Which is what I said at the start. If it’s an output, that takes a split or copy, Tracks, Groups and FX have sends. I do think it would be good to be able to take a split from an output and return it back to Cubase and is worth putting in a feature request for it. Using an output split as a send is a fine thing to ask for. Direct Routing is kind of like this, but not exactly the same, even if multiple destinations fire at once. And, always, so much depends on the hardware set-up and the kind of monitoring/playback system the material is for. Anyway, cool concept no matter what terms you prefer. Thanks for discussing it.
if you look at the tiering of I/O in Cubase you have:
Audio Inputs > channel outputs (audio/instrument) > group channels > audio outputs
sends can be used on channels and groups
both channels and groups have an output too
If one needs splitting/parallel outputs one can use direct summing mode
Cubase outputs have NO sends or “output” as they are the final destination within the DAW
This is the concept / I/O framework of Cubase, it’s not CIRCULAR
If you want to create (feedback(loops) you need to do that on the channel tier (audio, instrument, or group)
which you can do in several ways (send, external FX, or output routing)
the audio outs are a dead end in Cubase and should stay that way, Their purpose is the final sum / gateway out of the DAW.
Again, that’s a pretty narrow view. (And you already said this more succinctly earlier in this thread.)
I guess Steinberg considers it a pro feature for their flagshiip Nuendo product only. It’s been in Nuendo for years. It’s very handy, if you are open to the possibilities. No one is talking about creating feedback loops, or anything circular at all for that matter. Just the ability to send from an output to another output to have parallel (or different) processing of the same mix going to more than one destination. In Nuendo it won’t let you accidentally create feedback loops by “sending” to any destination that is routed to an output that would cause such a loop.
I guess you can q Link all the tracks and use the direct summing it would be the same mix , what about child busses? Or you can just assign a unused phone out to a different destination.
There’s lots of room for error doing it that way. You’d have to send from only the tracks assigned to the stereo out, (not to groups etc) or you end up “double sending” etc. Not to mention having to do it again every time you add a new track.
Not sure why the resistance here? It’s a powerful feature and it’s in Neundo, so obviously they know how to implement it… They’re just holding it back I suppose…
We´re in the Cubase forum and we fear what we don´t understand 
Nothing to fear. I like the concept. My only difference difference was in nomenclature and I’m not going to split hairs over that. I’m not sure if Cubase users need this, which is why it’s in Neundo and not Cubase. I generally like that Cubase doesn’t allow creating feedback loops, the internal downmixing seems to work very well. Direct Routing is excellent. I’ve never explored Neundo.
The OP is a Cubase user. Apart from that, it’ s a basic routing feature, useful for everyone working with audio.
I want the Sends on output channels, too! Also Direct Routing from output channels should be possible - it makes even more sense to me. There is no technical reason why the output channels should be left without these features. Moreover, there is no danger in enabling them since Cubase already prevents the user from creating loops in the signal chain.
I also always use a “Master Group” as a workaround but the Sends and Direct Routing from output channels would be my preferred method if it existed in Cubase.
–
Miloslav
I’ve used it for years, but didn’t miss it in Cubase, didn’t know it was in Nuendo and, since it’s an output channel, I call it a split not a send. That’s all.