Wet/Dry for all insert plugins =)
No.
And this was already posted.
please have a look around if you are going to post 5 or so frs at once.
-doubt this will ever happen, as it wouldnât be backwards compatible.
-Secondly, most plugins have their own internal mix, and if they donât you can use a VST wrapper that has the feature.
-the only plugins that donât have dry/wet are EQs and some compressors, of which most compressors also have dry/wet. How many times do you need dry/wet for EQ?
-
If I get a project where someone has set your insert dry/wet mix to %70 and the plugins internal dry/wet mix to %30 Iâm going to lose my 5h!t What is the point of insert dry/wet, when pretty much every plugin you would use dry/wet has it.
-
imo and many others, itâs not professional organizational workflow. Dry / Wet balances should be done on faders not mini-knobs.
Itâs just not what Cubase is or does, Cubase is about organization. -
having, a bunch of dry / wet mix knobs scattered across 16 inserts across 200-1000 tracks is not musical. If you wouldnât do it on a project that size, why would you do it on a project any size if itâs beneficial?
-
Itâs counter intuitive to doing proper gain-staging and gain management, it makes diagnosing problems more difficult, it puts gain variables in both visually and physically unobtainable place, it lacks organizational labeling and a track picture,
-
It also doesnât resemble anything in the analog world in terms of console workflows. I havenât seen too many dry /wet mix inserts.
-
Think of it like this, Cubase is your studio point to point wiring and console. You put modular synths, effects, instruments, and specialty routers - all things that have dry/wet mix knobs - and you put them in your studio and network into the console.
-
Thereâs no reason for it, and it encourages bad, lazy, unorganized workflow which is how I feel working in FL/Abelton/etc. Somethings shouldnât change - like always wrapping your cables and proper signal flow/topology.
\
if thereâs a feature request that makes sense, itâs to be able to save âfavourite quick controlsâ so that they always load to the first available quick control as soon as you load the plug. that way you could save all the dry/wet controls in each plugin as favourite quick controls so they always available. thatâs the best compromise I can make.
just ignore all the negative talk aboveâŚ
Great idea=)
+1
=)
1 Like
right, because having a Dry/Wet stage feeding another dry/wet stage on one insert x 16, IS A GOOD IDEA.
Yeah, some of us are pretty creative arenât we?
blows kiss 
1 Like
lovegames,
Hi. I understand your personal point of view. It does not suit your workflow. It suits mine, and probably can be useful for many people as well.
Regarding the justifications you evoke, I do not agree with you:
Backwards compatibility : many functions are not backward compatible.
Secondly, most plugins have their own internal mix, and if they donât you can use a VST wrapper that has the feature.
Most plugins already have a dry/wet : many but not all. A VST wrapper is a third party plugin, and I doubt about the stability over time (just a hypothesis, never used any).
-the only plugins that donât have dry/wet are EQs and some compressors, of which most compressors also have dry/wet. How many times do you need dry/wet for EQ?
Personnally that feature would be helpful for distortion or guitar amp plugins. Also most of plugins do have a preset management, but Cubase implement its own additional preset managementâŚ
- imo and many others, itâs not professional organizational workflow. Dry / Wet balances should be done on faders not mini-knobs.
Itâs just not what Cubase is or does, Cubase is about organization.
I did not talk about mini-knobs. But do not really care the type of entry system, for my workflow, once again.
- having, a bunch of dry / wet mix knobs scattered across 16 inserts across 200-1000 tracks is not musical. If you wouldnât do it on a project that size, why would you do it on a project any size if itâs beneficial?
This is a personal point of view =)
- Itâs counter intuitive to doing proper gain-staging and gain management, it makes diagnosing problems more difficult, it puts gain variables in both visually and physically unobtainable place, it lacks organizational labeling and a track picture,
Perhaps. But many plugins already use dry/wet mix, so what ?
- It also doesnât resemble anything in the analog world in terms of console workflows. I havenât seen too many dry /wet mix inserts.
True. Who say they should ? I guess there was not DOP, dynamic EQ nor any spectral editing back in the days.
- Think of it like this, Cubase is your studio point to point wiring and console. You put modular synths, effects, instruments, and specialty routers - all things that have dry/wet mix knobs - and you put them in your studio and network into the console.
Answered above =)
- Thereâs no reason for it, and it encourages bad, lazy, unorganized workflow which is how I feel working in FL/Abelton/etc. Somethings shouldnât change - like always wrapping your cables and proper signal flow/topology.
Personal point of view. And if a user wants to be unorganized, lazy, have a bad workflow, or even use FL/Ableton/etc, who can judge ?
if thereâs a feature request that makes sense, itâs to be able to save âfavourite quick controlsâ so that they always load to the first available quick control as soon as you load the plug. that way you could save all the dry/wet controls in each plugin as favourite quick controls so they always available. thatâs the best compromise I can make.
Yes, favorite quick controls can be cool. But there is no competition between this feature and my proposal. Itâs not one or another =)
1 Like
Iâve never seen an amp sim plugin without dry/wet mix.
If a user wants bad unorganized nonsensical workflow than any new feature or a feature like this one should be irrelevant to them and we shouldnât lose Steinberg FR development resources to them when we could be getting more important organizational features that make a difference to those who actually care.
It doesnât make sense to have dry/wet inserts, when most plugins have dry/wet mix knobs.
Iâm good at finding compromise, and that is the/my idea of quick control favourites, and I would say is more likely.
Stop spamming other users requests with your requests/trolling pleaseâŚ
Op- just ignore, one can tell that the disruptor is just being noisyâŚ
1 Like
âEveryone who is more logical than me is a trollâ = trolling
Helix Native, Guitar Rig, MixBox do not have master wet/dry setting.
Mate, I would love this workflow. If it sounds unorganized and nonsensical to you, it does not matter. You are not in my studio =) I consider my request as legitimate enoguh to submit it to the Steinberg team.
1 Like
MixBox has dry/wet control per module you insert. Guitar rig you can use the split utility. Iâm sure Helix can do this as well.
Iâm %90 sure this will never happen. It simply does not make sense to have âdry/wet stage1â feeding 'dry/wet âstage 2â per insert, it doesnât matter how much of a creative genius you are.
SigMod
Patchwork
Why are you insisting to prove that you vision is better? Mate this is just a request, about my own workflow. All is subjective here. Period. I donât argue on the usefulness of your own requests.
2 Likes
This is a reasonable request for those of us who work on modern music as one-person âproducersâ. Iâm a user of FL Studio who recently came to Cubase. A great many creative plugins out there DO NOT have a wet dry mix. (Its one less thing for a small dev to add to their project, and convenience is not a priority when you have mouths to feed and are running out of capital, so its not true that every useful plugin has it - one could argue that adding buses would solve this, sure, but that doesnât make it less convenient than adding buses). There are also some that are fairly hard to find without re-reading manuals. Gatekeeper (a gating plugin) is a good example of one that has a fairly complicated GUI and that I donât use on every project. Eventually there comes a time for bringing out dozens of tools like this, that I havenât used in quite awhile, and on which the existence of the wet/dry control is not immediately obvious. Death Eye by DDMF is one that doesnât have wet dry at all (as you say, plenty of analog-modeled gear like compressors donât), and that could be done by routing the signal to a bus - but that takes a bit of time and thought particularly for newbies. Furthermore the reason to have the wet dry is similar to having the ability to bypass the fx chain in the mixer channel (which is there in most DAWs) While that is a simple check, being able to compare different amounts of an effect may help decide whether it is worth the creating the bus - versus creating it only to have to delete it. If Cubase wants to attract novice users who may or may not become recording studio pros, but are just out to learn how to produce certain styles and see if they have a knack, then THIS request makes all the sense in the world to me. The idea that this would not be backward compatible isnât something I can comprehend. If someone is talking about removing the feature, then yes, that would pose a problem. But introducing a feature in the manner that FL Studio has it, which is just an additional GUI small element for which there is room (knobs are fine for it in my opinion) makes sense and you can ask 10 FL Studio users and probably 5 will say they use this a lot.
- Stop backwards thinking, and backwards compatibility will suddenly become less of an issue.
- Not an argument, since A LOT of plugins donât have mix knobs.
- Why not? Do you personally forbid me to use dry/wet on EQ?
Cubase has one massive problem - itâs ultra conservative audience.
Itâs a great DAW with large unique feature set, and thatâs why itâs still alive.
However, more and more DAWs are catching up (even FL Studio!), and they all have better and more flexible user interface and UX. Cubase really needs a modern user interface if it wants to remain the best DAW in the future.
With Cubase 13 they have taken the right direction, but this is not enough at all, much more is needed.
Everything should change and it eventually will, thatâs how this universe works. Whether you like it or not.
1 Like