drewfx1
Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/26 21:20:51
(permalink)
I'm thinking that what he might be doing is something like this: 1. Using 3 virtual audio outputs as sends for external inserts on each track. 2. They are mixed into a single virtual audio input. 3. This input feeds a track containing Amplitube and outputs to another virtual audio output. 4. This output is split into 3 virtual audio inputs... 5. ...which are the returns for each track's external insert. Do I win the prize? 
 In order, then, to discover the limit of deepest tones, it is necessary not only to produce very violent agitations in the air but to give these the form of simple pendular vibrations. - Hermann von Helmholtz, predicting the role of the electric bassist in 1877.
|
200bpm
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 337
- Joined: 2014/06/25 15:01:55
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/26 21:31:53
(permalink)
drewfx1
Do I win the prize?
At the point where you are talking "around" someone on an internet forum, you've borrowed from the playbook of a teenage girl and no, you do not win.
i7 4790K @ 4.8/1.325v Gigabyte Z97X-ud3h, 16GB DDR3 2300, RME UFX, Sonar 3Xe
|
...wicked
Max Output Level: -1.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 7360
- Joined: 2003/12/18 01:00:56
- Location: Seattle
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/26 21:49:38
(permalink)
This is where a "Splitter/Joiner" Pro Channel module would be amazing.
=========== The Fog People =========== Intel i7-4790 16GB RAM ASUS Z97 Roland OctaCapture Win10/64 SONAR Platinum 64-bit billions VSTs, some of which work
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/26 21:56:15
(permalink)
200bpm
Craig, you are closest to understanding this, but this you do not get: I am able to send 10,20, 30 separate DI tracks to a single instance of Amplitude because I am using Totalmix to make it seem like a single VST is a piece of hardware. SONAR can send as many DI tracks as you want to a single VST, so I don't understand why you need Totalmix to do this. You can do this while recording from multiple DIs, or playing back the tracks created by multiple DI overdubs. Or from any number of arbitrary tracks that just happen to exist, regardless of how they got there. It would be great if there was a "Insert effect" that you could set virtual I/O to/from a VST in the rack and route multiple tracks to it. Basically, that's the definition of a bus, which you can set pre-fader if you want the level to the VST to be constant and depend solely on the send control and not the channel fader. You haven't specified where the output of this "insert effect" would go, but you can assign the VST output to a bus instead of the master and route it anywhere you want. I can't help but think you're missing some very fundamental element of routing in SONAR that would make your life much easier if you knew it. That's why if only I knew the goal you want to accomplish instead of what you think you need in order to do what you want to do, I could be more helpful. Your goal is not really to have a "VST external insert," your goal is to achieve some particular routing to accomplish some particular recording goal which has not been explained or defined, but which you think would be solved by a "VST external insert." The way FX inserts in sonar work are single input, but theres no reason multiple tracks cant be routed to a VST as long as they are not playing at the same time. With what I've described, you can send multiple tracks to a single VST whether they're playing at the same time or not. I still don't understand how you claim to be able to vary the outputs of three separate tracks after being processed by a single instance of AmpliTube, which tends to support my concern that you're missing some very elemental aspect of signal flow. But hey, if you have something that works for you, run with it.
|
johnnyV
Max Output Level: -48.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2677
- Joined: 2010/02/22 11:46:33
- Location: Here, in my chair
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/26 22:36:16
(permalink)
And I thought that re amping was as simple as running a dry guitar track out to an amp(s), miking the amp and re recording the resulting signal to a new track. I used to do this with 4 track recordings but those other mikes were recorded live to the mix down deck.
post edited by johnnyV - 2014/12/03 21:26:40
Sonar X3e Studio - Waiting for Professional Scarlett 6i6Yamaha Gear= 01v - NSM 10 - DTX 400 - MG82cx Roland Gear= A 49- GR 50 - TR 505 - Boss pedalsTascam Gear= DR 40 - US1641 -Mackie Gear= Mix 8 - SRM 350's i5 Z97 3.2GHZ quad 16 Gig RAM W 8.1 home buildTaylor mini GS - G& L Tribute Tele - 72 Fender Princeton - TC BH 250 - Mooer and Outlaw Pedals Korg 05/RW
|
200bpm
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 337
- Joined: 2014/06/25 15:01:55
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/26 22:48:00
(permalink)
Anderton
200bpm
Craig, you are closest to understanding this, but this you do not get: I am able to send 10,20, 30 separate DI tracks to a single instance of Amplitude because I am using Totalmix to make it seem like a single VST is a piece of hardware.
SONAR can send as many DI tracks as you want to a single VST, so I don't understand why you need Totalmix to do this. You can do this while recording from multiple DIs, or playing back the tracks created by multiple DI overdubs. Or from any number of arbitrary tracks that just happen to exist, regardless of how they got there.
Yes, this is correct. But when you send multiple tracks to a bus with a VST, you mute the DI track and listen instead to the bus. That is OK, but the channel faders don't do anything at that point and you cant vary the level of the individual tracks. They are all "one" track at that point, and because they are going out the same output, there is no way to add different post effects to that many->"one" track.
i7 4790K @ 4.8/1.325v Gigabyte Z97X-ud3h, 16GB DDR3 2300, RME UFX, Sonar 3Xe
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/26 22:57:00
(permalink)
200bpm
Anderton
200bpm
Craig, you are closest to understanding this, but this you do not get: I am able to send 10,20, 30 separate DI tracks to a single instance of Amplitude because I am using Totalmix to make it seem like a single VST is a piece of hardware.
SONAR can send as many DI tracks as you want to a single VST, so I don't understand why you need Totalmix to do this. You can do this while recording from multiple DIs, or playing back the tracks created by multiple DI overdubs. Or from any number of arbitrary tracks that just happen to exist, regardless of how they got there.
Yes, this is correct. But when you send multiple tracks to a bus with a VST, you mute the DI track and listen instead to the bus. That is OK, but the channel faders don't do anything at that point and you cant vary the level of the individual tracks. They are all "one" track at that point, and because they are going out the same output, there is no way to add different post effects to that many->"one" track.
I get that, which is exactly how I explained it to John. To refresh your memory, I said: "Obviously he's not getting three separate audio streams through a single instance of AmpliTube 3." You said: "Yes I am. Just took some creativity. Sonar does not normally allow this but RME totalmix has some cool features." What I don't get (and I also don't get why you are so adamant about not explaining it), is how you can send multiple inputs to AmpliTube and claim to have come up with some type of creative routing method that allows you to control the level of each audio input's output signal, individually through a channel fader, after it exits AmpliTube? Can you please answer my question? It's also okay to say you thought that's what you had done, but on subsequent analysis, you realized you were wrong. It would also be okay to say you've come up with some ultra-high-frequency, clock-based time division multiplexing scheme that allows AmpliTube to process individual slices of the input signals on a time-divided basis, complemented by a time-division-based de-multiplexing system that follows AmpliTube and reassembles the slices back into individual streams, which the demultiplexer can then send to different channels for output level adjustment. Any one of these would explain what's going on. 
|
Karyn
Ma-Ma
- Total Posts : 9200
- Joined: 2009/01/30 08:03:10
- Location: Lincoln, England.
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 04:29:51
(permalink)
ok, from reading all the posts this is what I understand.
He has 3 tracks with Bass recorded on them.
He's found a really kewl tone in Amplitube3 that he wants to use to re-amp the basses.
He doesn't believe his computer is powerful enough to have Amplitube3 in every FX bin.
He's decided the best solution is to put Amplitube3 in a bus but is struggling to route the bus output back to the original channel...
The CORRECT way is to put Amplitube3 in the track FX bin set the tone then bounce audio to clip/track, drag Amplitube3 from the track into the FX bin of the next track. This ensures all the settings are exactly as you last touched them, even if you forgot to save. This does not result in lots of copies of Amplitube3, it moves it from one track to the next. Rinse and repeat for each track.
Result: All tracks have the re-amped tone from Amplitube3 printed to the track as if it were recorded like that. All tracks can be mixed/comped/edited/whatevered as normal with no overhead from Amplitube3, which can be deleted.
I think this is what I said back on page one...
Mekashi Futo. Get 10% off all Waves plugins.Current DAW. i7-950, Gigabyte EX58-UD5, 12Gb RAM, 1Tb SSD, 2x2Tb HDD, nVidia GTX 260, Antec 1000W psu, Win7 64bit, Studio 192, Digimax FS, KRK RP8G2, Sonar Platinum
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 04:41:49
(permalink)
What I don't understand is why do you have to mute the three tracks and "listen" to the buss"? If you mute the tracks you can't listen to the buss.
200BPM read JohnnyV's post carefully it has some useful information in it.
One thing I do know is the people that have been trying to help all know what they are talking about. They are very careful with the terms they use and have done all sorts of routing using Sonar and done it using hardware too.
BTW it doesn't matter if its DI (direct input) or miced . Its just audio to Sonar. It couldn't care less how you got it into it (Sonar) and being DI doesn't make any different from any other audio.
Do not use the word "send" when what you mean is output. Each actually has a meaning that uses different ways to rout.
I get that you don't want to use a tracks fader to adjust the volume because it will impact the signal of the tracks output. Mute is not the answer either. However you may be using the word mute differently than we do.
If what you are trying to do is use the same FX on more than one track use a buss to have the FX in its FX bin which is an insert point. Graig is right about not being able to unmix once you mix the three tracks via a buss.
We will still be here trying to help even though we have problems with clear communication.
|
Kylotan
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 995
- Joined: 2007/09/10 17:27:35
- Location: Nottingham, UK
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 08:49:43
(permalink)
Ok, having read all this, it sounds to me like what he's doing is pretty reasonable - he wants to share 1 effect plugin across several tracks, and wants to be able to tweak the post-FX levels with those separate track controls.  (There could also be per-track pre-Amplitube FX as well, left off to save space.) The thing that has confused most people, because it was seemingly only mentioned in the first post, is that there is "only one track feeding per time". So the fact that all 3 tracks are getting the same audio back from Amplitube doesn't matter - 2 of the 3 tracks are muted/archived. No need for time-sliced demultiplexing. ;) If this was an external piece of hardware it would be trivial to do with the External Insert plugin, but there doesn't seem to be an equivalent for software. And since Sonar people don't think in terms of Send/Returns (as they only really have Sends), this usage doesn't seem 'normal'. He could do the same thing via routing to a bus with Amplitube set as an insert - but then he doesn't get to have the 3 separate post-Amplitube fx bins and fader levels. A workaround would be to have each track output to the single Amplitube bus, then that sends to 3 separate buses. But now he has to mentally tie his 3 input audio tracks to the 3 output buses. And his pre-Amplitube and post-Amplitube FX (if any) are in completely different places - an awkward workflow. Some have mentioned that he could bounce each track - but that would stop him from experimenting with Amplitube settings in the context of tweaking the different pre- and post- fx and levels. If needed to do this, in Sonar, I would probably just put everything in one track on separate take lanes. They're not really designed for that, but since we lost layers, that's the best we have. Clip automation would handle differences in gain and similar. As I find quite often, REAPER appears to offer this sort of routing in the box - create a new track with your insert on it, then any track you want can Send to it and Return from it. I couldn't get this to work just now, but the functionality appears to exist there. I hope Sonar start to offer better routing options in future for this sort of thing.
Sonar Platinum (Newburyport) / Win 8.1 64bit / Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 / Absynth / Kontakt / Play / Superior Drummer 2 / ESP LTD guitar / etc Twilight's Embrace - gothic/death metal | Other works - instrumental/soundtracks
|
SuperG
Max Output Level: -63 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1371
- Joined: 2012/10/19 16:09:18
- Location: Edgewood, NM
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 09:09:07
(permalink)
The key hinge here is 'single instance'. Whatever Totalmix does, it cannot feed multiple signals to a single instance with separate outs for each input, so whatever it merely appears to be doing, it is not a single instance.
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 09:12:24
(permalink)
SuperG
The key hinge here is 'single instance'. Whatever Totalmix does, it cannot feed multiple signals to a single instance with separate outs for each input, so whatever it merely appears to be doing, it is not a single instance.
Totally agree. Sort of like unscrambling an egg.
|
Kylotan
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 995
- Joined: 2007/09/10 17:27:35
- Location: Nottingham, UK
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 10:06:00
(permalink)
SuperG
The key hinge here is 'single instance'. Whatever Totalmix does, it cannot feed multiple signals to a single instance with separate outs for each input, so whatever it merely appears to be doing, it is not a single instance.
Did you read my post? There don't need to be separate outs for each input. Only one of the 3 audio sources is playing at once, and only one of the audio destinations will be unmuted, so the fact that it all goes through 1 plugin and the same audio gets duplicated 3 ways is not a problem.
Sonar Platinum (Newburyport) / Win 8.1 64bit / Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 / Absynth / Kontakt / Play / Superior Drummer 2 / ESP LTD guitar / etc Twilight's Embrace - gothic/death metal | Other works - instrumental/soundtracks
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 10:13:42
(permalink)
Kylotan
SuperG
The key hinge here is 'single instance'. Whatever Totalmix does, it cannot feed multiple signals to a single instance with separate outs for each input, so whatever it merely appears to be doing, it is not a single instance.
Did you read my post?
There don't need to be separate outs for each input. Only one of the 3 audio sources is playing at once, and only one of the audio destinations will be unmuted, so the fact that it all goes through 1 plugin and the same audio gets duplicated 3 ways is not a problem.
Then all you need is a buss.
|
Kylotan
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 995
- Joined: 2007/09/10 17:27:35
- Location: Nottingham, UK
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 10:31:23
(permalink)
I'll repeat myself:
"He could do the same thing via routing to a bus with Amplitube set as an insert - but then he doesn't get to have the 3 separate post-Amplitube fx bins and fader levels.
A workaround would be to have each track output to the single Amplitube bus, then that sends to 3 separate buses. But now he has to mentally tie his 3 input audio tracks to the 3 output buses. And his pre-Amplitube and post-Amplitube FX (if any) are in completely different places - an awkward workflow."
Sonar Platinum (Newburyport) / Win 8.1 64bit / Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 / Absynth / Kontakt / Play / Superior Drummer 2 / ESP LTD guitar / etc Twilight's Embrace - gothic/death metal | Other works - instrumental/soundtracks
|
johnnyV
Max Output Level: -48.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2677
- Joined: 2010/02/22 11:46:33
- Location: Here, in my chair
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 10:32:22
(permalink)
Bad post delete
post edited by johnnyV - 2014/12/03 21:29:23
Sonar X3e Studio - Waiting for Professional Scarlett 6i6Yamaha Gear= 01v - NSM 10 - DTX 400 - MG82cx Roland Gear= A 49- GR 50 - TR 505 - Boss pedalsTascam Gear= DR 40 - US1641 -Mackie Gear= Mix 8 - SRM 350's i5 Z97 3.2GHZ quad 16 Gig RAM W 8.1 home buildTaylor mini GS - G& L Tribute Tele - 72 Fender Princeton - TC BH 250 - Mooer and Outlaw Pedals Korg 05/RW
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 10:53:43
(permalink)
Kylotan
I'll repeat myself:
"He could do the same thing via routing to a bus with Amplitube set as an insert - but then he doesn't get to have the 3 separate post-Amplitube fx bins and fader levels.
A workaround would be to have each track output to the single Amplitube bus, then that sends to 3 separate buses. But now he has to mentally tie his 3 input audio tracks to the 3 output buses. And his pre-Amplitube and post-Amplitube FX (if any) are in completely different places - an awkward workflow."
Just out to a buss and then export each track one after another. You get three different tracks but you will be able to control the fader on the buss for what volume you want for each. Then import them into the project. If that is what you want.
|
Karyn
Ma-Ma
- Total Posts : 9200
- Joined: 2009/01/30 08:03:10
- Location: Lincoln, England.
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 11:20:01
(permalink)
Kylotan
The thing that has confused most people, because it was seemingly only mentioned in the first post, is that there is "only one track feeding per time". So the fact that all 3 tracks are getting the same audio back from Amplitube doesn't matter - 2 of the 3 tracks are muted/archived. No need for time-sliced demultiplexing. ;)
I didn't miss it and it didn't confuse me. What I posted does exactly what he wants.
Mekashi Futo. Get 10% off all Waves plugins.Current DAW. i7-950, Gigabyte EX58-UD5, 12Gb RAM, 1Tb SSD, 2x2Tb HDD, nVidia GTX 260, Antec 1000W psu, Win7 64bit, Studio 192, Digimax FS, KRK RP8G2, Sonar Platinum
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 11:28:58
(permalink)
@ Kylotan - I don't believe the setup you have drawn is what he's describing, but extra credit for taking the effort to try and explain what you think it is he wants to do. It would be a simple matter for 200 bpm to simply post a screen shot of the Totalmix routing; why he hasn't is just one of this thread's many mysteries.
But, the fact is none of us really knows what goal he wants to accomplish. Basically, he has stated what he thinks is a solution, and stated the solution is not possible within SONAR but is possible if you use Totalmix. However, he has not fully explained the problem the solution is supposed to solve. And I interpreted "only one track feeding per time" differently than you did. I thought he meant that he would only be auditioning one track at a time, but want to be able to switch instantly to a different track, and when he switched, what he would hear would be that track through AmpliTube, controlled by the track's output fader. But in that case, all you would need to do would be to set up three tracks, click the exclusive solo button, and drag Amplitube from one track's FX bin to another track's FX bin. However, it appears that if he were to do that, he ALSO wants the previous track he was listening to to be audible processed by AmpliTube. Maybe. Possibly. Hence Karyn's suggestion about freezing, which certainly appears to do what he wants, based on one of the many possible interpretations of what he wants.
I think the main problem with your translation of 200 bpm's post is where you say "A workaround would be to have each track output to the single Amplitube bus, then that sends to 3 separate buses." But that would mean you would no longer have control over each individual track that went into AmpliTube, and he claimed very specifically that I was wrong to say it's impossible to extract three independent audio streams from a single instance of AmpliTube. He claimed that he could do this with Totalmix. I'm not familiar with the latest version of Totalmix, for all I know maybe it does do time-division multiplexing. That's how Gibson's interfaces for their high-tech guitars (like the FBX) derive individual string outputs from a single stereo cable, so why can't Totalmix?
The issue may not be that he lacks a fundamental understanding of routing principles, he may lack a fundamental understanding of basic audio terms. So until he actually defines the problem he wants to solve instead of what the thinks would be a solution, and who knows whether it would be or not, any solution we offer is based purely on speculation about what his problem actually is.
Meanwhile, I just want him to answer my question because if Totalmix actually does what he claims it does, an RME interface is going to have to be in my budget.
|
Kylotan
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 995
- Joined: 2007/09/10 17:27:35
- Location: Nottingham, UK
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 12:00:59
(permalink)
JohnnyV - the routing is not pointless under these 4 assumptions: (1) He wants to use a single instance of an effect (in this case Amplitube) shared across 3 tracks, (2) he's only going to have one track playing at a time, but wants to be able to switch between them quickly (eg. for comparison purposes), (3) he doesn't want to bounce Amplitube (because he's going to tweak it), and (4) he wants to be able to have 3 different post-Amplitube fader levels (or post-Amplitube FX, which he mentioned in his last post). Nobody else has suggested any way in which he can achieve this combination. Yes, it's the same mix in 3 cases, but he wants them passed through different faders on the way back in. If Amplitube was a piece of hardware he could do this with the External Insert.
John - I'm assuming he doesn't want to export anything because he is still trying to tweak the Amplitube settings to see what works. Perhaps he is trying 3 different mic-ed signals and seeing which works the best. Exporting or bouncing anything would happen later on, by which point this setup is redundant anyway.
Karyn - Well, maybe. You are presuming that he is in a position to bounce down or freeze all his Amplitube tracks. Perhaps he is not, and wants to leave it open so that it can be tweaked later, perhaps in the context of the mix. Nobody wants to be repeatedly re-bouncing every time they tweak a setting. But sure, if he doesn't know that Amplitube can be bounced down but he does just want 3 processed tracks each with a fader, maybe that is the way to approach it.
Anderton - You're right, he hasn't fully explained the problem, but he has sprinkled clues around, mostly in the first post ("I have three DI tracks for bass [..] only one track feeding per time)" - this means he doesn't need to split them out again) and the last post ("there is no way to add different post effects to that many->"one" track"). The simplest explanation to reconcile everything he's said is that he wants to have 3 tracks, each with their own audio, and in the FX bin, among other effects, is Amplitube. But to save memory he wants to share that instance.
"But in that case, all you would need to do would be to set up three tracks, click the exclusive solo button, and drag Amplitube from one track's FX bin to another track's FX bin." As I understand it, this would work, so no - you didn't understand him differently to me. I don't recall anybody suggesting this solution to him yet, though. (Plus, it's rather fiddly.)
"But that would mean you would no longer have control over each individual track that went into AmpliTube" - Why? There are still the 3 source tracks that feed into the bus. Plenty of control there. Not that I think this method would be good.
"he claimed very specifically that I was wrong to say it's impossible to extract three independent audio streams from a single instance of AmpliTube. He claimed that he could do this with Totalmix"
Actually, what he said was you're wrong to say he's not getting three separate audio streams through a single instance. You could take that as implying he gets 3 separate streams out, but it seems more logical that he means it as getting 3 separate audio streams into Amplitube and getting something out. The multiplexing issue is a distraction; if the intermediate plugin doesn't support multiple paths then it's going to be impossible, even if you have mux/demux at the ends. (Excepting the very rare case where each sample can be processed in isolation.)
Sonar Platinum (Newburyport) / Win 8.1 64bit / Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 / Absynth / Kontakt / Play / Superior Drummer 2 / ESP LTD guitar / etc Twilight's Embrace - gothic/death metal | Other works - instrumental/soundtracks
|
Karyn
Ma-Ma
- Total Posts : 9200
- Joined: 2009/01/30 08:03:10
- Location: Lincoln, England.
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 12:07:41
(permalink)
Kylotan
Karyn - Well, maybe. You are presuming that he is in a position to bounce down or freeze all his Amplitube tracks. Perhaps he is not, and wants to leave it open so that it can be tweaked later, perhaps in the context of the mix. Nobody wants to be repeatedly re-bouncing every time they tweak a setting. But sure, if he doesn't know that Amplitube can be bounced down but he does just want 3 processed tracks each with a fader, maybe that is the way to approach it.
He clearly states he doesn't want to end up with Amplitube in all the FX boxes in all the tracks because he doesn't think his computer will handle it. 200bpm
The problem with putting Amplitube in each track FX bin is that I have three instances of the plugin running, and I need to keep the project light for the lowest latency. If I use that strategy everywhere, then I will have a ton of instances running. He has come up with a long winded solution to use just one instance of Amplitube instead which we're saying won't work. The correct way is to freeze...
Mekashi Futo. Get 10% off all Waves plugins.Current DAW. i7-950, Gigabyte EX58-UD5, 12Gb RAM, 1Tb SSD, 2x2Tb HDD, nVidia GTX 260, Antec 1000W psu, Win7 64bit, Studio 192, Digimax FS, KRK RP8G2, Sonar Platinum
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 12:11:16
(permalink)
Karyn
Kylotan
Karyn - Well, maybe. You are presuming that he is in a position to bounce down or freeze all his Amplitube tracks. Perhaps he is not, and wants to leave it open so that it can be tweaked later, perhaps in the context of the mix. Nobody wants to be repeatedly re-bouncing every time they tweak a setting. But sure, if he doesn't know that Amplitube can be bounced down but he does just want 3 processed tracks each with a fader, maybe that is the way to approach it.
He clearly states he doesn't want to end up with Amplitube in all the FX boxes in all the tracks because he doesn't think his computer will handle it.
200bpm
The problem with putting Amplitube in each track FX bin is that I have three instances of the plugin running, and I need to keep the project light for the lowest latency. If I use that strategy everywhere, then I will have a ton of instances running.
He has come up with a long winded solution to use just one instance of Amplitube instead which we're saying won't work.
The correct way is to freeze...
Totally agree!
|
Kylotan
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 995
- Joined: 2007/09/10 17:27:35
- Location: Nottingham, UK
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 12:25:39
(permalink)
Except he's saying it is working. And I can see how he's got it that way. I do a lot of work with amp sims myself so I can see why he wouldn't want to freeze or bounce it, and maybe that's why I understand his situation better.
Sonar Platinum (Newburyport) / Win 8.1 64bit / Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 / Absynth / Kontakt / Play / Superior Drummer 2 / ESP LTD guitar / etc Twilight's Embrace - gothic/death metal | Other works - instrumental/soundtracks
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 12:33:13
(permalink)
Kylotan Anderton - Actually, what he said was you're wrong to say he's not getting three separate audio streams through a single instance. You could take that as implying he gets 3 separate streams out, but it seems more logical that he means it as getting 3 separate audio streams into Amplitube and getting something out. The multiplexing issue is a distraction; if the intermediate plugin doesn't support multiple paths then it's going to be impossible, even if you have mux/demux at the ends. (Excepting the very rare case where each sample can be processed in isolation.)I had already clarified what he wanted before that post, and he said I was correct in identifying what he wanted: "I believe the short answer is no IF what you want to do is mix three tracks into a single VST, then split the output of a single VST three ways so that these outputs join the three tracks that were mixed together, with the output inserting after the FX bin but before the channel fader. Once the signals are mixed together to go into a single VST, there is no way to "unmix" them after the VST."
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 12:35:56
(permalink)
Kylotan
Except he's saying it is working. And I can see how he's got it that way. I do a lot of work with amp sims myself so I can see why he wouldn't want to freeze or bounce it, and maybe that's why I understand his situation better.
But he won't say how it's working, or exactly the problem he is solving. I think you've figured out a solution if the problem is what you've identified, but see my post above, for what he says he wants to do which seems at odds with what you're describing. I still maintain it is not possible to "unmix" the signals coming out of AmpliTube. If you've figured out a way, PM me and I'll turn you on to a great patent attorney
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 12:41:42
(permalink)
I don't think we should be beating ourselves up over this. It is an oddball concept anyway. We have a solution. He can except it or not. He does have that right. Then, I don't know what an insert is. 
|
200bpm
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 337
- Joined: 2014/06/25 15:01:55
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 13:07:44
(permalink)
Kylotan
Ok, having read all this, it sounds to me like what he's doing is pretty reasonable - he wants to share 1 effect plugin across several tracks, and wants to be able to tweak the post-FX levels with those separate track controls.
(There could also be per-track pre-Amplitube FX as well, left off to save space.)
The thing that has confused most people, because it was seemingly only mentioned in the first post, is that there is "only one track feeding per time". So the fact that all 3 tracks are getting the same audio back from Amplitube doesn't matter - 2 of the 3 tracks are muted/archived. No need for time-sliced demultiplexing. ;)
If this was an external piece of hardware it would be trivial to do with the External Insert plugin, but there doesn't seem to be an equivalent for software. And since Sonar people don't think in terms of Send/Returns (as they only really have Sends), this usage doesn't seem 'normal'.
He could do the same thing via routing to a bus with Amplitube set as an insert - but then he doesn't get to have the 3 separate post-Amplitube fx bins and fader levels.
A workaround would be to have each track output to the single Amplitube bus, then that sends to 3 separate buses. But now he has to mentally tie his 3 input audio tracks to the 3 output buses. And his pre-Amplitube and post-Amplitube FX (if any) are in completely different places - an awkward workflow.
Some have mentioned that he could bounce each track - but that would stop him from experimenting with Amplitube settings in the context of tweaking the different pre- and post- fx and levels.
If needed to do this, in Sonar, I would probably just put everything in one track on separate take lanes. They're not really designed for that, but since we lost layers, that's the best we have. Clip automation would handle differences in gain and similar.
As I find quite often, REAPER appears to offer this sort of routing in the box - create a new track with your insert on it, then any track you want can Send to it and Return from it. I couldn't get this to work just now, but the functionality appears to exist there. I hope Sonar start to offer better routing options in future for this sort of thing.
Kylotan, You totally understand! I am happy to hear that Reaper has this routing capability. THat means there is a precedent and Sonar might decide to add it in the future. Craig, I am/was not resistant to describe what I did, just didn't think it would help anyone as the majority of people in the thread didn't understand what I was doing anyway... Some of the suggestions were good, but not exactly what I wanted to do. Going to the effort to "educate" other people who think they know all the answers is an uphill battle. Just not worth my time. As they say, ignorance is bliss. Happy Thanksgiving! PS. I think the take lanes is probably the best solution.
i7 4790K @ 4.8/1.325v Gigabyte Z97X-ud3h, 16GB DDR3 2300, RME UFX, Sonar 3Xe
|
SuperG
Max Output Level: -63 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1371
- Joined: 2012/10/19 16:09:18
- Location: Edgewood, NM
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 17:14:39
(permalink)
Well, I start to see.... Since only one track can be unmuted at a time in this configuration, there's no real benefit over simply disabling/muting/freezing a track/effects on a per track basis - hence the confusion among some very longtime Sonar users. Besides, if you freeze a track with effects in, you essentially disable that track's plugins. You simply unfreeze the *one* track you want to tweak (just as you would be required to do in the current circumstance) - yet this which allows you to have as many plugin instances on tracks as you want as only one is active and loaded.
There's some really smart people here, but I find it hard to believe many would see a benefit to a workflow requiring separate steps that can easily be automated using freeze options.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 20:31:35
(permalink)
200bpm
Craig, I am/was not resistant to describe what I did, just didn't think it would help anyone as the majority of people in the thread didn't understand what I was doing anyway...
As Kylotan has explained what you meant, then you did not get three individual streams out of AmpliTube, just three parallel routings of the same stream to different places. You got my hopes up that Totalmix did some sort of amazing thing...oh well. The good news is now I don't have to set aside a place for it in my budget.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Is there a way to do Channel Insert?
2014/11/27 21:58:43
(permalink)
Just FYI - I figured out how to do what he wants to do in SONAR if you're willing to feed an interface output back to an input. If anyone cares, I can describe...but I think Karyn's freezing approach is the simplest way to accomplish this goal in any DAW.
|