The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Help understanding send FX signal chain
Old 2 weeks ago
  #1
Here for the gear
 

Help understanding send FX signal chain

Started getting into using send fx which was a game changer with workflow ease/etc.


Lets say I'm using a reverb on a send. I run pretty much everything into it.
Then I want to add a delay after the reverb on a single track.

If I add a delay send after the reverb send to an individual track does it
A. have the return of the reverb+dry track run into it
or
B. only have the dry track run into it, running parallel to the reverb send

(I'm saying "dry" track but I know the inserts are included in the send)

Different scenario-
Using a reverb send that has pretty much everything running into it.
I want to side chain compress the vocals with the vocal reverb.
is there anyway to side chain the send reverb so when the dry vocals hit the compressor it doesn't also compress the reverb for the guitar/drums/etc also running through the send?

While writing this I figured I guess what im asking is, How do I get access to the return signal for individual tracks going through a send? One thing I'm confused about is the send FX channel has an output: main/etc. If I take a track that has gone through a send and route it to a bus, is the send for that track also sent to the bus? or is the send just running output to main and avoiding the bus?

DAW is studio one 4, but I can probably figure out the specifics just need the concepts explained
Old 2 weeks ago
  #2
It's B in your questioned scenario.The sends are always parallel (I'd prefer to say independent of each other).
If a reverb return goes to a bus, is up to you and depends where you route the reverb to. Global effects shared by many instruments should better be going straight to the stereo bus. Or you setup a FX bus/group to where all your FX are routed and route that one to the stereo. Allows to you to raise, lower, mute or EQ all your FX at once.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SometimesAlways View Post
Different scenario-
Using a reverb send that has pretty much everything running into it.
I want to side chain compress the vocals with the vocal reverb.
is there anyway to side chain the send reverb so when the dry vocals hit the compressor it doesn't also compress the reverb for the guitar/drums/etc also running through the send?

While writing this I figured I guess what im asking is, How do I get access to the return signal for individual tracks going through a send? One thing I'm confused about is the send FX channel has an output: main/etc. If I take a track that has gone through a send and route it to a bus, is the send for that track also sent to the bus? or is the send just running output to main and avoiding the bus?

DAW is studio one 4, but I can probably figure out the specifics just need the concepts explained
Assuming Studio One 4 uses language the same way other DAWs do then a send is simply a sort of "copy" of the signal on a channel at a specific point in time. As you noted you have the source of the channel/audio track, and then you have your inserts, and then you have your send(s). So the send at that point will be a copy of the signal at that point.

If you now have an FX channel that receives that sent signal (the copy) then it's best to think of this as a somewhat separate path from this point. The ways almost all DAWs are made is that FX channels, AUX channels, Buses, Groups (different names) all allow for signals to be summed together. In your case you actually do not have "a reverb send that has pretty much everything running into it", what you have is a reverb FX channel that has pretty much everything sent to it, and then all of that is summed together and the reverb is applied to all of it.

Since you can't "extract" one instrument you need a different solution.

The different solution in your case is to create a separate reverb FX channel, send ONLY the vocals to it, and then you would need to send BOTH the dry vocal audio track output AND the vocal FX channel to a new Bus/group/aux where they are summed together, and you put your compressor on that Bus/group/aux and use the sidechain.

The alternative to that solution is to NOT use a separate channel for your vocal reverb, and instead use an insert for it (before the compressor).
Old 2 weeks ago
  #4
Here for the gear
 

So what I'm starting to gather is that what I want does not really exist. Is this correct?

I want to be able to have one FX channel that has my dedicated reverb on it, be able to "run tracks through it" and then get access to the individual returns for further processing on the individual tracks post FX.

FX channels only output/ give you access to all channels sent to it summed together, so -

You cannot isolate a single track's FX if multiple tracks are running into it.

I would have to create a new Send FX/or insert the reverb onto the individual track to accomplish this.



I am wrong thinking this kinda sucks? Why would I not be able to tell a computer "send everything through this but I just want this one to output here"
Just seems like the whole point of an FX send is to control the levels of reverb easily across the whole track, as well as decluttering workspace and saving cpu.
I can still accomplish what I want but it will just take up more space on the mixer and take more time.

I feel like I got it, and my problem had to do with the thought of "this has to be a feature" but it wasn't.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #5
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SometimesAlways View Post
So what I'm starting to gather is that what I want does not really exist. Is this correct?

I want to be able to have one FX channel that has my dedicated reverb on it, be able to "run tracks through it" and then get access to the individual returns for further processing on the individual tracks post FX.

FX channels only output/ give you access to all channels sent to it summed together, so -

You cannot isolate a single track's FX if multiple tracks are running into it.

I would have to create a new Send FX/or insert the reverb onto the individual track to accomplish this.
More or less 'yes'... you got the gist of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SometimesAlways View Post
I am wrong thinking this kinda sucks? Why would I not be able to tell a computer "send everything through this but I just want this one to output here"
Just seems like the whole point of an FX send is to control the levels of reverb easily across the whole track, as well as decluttering workspace and saving cpu.
I can still accomplish what I want but it will just take up more space on the mixer and take more time.

I feel like I got it, and my problem had to do with the thought of "this has to be a feature" but it wasn't.
Yes, you're kind'a wrong thinking it sucks. I understand that if your background is composing or being a musician or whatever and not an engineer it may seem like you intuitively should be able to do what you want, but physics gets in your way. It's not about a lack of features in software, it really is physics.

Pretend that you make a copy of individual ingredients on your kitchen counter, and each individual ingredient - salt, sugar, butter, ground almonds - gets tossed into a bowl where they all get mixed. You add ketchup to that mix.

- Why can't I just take out the almonds with its share of ketchup?

- Because it's been mixed together.

Physics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SometimesAlways View Post
Just seems like the whole point of an FX send is to control the levels of reverb easily across the whole track, as well as decluttering workspace and saving cpu.
It is, and you can. The output of the FX channel (NOT "send") will control the levels of reverb across all instruments whose signals were sent to the FX channel. Mission accomplished. Same with decluttering the workspace, saving cycles, and also actually allowing for some effects to process things together which sometimes yields different results sonically.

You saved space by blending it all together in one bowl.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SometimesAlways View Post
I can still accomplish what I want but it will just take up more space on the mixer and take more time.

I feel like I got it, and my problem had to do with the thought of "this has to be a feature" but it wasn't.
Yep, it'll take up more space and use a few more cycles on the CPU. It'll take a hair more time, but with experience you'll accomplish these things in no time. It really isn't a big deal.

It wasn't that long ago that you would have had to be signed to a record label because you couldn't afford to hire the studio with all the analog gear and the technicians and recording engineers required to produce your music. We've come a long way, but what you're asking for isn't really possible for physical reasons...
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SometimesAlways View Post
So what I'm starting to gather is that what I want does not really exist. Is this correct?

I want to be able to have one FX channel that has my dedicated reverb on it, be able to "run tracks through it" and then get access to the individual returns for further processing on the individual tracks post FX.

FX channels only output/ give you access to all channels sent to it summed together, so -

You cannot isolate a single track's FX if multiple tracks are running into it.

I would have to create a new Send FX/or insert the reverb onto the individual track to accomplish this.



I am wrong thinking this kinda sucks? Why would I not be able to tell a computer "send everything through this but I just want this one to output here"
Just seems like the whole point of an FX send is to control the levels of reverb easily across the whole track, as well as decluttering workspace and saving cpu.
I can still accomplish what I want but it will just take up more space on the mixer and take more time.

I feel like I got it, and my problem had to do with the thought of "this has to be a feature" but it wasn't.
Combining data in effects busses is the same as combining tracks in analog busses. Once combined you cant magically split them apart into their own track afterwards.

Even though you're dealing with digital and state of the art programs and effects these DAW programs are pretty much designed to work like their analog counterparts. Understand one and your pretty much understand the other.

For your solution, you simply have to do things differently. If you want to be able to have separate tracks after reverb, you have to use multiple instances of reverb on tracks or busses then rout those to an echo. Once you combine to busses that it, game over, the signal is going to be the sum of the inputs.

There's still a lot of flexibility however. you can use effects on tracks, use them on busses, run one buss into another buss, into another buss, etc. It really comes down to knowing how the tools work then using your imagination trying things out. Over time you'll gain first hand experience and know what works and what winds up being a train wreak.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump