hello
I'm a part timer, hoping someone can tell me if this is possible and maybe where to look to learn how to... A track gets recorded, I want to run it through a compressor or perhaps another piece of hardware. Can I run the recorded track through the hardware and maybe onto a new track with the effect added. I'm using Sonar Platinum and M-Audio M-Track8. I have some decent hardware, but not more than 1 or 2 lines of the good stuff is available per performance. So if I record multiple tracks at once like drums, I'm limited to just preamps for the rest. I'd like to go back individually for each track to make improvements using the hardware. Thank you

I assume you could send the audio out to your audio interface and record it's output to another track sort of thing.
 
Though Sonar has some pretty decent compressors (even some specifically for drums) available.
 
Yes, I could be wrong so you mileage may vary.
 
Good luck!

You should see insert external insert when you right click in an fix bin.

Is must be routed to a hardware output of your computer and back in through a returning hardware input.

So you neede to have enough hardware I/o with your interface...

You could do one track at a time and re/record each track individually...?

Personally I see no point in this. Traditionally we use hardware compressors while tracking to tame any overs. Once the track is recorded we can use plug in compressors on a track because you will maintain your signals integrity.
 
Running audio through A/D   D/A converters instead of staying "in the box" only makes some kind of sense if the converters and the compressors are very very high end. There seems to be a myth that you should run your audio through some analog gear to make it sound better.. This might only be true for the very high end gear. What we have as plug ins, if used properly, blows away most of the hardware that's affordable.   

http://www.cakewalk.com/Documentation?product=SONAR&language=3&help=Mixing.33.html
 

Cactus Music
Personally I see no point in this. Traditionally we use hardware compressors while tracking to tame any overs. Once the track is recorded we can use plug in compressors on a track because you will maintain your signals integrity.
 
Running audio through A/D   D/A converters instead of staying "in the box" only makes some kind of sense if the converters and the compressors are very very high end. There seems to be a myth that you should run your audio through some analog gear to make it sound better.. This might only be true for the very high end gear. What we have as plug ins, if used properly, blows away most of the hardware that's affordable.   

I will say ^This^. But this is Sonar and the great thing about Sonar is that it can pretty much do whatever you want.

Yea, it all depends upon the hardware you want to go through.  Converters, most modern converters are good enough so re-converting doesn't hurt the quality of your sound.  Set up an insert as noted above and run a signal (or silence) in and out and re-record it 2-3 times and see if you can tell the difference.  If the quality sounds the same, you should be good to go.
 
The external hardware compressor (or EQ) should be good enough to add some wow factor to the sound.  Otherwise, digital effects should be fine.  I've done re-recordings with an Warm 76 and WA2A, both takes on classic hardware "effect" compression, where the transformers and circuitry provide a tone or sound to the recording, as well as envelope control of the sound.  Digital emulations get close, mostly close enough, and work well (more for envelope control) when you record through the hardware in the first place.  Playing a take back out and re-recording it is the next best thing and I'll sometimes do that since a "classic' recording chain is going into an 1176 and then into an La2A and some times I don't have both available. 

Cactus Music
Personally I see no point in this. Traditionally we use hardware compressors while tracking to tame any overs. Once the track is recorded we can use plug in compressors on a track because you will maintain your signals integrity.
 
Running audio through A/D   D/A converters instead of staying "in the box" only makes some kind of sense if the converters and the compressors are very very high end. There seems to be a myth that you should run your audio through some analog gear to make it sound better.. This might only be true for the very high end gear. What we have as plug ins, if used properly, blows away most of the hardware that's affordable.

 
Pieces of analog gear are often used for their characteristic quirkiness and are not necessarily expected to be neutral.

Extern hardware makes sense if you have very high-quality equipment. And also very noble digital converters.
Or with very special effects like analog delays or a flanger from EHX ...
No problem with SONAR.
I would play the original track through the equipment and record the output to an other track. No problem.

Lots of myths in the mix here...first off the "average" prosumer converter of todays products can handle frequency conversion FAR OUTSIDE the realm of human hearing...heck 10 year old emu converters will convert A>D>D>A with no perceptual loss in human hearing frequency ranges...this is a scientific fact of the Nyquist frequency formula...(see footnote if you doubt this)
 
The sound you send TO your compressor is exactly the sound you recorded (provided you did not tweak it in the daw, and even if you did it's still a perfect audio signal) so depending on what you want to do with it outside of the box is completely up to you...I send stuff to my SSL comp all the time and the difference is not subtle compared to my UAD or Cakewalk versions of the same compressor...there is absolutely NO degradation in exporting D>A and back in A>D but there is a TON of confirmation bias in this business so be careful what you believe...
 
If you want to be free watch the video in the footnote and check out the info...science is better than rumor.
 
https://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ
 
(NwAVguy quoting AES paper:
Meyer and Moran played SACD content with the ability to switch an A/D –> D/A pair operating at 16 bits and 44 Khz into the signal path. In other words, the high resolution SACD audio was sometimes “down converted” to CD quality. They designed the test to give the listeners “every opportunity” to detect a difference. The testing lasted a year and included 60 members of the Boston Audio Society, many professional recording engineers, fresh eared college students, and a whopping 554 listening trials. After all that, the only way anyone could identify a consistent difference was by cranking the volume unrealistically high during quiet passages exposing the higher noise floor of the 16 bit conversion.
Think about the implications of the above. Most subjective audiophiles claim to hear differences between CD players, DACs, and indeed most anything that performs a digital to analog conversion. They also consider SACD and other high resolution formats as being plainly superior. Why can’t audiophiles detect any difference at all when the music is subjected to an extra A/D and then another extra D/A process when they don’t know that’s happening?) (here: http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011/05/subjective-vs-objective-debate.html)
 
p.s. I built the 02 headphone amp he designed (for less than $100)and it blows everything I have ever used out of the water