As a long-time Nuendo user, one of the biggest things I feel is still missing from this DAW is the limitation of only 8 FX Send Slots per channel. In today’s workflow, 8 sends simply don’t cut it anymore — we honestly need 12-16.
On many vocal sessions, I constantly find myself wishing I had 2–3 more sends available for better automation and creative processing throughout the song. Extra sends make a huge difference for reverbs, delays, parallel processing, and special FX chains when mixing modern productions.
Nuendo is already an amazing DAW, but increasing the FX Send limit would seriously improve workflow and flexibility for mixing engineers and post-production users.
We really need this feature, Steinberg — what’s taking so long?
Just to contribute some help if you haven’t done this already your self. In my project templates I’ve set up dedicate ‘Group Split’ Tracks that have no output and only sends.
Each primary instrument gets its own.
Vocal Track
Vocal Track Sidechain Split
Vocal Track FX Split
Guitar Track
Guitar Track FX Split.
In the template, everything is already routed and ready to go, including to some preconfigured FX tracks I use regularly.
You might also be interested in this FR of mine in the Cubase forums:
Thank You So Much
I use parrell fx send - but have an extra track to work with
would off been so sweet i Cubase Pro have 12 sends and Nuendo have 16 sends
Thanks a lot again
Cheers!
While more sends would be nice, I am honestly not that bothered about it for today’s modern productions. Computers are more than powerful enough and it’s simpler to just duplicate the track and process as needed, rather than rely on traditional send/return configurations.
The sessions I get from producers/artists to mix generally follow a similar workflow and another bonus is it helps keep the session organized as you can see exactly what is going on in the arrangement at a glance (crucial in those large track count sessions).
I am getting pretty tired of duplicating tracks, it clutters mix console and the session - and I already have enough parallel processing channels as it is.
Also, if you have a bunch of inserts on the track you are needing more sends from… then you are duplicating all those inserts. Alternatively and as I suggested above, you can create some split tracks…
But I’d much prefer simplifying all this.
The example you give of producers/artists sending you work is only one situation… Some of us are writing/producing/recording/editing/mixing all at once in which one might be going back and forth between editing, mixing, and editing, and doing re-records, and mixing, etc, etc.
Almost all my first 8 sends are also already used up in my templates to templated-go-to-fx, which doesn’t leave room to add some after the fact of starting a project if additional/different FX are needed… and I’d rather not remove the template ones.
Sometimes less is more. As I said, I wouldn’t mind more but it certainly doesn’t stop me getting the job done. If parallel processing is your thing there are plenty of routing solutions available.
Less is more, but more is more. I can produce a stellar album with a 4-track casette recorder and an sm57… Is it going to beat competition sonically though? maybe…
But mixing in general is an artistic competitive field, and so engineers need pathways to develop their own sound, workflow, etc… ways of discovering new magic. Especially competing with AI now.