Pretty specific and very interesting approach. Wished for such a function myself a few times.
It’s pretty easy to set up an ‘alias’ of the channel that feeds fx with different processing on it though. So it’s already possible.
Should that channel(s) use heavy processing (demanding lots of cpu/dsp) you could route them via a group channel to the sends instead of doubling to save some horsepower. Could get confusing of course, especially when you open up the project a year later or so and have no clue what goes where and why (sometimes happens to me…).
This was my exact first thought, and I think I had the same feeling abut a similar request to add a mix knob to the direct routing. Deciphering and uncovering the layers.
I love the idea of hiding channels for stuff like this, but when a project grows, it does become a puzzle to reincarnate old projects when the setup was 'less than intuitive or traditional"
Then again, some of my old Cubase projects have such routing schematics, that I look at today, and wonder 'OH I see how this works! It’s absolutely genius!" So perhaps some of these features will make it more intuitive by design, thus actually easier and logical to come back to.
Sometimes “genius!” and sometimes I wondered how this has ever become an album
Since implementation of the Channel Strip and visibility management getting a clue of how I’ve done what has become more challenging. Really hard to display anything at a glance (inserts, sends, strip, EQs, direct routing etc.).
If Cubase would get a smooth way to process signals on their way to sends built that would just be another facette of complexity that wouldn’t do much harm