I always setup my mixes so that in the mixer view, ALL sends amount on line 1 are FX1, line 2 are FX2, etc…
But then if I decide to remove, add, move an effect, the lines don’t follow, eg if I delete FX2 from my song, the mixer view will show an empty line and means the new FX2 (old FX3) is in line 3, etc…
It’s disturbing for me and I’d like the option to “move” entire lines of sends in the mixer view or delete a whole line, very similar to what an XL spreadsheet operation …
Hope that inspires the team.
PS the forum is confusing, feature requests should be a category outside of technical issues so it would be an easier way for dev team and users to sort through.
Cheers from a user of 20 years always in love with Cubase
That’s not how the most people work.
I do not add FX sends to tracks I don’t plan to send to the FX.
I regularly use the function “add FX track to selected channels” and keep the mixer showing the enabled sends dynamically. With that way, I only see the FX sends the channel is using.
You can have more than 8 FX tracks, and then you have no lines anymore.
Thanks for the reply !
May I send an attached picture of my mixer window, I might have expressed myself not clearly.
I only add FX I use what I mean is add only on the row associated to the FX number for clarity.
If there is a better way I’d be happy to learn.
Especially I am not clear about the mixer showing the enabled sends dynamically part … gonna dig deeper but would love pointers, thanks !!
Might be clearer on this photo, I like to only use a specific FX only on its own row, so row 1 for FX1 only, maybe it’s inherited from hardware days with fixed sends routing, it feels clearer for me in the mix what FX sends I use on each tracks especially it’s mostly my preferred delays and reverbs as sends usually.
Anyway I’d love to be able to move a whole row of FX values or delete an empty row all at once.
If others work like me I’d love positive affirmation haha !
Or if I’ve been a fool for so long and there really is a better way then please enlighten me see if I can change some old habits
While “deleting an empty row” doesn’t really make sense, as the number of send slots is fixed, an option to move sends easily to another slot would be quite welcome imho (just as you can move inserts from one slot to another). The only way as of now seems to be to copy one slot, move to the target slot, paste it, then back to the original and remove it. Quite tedious.
to the OP: If you insist on that fixed routing, why do you need to rearrange things? Why do you, as you wrote, delete “FX2” (I assume you mean the second FX track in the project)? That doesn’t make sense to me. Just set up your eight FX tracks and keep them once and for all, no need to change anything except maybe for the effects in the tracks or the name.
(btw: What do you do when you need more than eight FX tracks??).
I love to compare VST effects so for example I will load three to five different reverbs on one song to see which ones may fit for which parts.
My workflow to only use one row for one effect then allows me to see quickly how many tracks use an FX, I only have to open the mixer window and look at rows. If row n is empty then FX n is not used and I might as well delete it. So I would need to "delete’ the empty row too. And if delete is not appropriate as you rightfully say, then I would want to move all subsequent rows up once.
I’m gonna go have a round of checks on the Youtubers see how they set things up see what I might learn.
Finally I have never used all 8 FX sends, never had the need to use so many FX sends.
Another option would be to dedicate slots to effect types and save them there in a template. For example, slot 1 is always reverb. Slot 2 is always delay. Etc. Etc.
Pile up all reverbs in the inserts section, one after another. E.g. slot 1 plate, slot 2 algorithmic hall, slot 3 convolution hall, just random examples. Then you can start with the whole inserts section in bypass, and engage effects from their bypass buttons.
A clickfest for sure, but that’s the only way I can think of to preserve an initial order of sends.
This is very close to how my templates are built. I maintain a fixed association between slot number and effect type. It makes remote controlling easier.
I even started applying the same concept for insert slots.
Yes it would work removing all sends data with Q Link, but there would still be an empty row in the Mixer section…
Key is for visual purposes I only load Fx1 on row 1, Fx2 on row 2 etc so I can tell in a blink which tracks use which FX, but if I decide to change my FX then this workflow is crushed so I wanna be able to move or delete rows like in XL
I think one problem with “forcing” rows to specific FX tracks is that as you add more and more FX tracks you increase the number of send rows. Since there is a maximum number of sends by definition once you go above 8 used FX (using your procedure) you will end up with empty slots by default. So this means more screen real estate will be taken up by empty slots.
I think it would have the potential of getting very ‘spread out’ vertically for those with a lot of FX tracks in total.
Hopefully I didn’t misunderstand what you are looking for.
You understood perfectly
Thankfully I usually use only 2-3 delays and 2 reverbs so never up to 8.
So I’m curious are you then using the first available slot for whichever FX you want first?
You don’t feel the need to visualise the FX as on their own row for clarity? Just curious of others workflows. I went on a YouTube rampage and couldn’t see too many others Mixer windows, I might be the only one with this “tidy” obsession hahah !
I’m in post production (audio to picture) and I always work off of templates. The current template probably has around 15 FX tracks (returns) in it. However, the way we have to work because of delivery requirements they are partially ‘copies’ of each other. So if I have five reverbs set up and ready to go for dialog I’ll have the same for “Nat” sound.
So for me, if it was the way you describe it, I would have all dialog reverbs on for example sends 1-5 and then the Nat reverbs 6-10. But that makes the send view very tall and also doesn’t even make sense for me. A practical example would be for me to edit dialog and end up with a piece of sound that isn’t speech and then needing to move that sound over to a Nat track. If that sound already has a bit of reverb on it then I need it to be the same on the new track. So in one sense send #1 for dialog is the same as send #1 for Nat, conceptually (which is why it makes sense they’re all on insert 1), but in reality they’re two different reverbs that are outputting to two different destinations.
So I agree that what you’re looking for is more “tidy”, but I also think there are drawbacks to it.
This also makes sense in a music production scenario. I have two room reverb returns in my template, each adapted for signals that should be more in the front (say higher predelay etc) and one for background signals. And both those always live in slot one.
All the other slots I just use with what the current track needs without bothering about any order, it’s rare for me anyway that a track has more than three sends, so everything stays rather clear and obvious.
I would find it actually confusing if all the send slots were pre-populated… and I also have more than 8 FX channels in my template anyway, so that would be quite limiting.
Thanks for your input Mattias, interesting to read about your workflow in post work !
I never imagined post would require so many returns. Makes me relax about my approach to FX sends with just 4 or 5 sends
Best of luck to you for everything !
Thanks Fese yes I can visualise how you do it, although different approach from mine I can see how that works for you, I think I’ll give it a shot !
Ultimately it’s about finding what works for oneself and enjoying the creative process, I’ve been using Cubase for 20 years and now in my forties finally getting the courage to write an album ! Takes forever but have been working on it daily for months already.