings, I could theoretically highlight all 30 vocal tracks hold down shift+option and put the send on each track.

But why do this when you can simplify it by routing all the 30 tracks as a whole as dcwave has explained.

Does this make sense or am I overcomplicating it? I just feel it saves CPU power so your session won't run slower for having 30 sends on 30 tracks.
Your way does help if you want the same exact effect on all the vocals with the same amount of verb. I've done that for R-n-B super stacked vocals for instance.

It might save a little CPU power, but unless you're running an old machine, I don't think it would be significant.
Eternal_One
Thread Starter
#20
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #20
Gear addict
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 459

Thread Starter
Eternal_One is offline
Duly noted, thank you for input everyone.
#21
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #21
Lives for gear
 
Bender412's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,019
My Recordings/Credits

Bender412 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal_One View Post
Ahh okay, my assumption was that it's using more CPU power because you have x amount of sends on x amount of tracks...
You're confusing inserts with sends. Inserts on a track are processing audio, so they use additional processing resources. Sends use virtually no resources, since they are only used for routing.

Regarding this thread (and some of your previous ones), you should really start to get familiar with the fundamentals of routing and subgrouping. It is very helpful to organize your tracks in a logical and efficient way, and this is the way good engineers have always done it.

Post #2 should have been the end of the thread
#22
31st December 2012
Old 31st December 2012
  #22
Lives for gear
 
Bender412's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,019
My Recordings/Credits

Bender412 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by isawsasquatch View Post
Creating sends on a PTHD rig does indeed use resources, though if I'm not mistaken, it's only a toll on the voice count, not the CPU.
On my system (PTHD8), adding a send doesn't add anything in the way of CPU, voice count, TDM slots, or TDM processors.
#23
31st December 2012
Old 31st December 2012
  #23
Lives for gear
 
Bender412's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,019
My Recordings/Credits

Bender412 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by isawsasquatch View Post
Huh. Shows what I know.

So, in the middle of a busy mix, you've never tried to create a send, only to have it grayed-out, and informed that you don't have enough voices? Cuz that happens to me all the time.

Or maybe it says I don't have enough dsp. I dunno. It's quite early here in the forests of Bluff Creek.

What were we talking about again?

I'm scared.
Ok let me retract my last post.. I just tried adding 6 sends at once, and it DID take a small chunk out of my TDM processors (really small). But definitely no voices used. Are you on HD? If not, then I would imagine it would use some DSP, but certainly nowhere near as much as an insert, which is the distinction I was trying to make to the OP.

Where is Psycho Monkey when you need him lol!
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
jeronimo / So much gear, so little time!
16
Reggie Love / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
1
Neruk / Rap + Hip Hop engineering & production
1
rinaldomerlo / High end
2
cleantone / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
1

Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.