How To Work With Sends?

D

Doctor Varney

Cave dwelling Luddite
I have several tracks which I want to pass through the same EQ but some of them to go into a reverb. The problem is I want all of the chosen tracks to pass through the EQ but only some to the reverb. I want the reverb to be side chained (is that the right term?) so that I can have a mix of wet and dry signal coming from the source track and the reverb respectively, to the master. I want the signals to pass first through the EQ and then into the reverb, without the need for several copies of the same EQ on each track. How do I do that?
 
Create an aux track to be an effects bus. Insert a reverb on the aux track, set it to 100% effect. Create another aux track to be a submix group bus. Assign all the relevant tracks, including aux track with the reverb, to the submix group track, insert an eq on the group track. Set the sends on the tracks that need reverb to post fader/0dB and keep the others at -∞. Control the overall reverb balance against the dry with the reverb aux track volume, control the relative reverb between tracks with the sends, eq them all together on the submix track, assign the submix track to the main mix.
 
Thanks, Boulder.

I don't seem to have a 'post fader' setting on my tracks. :confused:

This way, for me, ends up with the tracks going first to the reverb then onto the EQ. What I was hoping for was to EQ the tracks, then be able to send them, individually, to the reverb, after the EQ.
 
Can't you apply EQ per track...?....then apply a reverb to an Aux bus and send them there as needed.

I don't even understand why you would want to send a bunch of tracks to one EQ...???...like what single EQ setting can possibly apply to a bunch of different tracks? Are they the same kind of tracks, just different takes...?

If you are going to apply EQ to the whole stereo mix, that's a different thing, but individual tracks usually get EQ'd individually.
 
Well, it's not music, so I can understand why that would create some confusion. They are speech tracks, by the same person and so one EQ is good for all. Only when I use a different speaker will I use a different EQ, to suit their individual sound. When I'm making electronic music, very little EQing seems necessary, apart from drums.

Yes, I could EQ each track, but I just prefer not to. I figured I should be able to do this with routing.

I could, I suppose, automate the reverb on and off throughout... but that will probably just take a lot of extra work and make the project rather inflexible.

Or maybe what I'm trying to do, just isn't possible? Or maybe I am being too fussy in wanting the signal EQed before it hits the reverb?
 
Since it's the same person, then why not comp the multiple tracks down to one....EQ it...apply reverb to it....?
 
Good idea.

I think I've got it, though. In a non-destructive way. FL gives me this light plugin: "Send" which allows me to cream audio off from any point in the FX chain and send it to one of the fixed send tracks. I can mix wet and dry levels right there in this simple little plugin, from the source track. Before this, I've inserted an EQ and another, with identical settings on another aux track. Everything I don't want reverbed gets sent to this EQed aux bus, while the one I want reverbed has to get a copy of the EQ and a "Send" module routed to the reverb. This puts everything in the order I wanted and sounds sweet.

It would be SO straightforward to EQ all tracks at once, if I hadn't wanted the reverb.

Yes, it seems FL Studio does things differently to most other DAWs, in it's own weird and wonderful way. Probably not ideal for someone wanting to learn standard ops and I can imagine it confusing some old timers, coming from the analogue world or any 'ordinary' DAW.

Thanks for the insight, anyway, guys.
 
Route the tracks to one group -- EQ the group. The reverb sends are going to be another story (but I would imagine if you need stingers on certain words or something, simple automation will take care of that as a send from the group.
 
Cheers!

Hang on... looks I have got a 'create submix' option on each track but it doesn't seem to do anything other than what I've done manually.
 
If you draw it out -like a flow diagram you'd make the several track lines joining to a single point, which is a sub group or sub bus, and where you'd typically go to do your 'one and the same process for all.
Their level in that mix' is back at their track faders.
But the only place you can get independent verb levels is back before they're combined -pre EQ.

So yes, an eq for each track, or automate the verb after an eq bus. There's also the option to 'bounce down or 'Apply Audio Effects to the track (or this process can make a new track, and you mute the old), but that's just an FYI'. In this case that'd be way more moves
 
Pt gives me 5 sends per track which makes this no problem.

If I had to do it 'long hand' I'd probably set up 3 aux tracks and use main outputs instead of sends.

Aux 1+2 would have your eq.
Aux 3 would have your verb. (use wet/dry mix instead of as parallel)

Set the outputs so that tracks go to 1 which goes to 3, or go to 2 which goes to master out.
Requires 2 eq plugs but it's still a lot tidier than before.

That's just one way to skin the cat.
 
Cheers, I have it pretty much worked out now. I just wanted to streamline the project a bit as I am working with an older computer and I anticipate there will be some very long WAV files present. I managed to use a 'send' plugin and any tracks I want reverbed, I can just throw on an extra copy of the EQ just before the rest of the signal is sent off to the reverb. The rest will just get sent to the EQ/ FX bus. If that makes sense.

Thanks for the input.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top