What are the chances we will see that in the next version of Cubase, so we don’t have to go via a totally otherwise superfluous group?
Or am I wrong … can I record a processed audio track somehow directly onto another audio track already? (Ready to be embarassed 
, but it’d be worth it to find out!).
I used to do this on my Tascam 4-tracker all the time. I don’t recall doing it on the DAW aside from DAW machine to another, but somehow I’d think with the extensive routing capabilities, one could do this within Cubase by routing an output of one track to the input of another track. If nothing else, it should be doable routing an output of a track from your sound card, directly to another input on your sound card…either via cables or via the sound cards own software routing.
Thx, Qbase-007 (license to thrill? 
Yes I can do it the ways you suggest, I think after watching some YouTube’s with some other DAWS in action (PT?), I’m just a little jealous, they seem to be able to have the input of one audio track be another audio track, badda-bing, badda-boom.
No interim group needed!
I think it depends on your sound cards capabilities. With my old RME 96/8 PST card I could solo an audio track (or multiple tracks) in Cubase, record arm another track and hit play.
I don’t think any work around would be that hard. And “Groups”? Are you referring to mixing down several audio tracks at a time into one stereo or mono track, or just mix down one track, complete with FX’s etc to another track? (what I thought you meant) Either way, I used to mix down 3 mono tracks over to a 4 track in my old Tascam porta-studio, record 3 more & repeat.
With DAW’s having unlimited tracks, most don’t have a need to do such a thing, though on my Win XP machines I did have to raise my latency buffers, and use various methods of ‘bounce’ when needed for conserve on resources. Now that I use multiple machines, I can bounce entire mixes as a stereo track from one machine, directly to anther…kinda back to what I was doing with my 4 tracker & a stereo reel machine. I’ve even heard of some just mixing down/exporting, and then re-import with the same machine in another (part-2) project. But it’s much more convent having 2 machines.
If it’s a matter of resources that you need to conserve on, you may want to consider any of the available methods of networking 2 machines as a solution to opening up nearly unlimited resources 
…which actually, I think it was you who mentioned the possibility of VEP and/or System Link in another thread.
Create a dummy output in VST connections and don’t connect it to anything. Then set the output of the track to use that dummy output. On the track you want to record to set the input to that dummy output. Now you can record directly from one track to the other. It is this way to prevent users accidentally making feedback loops in the daw.
I do like this suggestion, as it seems that the dummy output can be stored as part of the “Output Tab” default, and it can be used over and over in different projects.
Is that what PT does? In the vids (I think it was PT, but I could be wrong), they just send one audio track over to another. Maybe they have VST connections already routed behind the scenes …
(Yes, Qbass-007, my goal is to print automation, plug-in changes, etc., to a new audio track. But it wasn’t me who was talking about VEP/System Link, I can’t even spell those things much less consider using them … it was someone else!).
As peakae explained is the usual way to do it, in fact this technique was often used to create artist cues by sending to this track and routing it to the output used for the phones before the advent of the control room which makes it simpler now.
In VST Connections just create outputs and name them Aux1, Aux2 … but don’t specify any Device or Ports. You then create master headphone faders by creating new tracks (named phones-x appropriately) and set their inputs to the respective Aux. These will then be routed to the specific outputs used for phones. (You can see why the control room makes this all easier now).
In PT it’s very similar using the I/O setup dialog. In PT it’s not uncommon to route everything to an auxilliary track set to record, and route that to the monitor outputs. This fixes the the mixdown level so you can freely adjust the output level (again in the Cubase Control Room this is unnecessary), plus It’s also used for creating versions.
Render in place.
It’s in CB8.
However if you’re using 7.5.3 (like I am) and the track has no external effects you can solo it and “Export Audio Mixdown” with import into new track (or whatever it is) checked. Much faster than real time.
Hugh
Thank you guys!
I will have to compare the “dummy output” vs. “Export”. With the latter I guess you have to scroll down to the bottom and drag it up IIRC (whereas the audio track created for the dummy output method is already right there), but quicker than real time, which I guess wins out every time (the fast method, I mean).
Either way, MUCH better than creating a group just to record “from” … thanks again everyone!
[EDIT: Super fast doing the non-real time render! Have to add the few moments spent to name the track, correct path, and make sure that .wav and not .mpg3 (etc.) are chosen … tough choice!].
Just remember, depending on plugins and effects used, you may not always have the viable option of using ‘non-real time render’. 
OK, thanks. Are there any rules of thumb as to which will/won’t work, or can you give some examples perhaps?
Thanks!
The most obvious example would be when using external (analog) instruments and effects, but can also apply to some VST plugins which might need time for their processing . you’d need to check the specs or check with the manufacturer.
Ah, like maybe “look-ahead” plugins …?
It sounds like trial and error - thanks for the heads up!
Hi there,
It seems that I need a related-but-different approach to apply in a slightly different scenario. I hope that there’s an answer that you can hep me find.
[ Win7 x64, Cubase 8.5.15 x64 ]
Arturia’s brand new ARP 2600 V3 no longer has a separate ‘Efx’ version, which could previously be used as an insert on any track.
However, the new 2600 still has a ‘Preamplifier’ section into which you can, somehow, route audio which can then be passed through all of the synthesizer’s modules.
My goal is to be able to load a VSTi on Track 1, say a Kontakt piano . . .
. . . and then load the Arturia ARP 2600 V3 on Track 2 . . .
And route the Track 1 audio (as generated by the VSTi piano by live playing or pre-written MIDI notes) into the Track 2 ARP 2600 for processing.
I can’t get peakae’s method to work because, although I can get the Kontakt piano track to output to a ‘not connected’ dummy buss, I have no idea how to get the audio from that buss into the ARP 2600 (loaded either as a Track Instrument or a Rack Instrument).
When loaded as a Rack Instrument, I can get the Kontakt piano audio track to output to the dummy buss. I hit a key, I see the short meter burst on the piano MIDI track, and I see sustained meter bursts on both “Kt. st. 1” (the piano’s audio track), and the dummy buss meter. So far, so good. But then…
When loaded as a Rack Instrument, (1) the 2600’s ‘audio track’ is output only—it doesn’t allow me to select an input buss at all, and (2) the 2600’s MIDI track only allows MIDI sources as inputs, and I can only output via MIDI (to the 2600’s “MIDI In” or various MIDI ports on my sound card).
That’s where I’m stuck.
It should (?) be do-able . . . an Arturia forum member is doing it quite easily (albeit on a different DAW) here:
[The above video is one of several nice intro videos that he’s produced for the V3.]
Any ideas? Am I missing something basic? Is there some other esoteric way to load the 2600 that would make it easier to route audio into it? I can’t be the first person facing this problem…
Thank you all very much for any wisdom or guidance that any of you can impart.
— Alan
ps — I just learned that the DAW in the above-linked video in my previous comment is Ableton Live.
I know nothing about Ableton, so I have no way to map its routing routines to their Cubase equivalents.
Does this help anyone make sense of this?
Thanks again!!