Hi all,
I am trying to understand, why the term “summing mode” is used. I understand that selecting “summing” allows us to route a Signal to more than one Destination at once. I cannot understand why this is called “summing”, since it rather does the opposite.
Anybody?
Cheers, Ernst
Yeah - I don’t get this either. What does this “summing option” do on top of Direct Routing (D.R. itself is easy enough) ? Nothing in the manual, btw.
Actually - found it - “summing” let’s you send a channel to multiple outputs (ie., main outs), as well.
Thank you. I was hoping to hear this.
Hi, my question was different ;o)
I am wondering about the term “summing”, since there is nothing “summed”, but something like the opposite: Send the Signal to multiple Outputs at once.
I try to understand the Name “summing”. It should be “parallel” or something alike.
I think that if you route each channel to an dedicated hardware output you can do external “summing” on a mixer or summing device, the extra routing to other outputs is an extra flexibility.
Yes, it is used for outboard summing device or mixer, them you bring back the stereo audio inside the computer, you can use your AD converter for limiting too. This is the most preferred practice for summing all tracks to stereo.
Hi guys, None of your Kind replies really refers to my question.
I DO understand that the whole idea of direct Routing is to send individual channels to separate physical Outputs - for example to mix them externally. So the whole “direct Routing” is - logically speaking an (external) summing-mode.
The remark I have made is that the capability to route one channel to more than one “direct Outputs” AT THE SAME TIME is called “summing mode” in Cubase. There is simply no logic in this terminology. Because actually the cubase “summing mode” for direct Outs does “DISTRIBUTE” rather than sum.
Please be Aware that i do not question the functionality. I am only mentioning that the terminology is completely misleading.
Cheers, Ernst
This perplexed me at first, too. I now see the light, though! 
Direct routing does NOT allow you to concurrently route to multiple destinations UNLESS summing mode is ON (function pull down in upper right of mixer). If it is OFF, activating a route will toggle the other’s off so that only one output can be active at a time. It is like soloing in exclusive mode versus standard (inclusive) mode. Turning summing mode ON will allow you to simultaneously route to multiple outputs and thereby “summing” the signal to whatever destinations are defined in VST connections Outputs or Groups. These outputs can connect to a physical port OR not be defined to a physical port allowing for a very flexible way to route the signal anywhere you want. So it can distribute or sum signal/signals depending on mode AND destinations. There should be another name for summing mode since it can distribute as well. Maybe just Exclusive mode? This explanation should be added to the manual.
So, bear with me, if you have a Stereo main out this is where eventually all channels will go (either directly or via group channels)
You can also defne additional outs, which you can connect to an external summing device (I use a SSL SIGMA)
Selecting any OUT 1-16 removes the output from stereo to that individual out
With summing mode ON it keeps the signal mirrored on both the stereo and individual out.
You will still have to define an external in, in order to monitor and print the external mix
This external summed mix will still bypass the master section (which is ONLY available for the stereo master bus)
Other than for quickly printing individual stems via the stereobus, is there any OTHER advantage for turning summing mode ON that I might have overlooked?
Agree with this thread. Change ‘summing’ to ‘multing’. When you MULT an output, you split it to several destinations e.g. we do this a lot with modular synths. Both RME audio interfaces and Steinberg have this backwards IMO.
Agree. It is just like multing from a patchbay. Wrong term. 
+1 for “Multing”
I agree the terminology is confusing.
I use it for parallel compression etc. Makes it easy to not send your whole drum mix to the parallel buss, and the volumes are completely independent.
To answer your question about the wording, for example, with an outboard mixer: Each hardware group bus is a summing bus, and the mixer’s main output’s are too. Direct summing I’m assuming means that the channels’ signal paths get sent from Cubase directly to the hardware summing bus rather than being summed in Cubase. So although it allows you to send directly to multiple summing buses on your hardware mixer at the same time (so it appears you are in fact doing the opposite of summing), the summing part is referring to the hardware group’s and main output’s summation of everything going to it, and the direct routing of the signal to the hardware.
So instead of summing in Cubase, you are summing separate channels routed directly to the hardware, in the hardware it’s self. That’s why it’s “direct summing” as opposed to “internal summing” or something. Direct is a term used to describe the signal path going or coming, straight to or from, the hardware’s inputs and outputs, the same as “direct monitoring” which means monitoring the audio signal directly from your hardware rather than the software.
In live recording studios (or even live events) there can be multiple mixes going on at the same time, a ton of different monitor mixes for musicians, diferant mixes for studio room 1’s monitors + studio room 2’s and the vocal booth’s monitors, as well as the main mix etc, if this is all done on hardware (which is often the case in scenario’s like this), all the summing would be direct summing, and this is why it allows you to route to multiple hardware outputs with the same channel. I believe that’s it’s intended use, but I’m assuming people have found other uses for it, which has caused the confusion.
Hi you, thank you for explaining the background of the naming. Very interresting!
THx again for taking the time!
Ernst
I disagree with that explanation. We’re not dealing with external hardware, and the option is juxtaposed to only having the one output, but all outputs sum by default and by definition, so not having summing mode on implies there is not summing going on, but there is… So comparing one output versus multiple outputs sounds more like “latch” the way we can latch solo buttons for example.
The naming is somewhat confusing and misleading. It should be called something else. Like just “latch”.