None of those scenarios were mentioned in the OP's post. Again I made allowance for odd situations. If the signal is different on the track then it would appear on the bus then that would work as you state. But none of that was introduced. Thus I stand by what I said and how I said it. Its still accurate.

ORIGINAL: John

None of those scenarios were mentioned in the OP's post. Again I made allowance for odd situations. If the signal is different on the track then it would appear on the bus then that would work as you state. But none of that was introduced. Thus I stand by what I said and how I said it. Its still accurate.

Yep -- I was mostly just recalling times where I started with a buss solution and then had to back out of it because of the "order of effects" issue. But, mainly, I was just voting for the proposed shortcut enhancement... well, if there were a vote, that is!

ORIGINAL: John

Thus I stand by what I said and how I said it. Its still accurate.

no fooling
when does that rod get removed?

ORIGINAL: John

Are you seriously trying to tell me that you believe the sum of 10 processed tracks is equivalent to processing the sum of those 10 tracks?

Why wouldn't it be?

Because that's not how processing and the digital math behind it works. That's OK ... now I understand where "you're at" with this stuff and can take that into consideration!

ORIGINAL: MatsonMusicBox

ORIGINAL: John

Are you seriously trying to tell me that you believe the sum of 10 processed tracks is equivalent to processing the sum of those 10 tracks?

Why wouldn't it be?

Because that's not how processing and the digital math behind it works. That's OK ... now I understand where "you're at" with this stuff and can take that into consideration!

So how does it matter you explain? If you can't don't feel bad because there is no deference. Bits are bits.

KenM, the way you describe your intended pupose, you're using the SSL channel plug to create the virtual ITB equivalent of an SSl console, right? So wouldn't it be in you interest to create a Project Template and then use it whenever you start a new project? I guess I don't see why everybody's arguing or what they're arguing about...

Templates are a great way to customize Sonar for each user's preferences.

J Boy ... first of all .. this is not my thread - I'm not the OP. I suggested a reason why someone would want to add the same effect to multiple tracks at the same time. I've never said there aren't other ways to acoomplish the same goal in the end .. and in fact, I do use templates. I've also said it's not a big deal to do it these ways.

BUT - that doesn't mean it would not be nice to be able to just do it with a multi-select and insert.

Look - I could do it with templates, I could do it with track templates, I could copy and paste, I could ctrl drag copy, I could simply insert it on each one, I could probably, with enough time and learning curve, hack the project file directly with a Hex editor and do it, I could pay a trained monkey to come and do it for me when I need it.

There's lot's of ways to accomplish it, all with varying degrees of convenience and depending on where in your process you are and what workflow you prefer. Why is everyone so gung ho on trying to prove that there are other ways to get there? NONE are as easy or intuitive as what the OP wanted and what I suggested.

ORIGINAL: John
So how does it matter you explain? If you can't don't feel bad because there is no deference. Bits are bits.

All I can suggest john is set it up, export it both ways, and compare ... it will be very obvious depending on the signal, the effect used, other effects in the chain, etc.

This is really silly .... you apparently don't even have a clue how this stuff works ... sorry to bother you ...

I get tracks to mix all the time. It would be nice to select a number of tracks and insert the same plugin on all of the tracks at once, as I probably don't have a template saved for this person's track layout. In Pro Tools, you can do this easily, and assign outs in series, and easily do things to all tracks at once with modifier keys. This is a feature I have been requesting as well.

For example, I may want to take 8 tracks of backup vocals and compress each one with the same compressor, but each one set for that person's voice. Then I may send that group of vocalists to a bus, and put an overall compressor on that bus. Works great, and is standard practice. Perfect reason to have the same insert on many tracks. Of course you can insert one, then copy it track to track, but a shortcut would save time again and again.

I totally want exactly what the OP was talking about. I have 16 threads at 4ghz so I don't really have to worry about cpu usage, but I DO worry about having to click and drag a plugin I want on every channel anyway (such as Softube Tape with slight variances to the saturation, gain, character, crossover, etc but that I'll do myself as I go) especially when it's a 50+ track mixing project ;)