Newbie Cubase Question: Using Plugins while Recording

[hugocat]

Hey all -

Can any one offer me any help with Cubase? I'm about to punch the screen right now!! ARGhh!!

Basically, I'm trying to learn how to use plugins: I've figured out how to apply effects (compression etc) to my tracks AFTER I record, but can't find out how to apply them to the tracks WHILE they;re being recorded.

Am I being crazy/dumb? I just want to be able to adjust eq, compression etc while I'm recording....

If anyone can recommend a tutorial, youtube video, anything!! I really have tried my best before posting here, but am out of patience!!

Thanks
J

 

[philbagg]

Hey all -

Can any one offer me any help with Cubase? I'm about to punch the screen right now!! ARGhh!!

Basically, I'm trying to learn how to use plugins: I've figured out how to apply effects (compression etc) to my tracks AFTER I record, but can't find out how to apply them to the tracks WHILE they;re being recorded.

Am I being crazy/dumb? I just want to be able to adjust eq, compression etc while I'm recording....

If anyone can recommend a tutorial, youtube video, anything!! I really have tried my best before posting here, but am out of patience!!

Thanks
J

I've dabbled a bit in Cubase, but not enough to know how to do this, but maybe you can learn from the way I'd do it in Pro Tools.

Set up an audio track (track A) that you'll be recording onto. Then, put some plug-ins on track A. Then, set the output of that track to another track (track B) via a bus, and record-arm track B aswell. Then, when you begin recording, you'll have your dry/unprocessed audio which gets recorded before it hits the plug-ins on track A, then you have the audio go through the plug-ins, through the bus, onto track B, and recorded with your FX.

Just one question, why do you need to process before recording? In digital recording it's no longer necessary to do it. And it has the exact same effect as processing AFTER your recording, the only difference is that you can change it if you did something wrong.

 

[Seidy]

look at the picture:
http://musikality.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/cubase4_2.jpg

do you see the speaker button next to track arm button? turn that on, turn off realtime monitoring elsewhere (or you will get dry+cubase signal) and you are good to go. note that you have to have very-very small latency to process in realtime.
oh and when playing back, turn off the button with speaker on it.

 

[hugocat]

Thanks guys - Now I understand it a lot more!!

Actually Philbagg, you have a good point about adding effects after recording: I guess I'm just old-fashioned, but will start to add after a lot more.....

Thanks!!
J

 

[philbagg]

You're better off Adding plug-in processing during tracking (permanently) has no advantages and just leaves you with less options.

 

[Bristol Posse]

You're better off Adding plug-in processing during tracking (permanently) has no advantages and just leaves you with less options.

That's not always a bad thing assuming you know what you want to achieve before you hit the record button.

YMMV of course

 

[philbagg]

That's not always a bad thing assuming you know what you want to achieve before you hit the record button.

YMMV of course

You're right, it's not always a bad thing. Sometimes it will just work and there'll be no regrets. But there's no advantage to doing it before the fact, rather than after. If you can set up plug-ins before you track, you can set them up afterwards too.

 

[Bristol Posse]

You're right, it's not always a bad thing. Sometimes it will just work and there'll be no regrets. But there's no advantage to doing it before the fact, rather than after. If you can set up plug-ins before you track, you can set them up afterwards too.

True enough!

Two things though
1) processing when recording means you can dump the plugin during mixing which can be useful if you are running out CPU power. If you know you're going to do it anyway, and are comfortable setting up the plug why not save that power for something else.

2) sometimes you get a different performance if you are tracking with effects vs dry
two examples from my own experience that makes me track with effects (of course this is only relevant to me so I will once again caveat with YMMV)

I use amp sims a lot (yeah I know!). I get the tone I want I practice it through the sim and when it comes time to record I put the Sim on the input bus and record the tracks wet, through the sims and effects. If I record them dry I don't get the same performance and it doesn't sound as good if I add the sim after recording (I have tried both ways several times)

I have a compressor I like on my vocal in some songs (in this case hardware but it could equally be the same with software). If it's appropriate for the song and I know I will use it anyway, I track through it cause I sing differently when I hear myself back through the compressor vs. hearing the vocal dry while I'm singing the track.

Neither of these are "the right thing to do" just throwing it out there that while there is no real reason to use effects on the way in, there's also no reason not to if it gets you the result you want.

 

[philbagg]

Sorry Bristol but I gotta poke a few holes in these

Two things though
1) processing when recording means you can dump the plugin during mixing which can be useful if you are running out CPU power. If you know you're going to do it anyway, and are comfortable setting up the plug why not save that power for something else.

With Cubase you can freeze your tracks. This renders the audio with plug-in processing, freeing up CPU, and it can be undone later (which you can't do with recording w/processing).

2) sometimes you get a different performance if you are tracking with effects vs dry
two examples from my own experience that makes me track with effects (of course this is only relevant to me so I will once again caveat with YMMV)

I completely agree about using FX while recording to make it an easier experience. But plug-ins come after the recording. (lol @ but plug-ins ) So, you can set up your EQ's, compressors, reverbs etc on your destination track, to get the sound you want, but your recording is still going down before it reaches processing. So you can record with FX and change them afterwards. And if you got it right while tracking, then there's no need to change them, just freeze the track and you're set.

I just personally wouldn't like to lose a good performance due to not leaving myself more options for something unnecessary. Although, like you, I hate recording dry.

When I record my guitar with an amp, I like to apply a rough EQ (HPF, a little brightening/darkening etc.), and especially when I'm doing lead stuff I drown it in reverb because I enjoy sounding like I'm in St. Pauls Cathedral when I'm rockin out It helps me perform, or maybe I perform just as badly and enjoy it more However, the recording goes down just as dry as before it hit the plugs, and I can adjust it later if needs be (especially turning down the reverb).

I don't use my amp as much these days (it's fooked), and like you I use an amp sim (Guitar Rig). I like to record with a lot of gain, but I know it clutters up the mix so I want to adjust the gain of GR afterwards. I record my dry guitar signal onto an audio track in Pro Tools, bus that out to a stereo auxiliary track with Guitar rig on it, and have guitar rig going out to my monitors (I don't hear the DI). So I still get the performance of playing through a setup, and I can adjust it afterwards. Then, once I'm happy, I'll record the rig sound onto audio.

-end of speech-

 

[Bristol Posse]

Just goes to show there's no one way right way to do it

But plug-ins come after the recording. (lol @ but plug-ins ) So, you can set up your EQ's, compressors, reverbs etc on your destination track, to get the sound you want, but your recording is still going down before it reaches processing.

point of order here, I guess it depends on the DAW. on mine I route the incomming signal to an input bus where all the plugins are added and the wet signal is then passed to the track where it is recorded. So in my case the signal hits the converters then the Input Bus/effects and then the track, no dry recording is ever made when I use this method. There's no plugins inserted on the recorded track

I just personally wouldn't like to lose a good performance due to not leaving myself more options for something unnecessary. Although, like you, I hate recording dry.

I can see that. my workflow is different that's all

 

[philbagg]

Just goes to show there's no one way right way to do it


point of order here, I guess it depends on the DAW. on mine I route the incomming signal to an input bus where all the plugins are added and the wet signal is then passed to the track where it is recorded. So in my case the signal hits the converters then the Input Bus/effects and then the track, no dry recording is ever made when I use this method. There's no plugins inserted on the recorded track



I can see that. my workflow is different that's all

Each to their own I guess This reminds me of a time when I was recording guitar on an EP with some halfwit engineer a few years back, who we all thought was amazing. None of us had a clue about recording.

It was day three and it was time to lay down my guitar leads. So, we got the guitar, hooked it up to a BOSS Metal Zone (what was I thinking ), and then to some shitty 10-watt amp that the guy had in his studio. And I don't mean the good kind of 10-watt recording amp, no. A very thin, weak sounding amp. So, I was displeased with the sound (there was no other gear around and we had to track there and then, I figured it could be fixed in the mix ). All I asked for was a basic headphone mix and a lot of reverb on my guitar. He very angrily refused to put any reverb on my guitar during tracking. He was snapping at me and everything. Apparently, he wouldn't do it because he had to hear it as clearly as possible to make sure it was recorded perfectly.

1) We didn't employ him as a producer, just an engineer/studio owner. That decision should've been left up to us.
2) We were going to put reverb on the guitar in the mix anyway, so why not monitor like that?
3) Could he not have just sent the reverb to my cans and muted it on his monitors?
4) How he couldn't hear a guitar clearly with reverb is beyond me

So, I grudgingly put down the tracks, dry. And after finishing the best take, I asked to hear it back with reverb (it was crying out for it). He starts going nuts again! Same deal

Funnily enough, he wanted the tracks to go down perfectly. Yet he completely disagreed with me when I told him that my guitar and the bass were out of tune with the acoustic. I have almost (if not complete) perfect pitch. He wouldn't listen.

He tuned the acoustic to a piano, perfectly. This was being recorded after the drums, before bass and electric. Then, the acoustic guitarist/singer put a capo on the guitar after the tuning, sharpening the pitch a few cents. We didn't notice at the time because it was the guide and he was only playing with drums. But when we got around to recording, we didn't have capos on our instruments, so we were flat compared to him. Mr. Producer just wouldn't listen to me. So I had to try and slightly bend as many notes as possible during my parts just to match the tuning. Didn't matter anyway, the bass is out.

Then, I learned about recording, properly. It has shown me how much of a tool that guy is I know this all has very little to do with the subject at hand, just thought I'd share the story seen as how the OP seems to have sorted the problem

If you want to hear some of the tracks I'll post em.