Answeredtrack routing question

Author
Post
Essentials Only Full Version
Notecrusher
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 579
  • Joined: 2004/02/17 00:32:14
  • Status: offline
2016/06/04 22:11:36 (permalink)

track routing question

How would you solve this track routing conundrum?
 
You have all the drum channels routed to a bus for combined processing of the drums via automation. You've got some creative FX on there -- distortion, filter, etc.
 
Then you have a bus w/ an EQ for the top end instruments w/ a hipass filter at 10k. You want to send a couple of synths to this EQ along w/ the hihat.
 
So the hihat needs to go through the EQ channel first, then the drum channel. I don't want to route the EQ channel to the drum bus because there's non-drums tracks on there. Both busses should route to MAIN OUT. I can't use a send because the dry signal will get mixed in.
 
#1
See best answerList Solutions Only

16 Replies Related Threads
    chuckebaby
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 13146
    • Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/04 22:41:05 (permalink)
    cant you just use the Quad core EQ in the pro channel on the hi hat track ?
    or create another bus ?
     
    I wouldn't feel like you cant have too many buses.
    I often have one for every sub group, every instrument section and then some for FX and other things as well.
    back in the old days I used to use a bus for FX and that was it. once I started sub grouping, my out look on mixing opened wide up.

    Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64
    Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GB
    Focusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
       
    #2
    tenfoot
    Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2186
    • Joined: 2015/01/22 18:12:07
    • Location: Qld, Australia
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/04 22:42:24 (permalink)
    Could you could set up an aux track with the same eq settings as your top end eq buss, then route the high hat through that before sending it to the drum bus?
     
     

    Bruce.
     
    Sonar Platinum 2017-09, Studio One 3.5.3, Win 10 x64, Quad core i7, RME Fireface, Behringer X32 Producer, Behringer X32 Rack, Presonus Faderport, Lemure Software Controller (Android), Enttec DMXIS VST lighting controller, Xtempo POK.
    #3
    Notecrusher
    Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 579
    • Joined: 2004/02/17 00:32:14
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/04 23:22:18 (permalink)
    chuckebaby
    cant you just use the Quad core EQ in the pro channel on the hi hat track ?

     
     
    tenfoot
    Could you could set up an aux track with the same eq settings as your top end eq buss, then route the high hat through that before sending it to the drum bus?


    This is what I'm doing now, but I don't like it. Duplicating the EQ and its settings isn't a good solution. if I make a change it has to be changed everywhere, that could easily get messed up.
     
    chuckebaby
    I wouldn't feel like you cant have too many buses.
    I often have one for every sub group, every instrument section and then some for FX and other things as well.
    back in the old days I used to use a bus for FX and that was it. once I started sub grouping, my out look on mixing opened wide up.

     
    I don't see how more busses helps. I'm trying to get the right signal flow to the master outs. For the hat that means it has to go through the EQ, then the drum bus.
    #4
    tenfoot
    Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2186
    • Joined: 2015/01/22 18:12:07
    • Location: Qld, Australia
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/05 00:12:05 (permalink)
    Indeed you would need to adjust the second eq if need be, but given the routing scenario you have described I can't see any other solution. You essentially want to combine channels through your top end EQ buss and then split them again to separate busses which is not possible. 
     
    FWIW I would be more inclined to make necessary adjustment to the HH on the Channel EQ. Occam's Razor applied to mixing technique:)
     
    Hopefully someone else will have a solution that suits you.
     
     

    Bruce.
     
    Sonar Platinum 2017-09, Studio One 3.5.3, Win 10 x64, Quad core i7, RME Fireface, Behringer X32 Producer, Behringer X32 Rack, Presonus Faderport, Lemure Software Controller (Android), Enttec DMXIS VST lighting controller, Xtempo POK.
    #5
    Bristol_Jonesey
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 16775
    • Joined: 2007/10/08 15:41:17
    • Location: Bristol, UK
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/05 03:21:34 (permalink)
    No other solution seems apparent.
     
    I would always do my EQ at track level as an insert  effect - putting it on a bus means you'll be running the track(s) that feed it in parallel with the track itself, effectively doubling up on the volume and also you run the risk of introducing phasing issues.
    The only way around this would be to set the output channel of the track to None, but I think this is a very messy solution.
     
    I'm also struggling to understand the benefit of EQ'ing your top end instruments with the exact same EQ curve.
    Each instrument should & must be EQ'd seperately

    CbB, Platinum, 64 bit throughout
    Custom built i7 3930, 32Gb RAM, 2 x 1Tb Internal HDD, 1 x 1TB system SSD (Win 7), 1 x 500Gb system SSD (Win 10), 2 x 1Tb External HDD's, Dual boot Win 7 & Win 10 64 Bit, Saffire Pro 26, ISA One, Adam P11A,
    #6
    tenfoot
    Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2186
    • Joined: 2015/01/22 18:12:07
    • Location: Qld, Australia
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/05 04:33:44 (permalink)
    Bristol_Jonesey
     
    I would always do my EQ at track level as an insert  effect - putting it on a bus means you'll be running the track(s) that feed it in parallel with the track itself, effectively doubling up on the volume and also you run the risk of introducing phasing issues.
    The only way around this would be to set the output channel of the track to None, but I think this is a very messy solution.
     




     
    I presumed the OP is routing the entire track to the EQ/Hi pass bus rather than a parallel send Bristol Jonesey. Totally agree on the track EQ.

    Bruce.
     
    Sonar Platinum 2017-09, Studio One 3.5.3, Win 10 x64, Quad core i7, RME Fireface, Behringer X32 Producer, Behringer X32 Rack, Presonus Faderport, Lemure Software Controller (Android), Enttec DMXIS VST lighting controller, Xtempo POK.
    #7
    Bristol_Jonesey
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 16775
    • Joined: 2007/10/08 15:41:17
    • Location: Bristol, UK
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/05 04:56:15 (permalink)
    I would hope so, otherwise none of it makes sense.

    CbB, Platinum, 64 bit throughout
    Custom built i7 3930, 32Gb RAM, 2 x 1Tb Internal HDD, 1 x 1TB system SSD (Win 7), 1 x 500Gb system SSD (Win 10), 2 x 1Tb External HDD's, Dual boot Win 7 & Win 10 64 Bit, Saffire Pro 26, ISA One, Adam P11A,
    #8
    Notecrusher
    Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 579
    • Joined: 2004/02/17 00:32:14
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/06 02:15:09 (permalink)
    Bristol_Jonesey
    I would always do my EQ at track level as an insert  effect - putting it on a bus means you'll be running the track(s) that feed it in parallel with the track itself, effectively doubling up on the volume and also you run the risk of introducing phasing issues.

     
    No, I said explicitly that this was unacceptable. The high synth and hat OUTPUTS need to route directly to the EQ bus.
    Bristol_Jonesey
    I'm also struggling to understand the benefit of EQ'ing your top end instruments with the exact same EQ curve.
    Each instrument should & must be EQ'd seperately

     
    The use case in my OP as far as one of the busses having an EQ on it is only an example. It has zero relevance to the discussion. That bus could have a delay on it instead. The point is as stated above: the tracks can't be parallel processed. The hat has to get processed through the "EQ bus", then the drum bus, then to main outs. The high synth has to through the EQ bus, then to main outs.
    post edited by Notecrusher - 2016/06/06 04:16:27
    #9
    tenfoot
    Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2186
    • Joined: 2015/01/22 18:12:07
    • Location: Qld, Australia
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/06 03:53:01 (permalink)
    Notecrusher
    The use case in my OP as far as one of the busses having an EQ on it is only an example. It has zero relevance to the discussion. That bus could have a delay on it instead.



    Hey Notecrusher. In light of this I am a little lost as to what you are trying to achieve. Using additive fx like delays and reverbs as a bus send is very different to routing tracks through a bus in order to EQ them as a group. Are you trying to use the top end EQ bus as a parallel send the way you would paralell compression? 
     
    Regardless, it seems the way you would like to achieve your initial scenario involves combining tracks for processing and then redividing them, so the short answer to your quandary is that it is impossible on any DAW without the second bus\aux with cloned EQ. 
     

    Bruce.
     
    Sonar Platinum 2017-09, Studio One 3.5.3, Win 10 x64, Quad core i7, RME Fireface, Behringer X32 Producer, Behringer X32 Rack, Presonus Faderport, Lemure Software Controller (Android), Enttec DMXIS VST lighting controller, Xtempo POK.
    #10
    Notecrusher
    Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 579
    • Joined: 2004/02/17 00:32:14
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/06 04:07:24 (permalink)
    tenfoot
    Are you trying to use the top end EQ bus as a parallel send the way you would paralell compression? 
     
     
    I just edited post #9 which should answer your question: NO. 
    tenfoot
    Regardless, it seems the way you would like to achieve your initial scenario involves combining tracks for processing and then redividing them, so the short answer to your quandary is that it is impossible on any DAW without the second bus\aux with cloned EQ. 

     
    It appears that way. But I wonder if there is some studio trick. And if not in Sonar maybe in some other DAW so I can FR it.
    #11
    Sanderxpander
    Max Output Level: -36.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3873
    • Joined: 2013/09/30 10:08:24
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/06 04:12:03 (permalink)
    The definitive answer was already given by tenfoot several posts ago. You essentially want to combine tracks in a bus and then split them again. That's simply impossible. This isn't midi, with separate channels and note numbers. An audio bus doesn't know what's going through it, it just processes whatever audio stream comes through it.

    So no, you can't do what you want the way you want to. If you also don't like any of the suggested methods that you CAN do, I don't know what to tell you. I will say that all successful music to date has been produced without this "required" technique.
    #12
    stevec
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 11546
    • Joined: 2003/11/04 15:05:54
    • Location: Parkesburg, PA
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/06 14:30:07 (permalink)
    I'm struggling to understand how you envision the plumbing that would allow a single bus to split its outgoing signal solely based on the incoming audio, since buses by nature combine signals and don't just pass them thru as-is.   
     
    Maybe you'd need something like a surround bus whose inputs match its outputs, but I guess that would really be more like a matrix of sorts rather than a traditional bus. 
     

    SteveC
    https://soundcloud.com/steve-cocchi
    http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=39163
     
    SONAR Platinum x64, Intel Q9300 (2.5Ghz), Asus P5N-D, Win7 x64 SP1, 8GB RAM, 1TB internal + ESATA + USB Backup HDDs, ATI Radeon HD5450 1GB RAM + dual ViewSonic VA2431wm Monitors;
    Focusrite 18i6 (ASIO);
    Komplete 9, Melodyne Studio 4, Ozone 7 Advanced, Rapture Pro, GPO5, Valhalla Plate, MJUC comp, MDynamic EQ, lots of other freebie VST plugins, synths and Kontakt libraries
     
    #13
    ramscapri
    Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 316
    • Joined: 2008/03/23 06:02:59
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/06 16:48:22 (permalink) ☼ Best Answerby Notecrusher 2016/06/07 00:58:35
    Notecrusher
    chuckebaby
    cant you just use the Quad core EQ in the pro channel on the hi hat track ?

     
     
    tenfoot
    Could you could set up an aux track with the same eq settings as your top end eq buss, then route the high hat through that before sending it to the drum bus?


    This is what I'm doing now, but I don't like it. Duplicating the EQ and its settings isn't a good solution. if I make a change it has to be changed everywhere, that could easily get messed up.
     



    I could clearly understand what the OP needs but as others pointed out, even I don't see how a bus could be set to two different outputs at the same time because that's what would be required if two different inputs to a bus need to be routed to different destinations. I can't see how that could be done at all, at least till date.
     
    If using a new bus/aux and duplicating the fx plugin settings is what the concern is, I guess what you are implying is that you would make changes to one plugin (say an eq) and then go and make similar changes by opening the 2nd copied plugin. Now this could cause minor differences if you are not looking at the exact numbers and settings in the plugin.
    If you need 100% exact copy of settings, a better solution would be to make changes in one and then delete the other one and ctrl-drag the first one to the 2nd bin (which will copy the plugin with the exact same modified settings). I know this would be cumbersome if the case is for a big number of copies of the plugin but quite a quick and easy solution for a small number, say 5 or less.
     
    This was also suggested in another context by Craig in another thread :   http://forum.cakewalk.com/FindPost/3205192 
    BTW, this thread is about a feature for linking similar fx bin plugins which would be a nice feature to have in this context. 
     
    post edited by ramscapri - 2016/06/06 17:12:56

    ************************************************************
    Sonar Platinum ∞, HP Envy Core i7-4700 Quadcore touchscreen laptop, 16 GB RAM, Windows 10 64-bit, Roland Octacapture, Zoom H6, Akai MPK Mini mk2, Novation Launchpad Mini mk2, NI Komplete 11, KRK KNS-8400, AKG P120
    #14
    SquireBum
    Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 347
    • Joined: 2013/06/26 13:23:55
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/06 20:41:16 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby tenfoot 2016/06/06 22:38:08
    Notecrusher
     
    tenfoot
    Regardless, it seems the way you would like to achieve your initial scenario involves combining tracks for processing and then redividing them, so the short answer to your quandary is that it is impossible on any DAW without the second bus\aux with cloned EQ. 

     
    It appears that way. But I wonder if there is some studio trick. And if not in Sonar maybe in some other DAW so I can FR it.




    The limitation in your scenario is the number of audio channels the DAW supports for each track AND  the number of audio channels that the EQ supports.
     
    The routing scenario you describe is NOT impossible and could be accomplished in another DAW whose name starts with "R".  The other DAW does this by supporting up to 64 separate audio channels per track.
     
    However, if you still want the synthesizers to remain in stereo, the EQ would be required to support at least 4 input channels and 4 output channels to keep the two signal flows separate.
     
    If you don't require stereo output for your synth tracks, then you could achieve this in Sonar:
     
    1. Hard pan the Hi Hat track LEFT and route it to new AUX track, Aux 1.
    2. Hard pan the Synth tracks RIGHT and route them to Aux 1.
    3.  Set Output of AUX 1 to "None".
    4.  Add Pre-fader Send on AUX 1 to new Hi Hat Bus and pan Hard LEFT.
    5.  Add Pre-fader Send on AUX 1 to Synths Bus and pan hard RIGHT.
    6.  Add EQ to AUX 1.
    6.  Set new Hi Hat Bus to Mono interleave and output to Drum Bus.  Hi Hat Bus is needed to center panned signal.
    7.  Set Synths Bus to Mono interleave to center panned signal.
     
    HiHat track --> AUX 1 -------->  Pre-fader send  --> HiHat Bus (mono interleave) --> Drum Bus
    pan full LEFT                              pan full LEFT
     
    Synth tracks --> AUX 1  ----->  Pre-fader send  -->  Synth Bus (mono interleave)
    pan full RIGHT                           pan full RIGHT
     
    -- Ron

    Cakewalk by Bandlab, Sonar Platinum x64 2017.10, X3E, X2a, X1d, 8.5
    Windows 10 x64
    AMD Phenom II X4 955 3.20 GHz
    8 GB Ram
    Nvidia GeForce 9500 GT
    Echo Gina 3G
    #15
    Notecrusher
    Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 579
    • Joined: 2004/02/17 00:32:14
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/06 21:28:12 (permalink)
    ramscapri
    http://forum.cakewalk.com/FindPost/3205192 
    this thread is about a feature for linking similar fx bin plugins which would be a nice feature to have in this context. 

     
    Now we're getting somewhere!!! Using groups is kinda clunky cos you need to hand map every parameter and you're limited to four (of Sonar's choosing) AFAICT. Azslow's solution, which links and syncs all params across FX looks a lot better. I'll have to install AZ Controller and try it out.
     
    post edited by Notecrusher - 2016/06/06 22:28:34
    #16
    tenfoot
    Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2186
    • Joined: 2015/01/22 18:12:07
    • Location: Qld, Australia
    • Status: offline
    Re: track routing question 2016/06/06 22:20:28 (permalink)
    SquireBum
    Notecrusher
     
    tenfoot
    Regardless, it seems the way you would like to achieve your initial scenario involves combining tracks for processing and then redividing them, so the short answer to your quandary is that it is impossible on any DAW without the second bus\aux with cloned EQ. 

     
    It appears that way. But I wonder if there is some studio trick. And if not in Sonar maybe in some other DAW so I can FR it.




    The limitation in your scenario is the number of audio channels the DAW supports for each track AND  the number of audio channels that the EQ supports.
     
    The routing scenario you describe is NOT impossible and could be accomplished in another DAW whose name starts with "R".  The other DAW does this by supporting up to 64 separate audio channels per track.
     
    However, if you still want the synthesizers to remain in stereo, the EQ would be required to support at least 4 input channels and 4 output channels to keep the two signal flows separate.
     
    If you don't require stereo output for your synth tracks, then you could achieve this in Sonar:
     
    1. Hard pan the Hi Hat track LEFT and route it to new AUX track, Aux 1.
    2. Hard pan the Synth tracks RIGHT and route them to Aux 1.
    3.  Set Output of AUX 1 to "None".
    4.  Add Pre-fader Send on AUX 1 to new Hi Hat Bus and pan Hard LEFT.
    5.  Add Pre-fader Send on AUX 1 to Synths Bus and pan hard RIGHT.
    6.  Add EQ to AUX 1.
    6.  Set new Hi Hat Bus to Mono interleave and output to Drum Bus.  Hi Hat Bus is needed to center panned signal.
    7.  Set Synths Bus to Mono interleave to center panned signal.
     
    HiHat track --> AUX 1 -------->  Pre-fader send  --> HiHat Bus (mono interleave) --> Drum Bus
    pan full LEFT                              pan full LEFT
     
    Synth tracks --> AUX 1  ----->  Pre-fader send  -->  Synth Bus (mono interleave)
    pan full RIGHT                           pan full RIGHT
     
    -- Ron



    Whilst I wouldn't use this particular routing/eq technique and wouldn't sacrifice stereo output of my synths, I gotta say that's a pretty clever solution Ron:)

    Bruce.
     
    Sonar Platinum 2017-09, Studio One 3.5.3, Win 10 x64, Quad core i7, RME Fireface, Behringer X32 Producer, Behringer X32 Rack, Presonus Faderport, Lemure Software Controller (Android), Enttec DMXIS VST lighting controller, Xtempo POK.
    #17
    Jump to:
    © 2025 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1