ULTRABRA
if I have FX on the Strings Bus, they will now also effect the reverb.

In addition to assuming you would want to continue using the Reverb bus universally for other tracks, that's another reason why I suggested using a pre-Reverb bus to collect the sends from the string tracks.
 
What I meant by that is you create another bus that outputs to the Reverb bus and call it something like String Sends. Then group its volume with the Strings bus volume, and re-assign the sends from the String tracks to this bus.
 
This way you still have individual control of the send volumes but their contribution to the Reverb bus is tied to the output level of the Strings bus, and the Reverb bus still returns to Master in parallel with the Strings bus as it should and can still be used by other track sends.
 
I think this solves all the problems.

ULTRABRA
Hi Keni - thanks for the suggestion.   In my example, I would want to have control of different amounts of reverb for each instrument that goes to the Strings bus - so not the same amount of reverb for the group as a whole.   

Hi Ultrabra...

Then the already posted idea of simply sending from each track to a reverb bus... And if so desired, grouping any sends in their' relative settings should fit the bill...?

Keni

ULTRABRA
I tested it and it works OK except ... if I have FX on the Strings Bus, they will now also effect the reverb.    I guess I could make a 3rd bus which the unFXd reverb is sent to, and also the Strings Bus is routed through on the way to Master, and have this buss's fader control overall volume of both ... though this sounds like its way to complex ...

Then simply return the reverb bus to the master?

Keni

brundlefly

ULTRABRA
if I have FX on the Strings Bus, they will now also effect the reverb.

In addition to assuming you would want to continue using the Reverb bus universally for other tracks, that's another reason why I suggested using a pre-Reverb bus to collect the sends from the string tracks.
 
What I meant by that is you create another bus that outputs to the Reverb bus and call it something like String Sends. Then group its volume with the Strings bus volume, and re-assign the sends from the String tracks to this bus.
 
This way you still have individual control of the send volumes but their contribution to the Reverb bus is tied to the output level of the Strings bus, and the Reverb bus still returns to Master in parallel with the Strings bus as it should and can still be used by other track sends.
 
I think this solves all the problems.

That's a great solution! I like that better than my suggestion of routing the reverb bus to the string bus, as it allows for more flexibility and only requires a single reverb bus. I'll be using that approach myself from now on. Thanks, brundlefly!

I recently started doing reverb this way: I "midi learn" the reverb (or wet/dry) button on the native reverb for each synth. Thus I can control the exact amount of native reverb for each instrument, using the purple sonar reverb sliders (Sonar 8.5). Then, I have each synth routed to a Reverb Bus, on which I have Spaces Reverb (Northwest Hall). I can use my ears to try to equalize the reverb of all instruments, before it gets to the reverb bus to be glued together. This way I can compensate for the differences in libraries (for example, East West SO very wet; Vienna Sp Ed very dry). My synths are: Aria; Play; Kontakt with CS2; Dim Pro and TTS-1. I can adjust each synths native reverb with the slider, equalizing them as much as possible, so that when they get sent to the Spaces Reverb bus, they will sound like the are all in the same hall.

I treat reverb as separate entities on their own bus or busses if I am using true stereo presets. This means a separate export can be made and the reverb can be turned up or down, possibly re-equalised when it comes to mastering.