I often want to affect the sent signal to an fx etc
From what I know, I either dup the track or if there are more than 1 send from a track that eg sidechains etc, then I create group channels and send to them or direct route.
Ideally, there would be pre/post insert sends on a channel and each of those could have inserts but at the very least a choice of processed or unprocessed would make the workflow a lot more elegant imo
So
Im having a discussion with someone who says that there is now the possibility to add fx to the sends of a channel in V14…is this correct?
I can do it in another DAW but its not friendly however can become a preset when set up
Could someone please confirm? THere is practically nothing in upgrading to v14 for me personally…even modulators etc are just candy as PLZ midi and other utilities already do a lot and if tis a performance thing, I simply use Ableton and move it to Cubase for the mix.
Thats what I thought…a well known Cubase YTer is saying that you can now do this in 14 and no one else had mentioned it…hence me asking.
Thats a type though? You mean always post insert yeah?
I have always used Ableton as a live performance DAW. I have programmed control surface python for Chinese OEM so I had to get to know it pretty well. It really suits me when jamming with peeps and spontaneous stuff but its pretty hacky with mixing and doesnt support surround natively
I have been slowly working out how to do the stuff I need in reaper but its not easy…the UI is just very clunky…if someone, anyone would just start adding flowcharts would be very helpful.
Once you know…all of this type of routing is pretty basic.
Thanks for the heads up…
This is from Dom RE the ability to add inserts to sends
yes Cubase 14 introduced modulators which include an envelope follower which allows you to trigger anything using the transients or envelope.
I’ve done many videos about it so check them out and you can judge if this is what you want to achieve
route a send from the track I want to affect to this group
add the inserts I want to this group
do not route it to the master
create a send from this group to the FX send you wanted
So for example you could say add a distortion and phaser to a guitar track before it hits the delay.
And as on a group that would not affect the main guitar track, also allow parallel processing, plus would not affect other tracks using that delay send.
To me this is all logical, similar workflow to what was done with hardware desk, just got to
Thanks
But the send is always post inserts…so then you have to add another group track with its fx and leave the source track untouched…which is why im trying to simplify
Oh I see you wanted to send and tweak before the actual inserts ON the original track.
Parallel processing inception haha
One thing you can perhaps look at is Waves StudioVerse.
It is free and allows to create parallel and multiband chains with ANY vst3 plugins.
No need to buy anything no need for subscription, works with your existing plugins and is very helpful to create custom chains.
I am sorry but I don’t see anything about pre-insert sends in this sentence.
BTW - the term “add inserts to sends” is a bit weird for me as every effect track in Cubase has only inserts. So, taking it literally, this is what all of us do 100% of the time. Maybe there is a better way of formulating what you want? I hope “pre-insert sends” fits your expectation well.
If you study this it makes more sense…the receive channel might no be fx but rather eg a sidechain where you want to simply sidechain the bass channel from the kick but you want a different envelope from the kick to affect the bass differently esp in edm…
In this case you would add transient designer to the send insert fx
I understood the scheme. It is just not how Cubase operates, and you can’t “add an insert to a send”. So the only way to achieve what you like to achieve is to add an Effect Track, that holds a transient shaper, “in between” as the destination of the Send and using a Send from that track to go to the plugin’s sidechain input. Sorry, I don’t see another way.
I may have misunderstood the number of replies with Dom as in context, he was saying that modulators and mixer had changed.
My main question was asking if this had in fact changed but appears absolutely not.
What you are saying is exactly as I had understood Cubase worked even back as far as VST and SX
Ill continue as is…C14 is def not changed and no need for me to upgrade…Ill keep adding these things into reaper…eventually I see it will become my mixer for many reasons…but its not going to happen soon as I still need to do jobs and its just not easy to migrate a Cubase mindset to…even remotes are complicated at the least while legacy remote still works fine in Cubase
You may just need to create a group track.
Then your original audio track can send to anything without the inserts.
It will be processed by the inserts on that group track, which you can then decide to route to the main or to the FX.
And if you do not want that original audio track dry sound, you set its volume to zero and the sends to pre-fader. Or route to No Bus. Then you only get its affected group sound and FX sends return.
It’s just using a group and means you can mix your audio track, group with inserts, send returns, all separately.
If I understood your needs correctly, things tend to get confusing with words sometimes
*
I do this regularly say when I want to add some guitar amp sim in parallel on drums, I have my original drum track with its inserts, a send to a group with the amp sim as insert, which goes to the Mains out, but could also be send to the FX channels in your case.
This is complicated indeed
But if I understand it well, you can still do it with the Groups, just having multiple groups that start with an EQ doing the bands. Then in your BASS DI, Bass Amp and Synth you can route the sends to all those multiband Groups where you place your inserts as desired.
And I’d save this as a template !
Well its showing 4 modes in 1 which will make it look complex
Sometimes I get Just a DI bass
If Im recording the client
Bass DI
Bass Amp
If there is space in the song I add an ORTF room mic
I should have added the whole pic which shows the modes
The blue area are pure source channels, no processing, just audio tracks
The gold are are all group tracks
I never use bass synth and bass guitar at the same time else its moved into the Keys folder and sidechained differently
Thanks for sharing your workflow, this is interesting and indeed flexible for your production needs. And this is why I like engaging on this forum, support and learn from each other.
I’ve got no other suggestions and you know what you’re doing, great signal organisation.
Best of luck for all your projects!
Thanks @Antoine-B
Im the same…always something to learn as everyone has a valid perspective.
Its often all the little things that add up
I like spending certain periods on doing a focused study like eg Picasso Blue Period hehe
ATM Im doing a study on acoustic bass sources eg Double Bass, Cello, acoutic guitar bass etc. Its amazing how different they are and there really isnt much out there ie reference tracks that give a lot of clues…just not enough time.
I do have all the usual gear for bass inc L6 helix, bunches of older boards etc but have a pretty fool proof tone box and identical vox amps which I mic up often in stereo because it just sounds so much better than sims…really…especially when you add the room or its a group that Im recording.
Once I finished this job, Ill share the track as I think my workflows, understanding etc have come a long way in the last couple of months…probs more than the last 20 years tbh…hopefully lol
Personally, instead of trying to achieve some complicated routing scheme, I find it is often a lot simpler (and more intuitive) to just duplicate the track(s).
I duplicate recorded track all the time for various purposes. It makes mixing easier faster when each channel has a more clear purpose as opposed to resorting to utility/routing channels for achieving the same results.
Don´t want to be rude but does this complicated workflow ends with better sounding songs than the most beatiful songs in the world made without all these?
The job of a mix engineer is not to create beauty but to expose it. Like a tour guide, we focus and translate. The artist creates the beauty (if we add to it the we are producers which sometimes cant be helped.
I mix everything from gospel to psychedelic retro and ambience and I must always respect and only suggest change if it benefits the core values/goals
“Beauty” is in the eye of the holder Some peeps love death metal, punk etc…which is offensive to others but they find it “beautiful” lol
