Group Channel VS. FX Channel

Hi All,
I’m looking for some thoughts on the difference/preference between adding reverb as an insert on a bus (group channel) vs. as a send on an FX channel. It’s a hard thing to a/b. My hunch is that there is more depth with a send, moreso than what a mix knob can accomplish. On the other hand, not having the send and return controls to finesse makes an insert on a group channel easier to manage.

?

First off - Group channels and FX channels are identical (They didn’t used to be but as of 4.5 they are). Everything you can do with a group channel you can do with an FX channel and Vice Versa.

Now - using with inserts vs sends. Sends are typically used with effects like reverb. Allows you to use a single instance for multiple tracks. Where inserts are used for things like track compression where it doesn’t make sense to send multiple tracks to a single compressor.

Also your effect needs to have the ability to output wet only to use on a send. To use as an insert you need to be able to control the amount of wet vs dry in the plugin. That being said - I would think with a single track and single effect, you can create the exact same output using the proper settings.

Ron

thanks. yeah, i totally understand and implement the multiple instance concept. generally/lately i’ve been giving each element it’s own individual space and have been wondering if the mix knob on, say REVerence, wasn’t as sophisticated with the audio as dialing it in as a send. Wondering (maybe wasting time :smiley: ), whether the dry signal when using a send is more clean and defined than when using the ratio knob on the plugin…if you were able to get them to be exact same ratio. Oh hell :laughing:

FWIW, Group and FX channels are still different in the C5 line full / Essential version, so maybe also in C 6…?

How are they different? Other than colors and choices when they are instantiated.

Looks like it was 4.1 when free routing was added and not 4.5. Here is a thread from long ago. Scroll down to RWILs explanation of the differences (which are very minor)

http://www.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=92800&highlight=

Ron

https://www.steinberg.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=19478&p=122602#p122602

Ahh - I misunderstood. I thought you were telling me that they were still different in the Full and Essential versions. If I understand correctly you are saying they are different in the essential version - which since I have never used and cannot comment. I have only used the full versions. Thanks for clarifying.

Ron

With the FX channels you can choose the effect you want to use in the channel during the “add track” bit which is handy, it also names the channel with the effect you’ve chosen which is nice.

Even if they aren’t that different in practice, using both types gives you more options in the mixer to hide certain types of channel.

Yea - I knew that. It’s what I was refering to when I said “choices when they are instantiated”. And yes - It’s nice from an organizational point of view in the mixer. No arguments there. Which, of course are a good reasons to keep both group and FX tracks.

Ron

Yes, there´s differences between full version “behaviour” and Essential version “behaviour”