Sends housed in Mix Channels

[Loque]

Just one question.... The Direct Out is not delay compensated. Does this have an impact on the sound of this is used as Send Return?

It’s the mix channel itself that inserts the delay, whether or not you use the direct outs.

The only time you’ll have an issue is when using an effect that doesn’t involve delay (anything that’s not a reverb/delay/phaser/flanger/chorus/doubler etc.), which is not common for most folks. Although one could argue you’ll get a slightly different effect with the phaser/flanger family of FX, it’s probably not noticeable in most cases.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

That means, if the fx has any delay, it will have an effect on the result? Might be not audible by a lot of fx, but can happen and the fx will be phasy, washed or out of sync. Is that correct?

[antic604]

As I said, it copies Mix Channel's name to Send label in Mixer. Not the effect's [emoji3] That's good enough for me [emoji1]

Not meaning to get overly pendantic, but you actually said: “It's the only way to have send effect names (that are visible in Mixer) linked to Mix Channel names.”
It’s actually the other way around, right?

I think I worded it just right - if you rename Mix Channel, the name will appear in SSL Mixer's send/return slot; not the other way around. But that's nitpicking

[Ahornberg]

for interest, here is my template song

_loop.zip

(74.98 KiB) Downloaded 121 times

[deepndark]

Not done this but I can sure see where it would be handy.
An additional question, have none of you created a mix channel to use the SSL EQ for mastering, propably lots of you have.

[napynap]

By "sends" I assume you're talking about putting your FX devices into Mix Channel inserts? Technically speaking (and apologies in advance for being pedantic here) the "sends" are just an audio bus where the signal comes from (and the path it travels) - meaning, you can use sends for many different things other than FX such as headphone mixes or for sub-groups to name a few. So it took me a second to understand exactly what you meant (especially since you didn't show any FX in your screen shot).

But now I understand what you're doing, which is functionally exactly the same as using Mix Channels as returns.
As for "grouping" FX, I already do that with Combinators, so there's no advantage with regards to that approach.

The disadvantages are exactly the same as using Mix Channels in place of Returns:
•You can't solo a channel and hear all it's associated FX.
•You add 64 samples of delay on the FX (there's no delay when you use Returns).
•More Mix Channels in the mixer (only a problem because you can't show/hide them).

The advantages have already been mentioned, and yes you CAN send the FX back into itself (with the afore mentioned 64 samples of delay), so be careful!

As for routing all the FX to a new output bus, I'm not sure why you'd want to control all your FX's level as one, but this would definitely help when soloing a channel because you can also quickly solo the FX bus as a whole, meaning you only have to solo in one other place to hear any/all associated FX when soloing any channel.

To me, it makes more sense to route the Mix Channels as Returns, if only because that's how I used the hardware SSL channels back in the day. But again, functionally absolutely no difference one way or the other, other than there being more cabling with this approach.

Thanks Selig! This is great info on this topic.

[selig]

It’s the mix channel itself that inserts the delay, whether or not you use the direct outs.

The only time you’ll have an issue is when using an effect that doesn’t involve delay (anything that’s not a reverb/delay/phaser/flanger/chorus/doubler etc.), which is not common for most folks. Although one could argue you’ll get a slightly different effect with the phaser/flanger family of FX, it’s probably not noticeable in most cases.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

That means, if the fx has any delay, it will have an effect on the result? Might be not audible by a lot of fx, but can happen and the fx will be phasy, washed or out of sync. Is that correct?

It means for FX with no intended delay, such as a compressor or saturator or EQ, you will hear comb filtering effects.

But also, adding comb filtering to effects such as flanger/phaser that ALSO produce comb filtering FX MAY be a problem.

Reverbs and delays should be absolutely no problem IMO and in my experience.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[selig]

Not done this but I can sure see where it would be handy.
An additional question, have none of you created a mix channel to use the SSL EQ for mastering, propably lots of you have.

The SSL EQ, my all time favorite “channel EQ”, sits in between the wide EQ approach such as Pultec types and the surgical types that are both more commonly used for mastering.

Of course, I have my own preference for a mastering EQ that can handle all three approaches and more...


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk