Technical question about mix channel combi vs. FX combi

This forum is for discussing Reason. Questions, answers, ideas, and opinions... all apply.
chaosroyale
Posts: 589
Joined: 05 Sep 2017

Post 17 Dec 2020

Does anyone know if there is any difference - particularly regarding batch latency or delay compensation - between using effects nested inside the mix channel's built-in "combinator" compared to taking the cables from the insert jacks to and from an external FX combinator?

The reason I ask, is because I am starting to hate the look of the mix channel combinator with its tiny knobs and wasted space on the right side (because you cannot close the programmer and still access the knobs). I would prefer to use my "traditional" FX combinators with nice custom skins and save space in my rack at the same time.

User avatar
Loque
Moderator
Posts: 8646
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

Post 17 Dec 2020

Hmm... I remember the was a difference which was the reason i use Combinators today
:reason: 11, Win10 64Bit.

User avatar
antic604
Posts: 655
Joined: 02 Apr 2020

Post 18 Dec 2020

I don't think so. Only using the Direct Out aren't latency compensated AFAIK.
Music tech enthusiast.
DAW, VST & hardware hoarder.
My "music": https://soundcloud.com/antic604

chaosroyale
Posts: 589
Joined: 05 Sep 2017

Post 18 Dec 2020

Yeah, if they designed it logically, anything using the "insert FX" jacks should work identically. After all, the only difference is whether the FX devices are sitting inside the GUI of the mix channel or inside a combinator below the mix channel. The routing is exactly the same.

But batch delays are poison to things like sidechain compression so I want to be really sure.
antic604 wrote:
18 Dec 2020
I don't think so. Only using the Direct Out aren't latency compensated AFAIK.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 9053
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

Post 18 Dec 2020

Yea it works exactly the same in or out of the "container", same delay compensation inside the insert container, outside, or outside + in a Combinator.

BTW, I've been doing it this way forever, first to not loose routings in Combinators when dragging them into Inserts, but also when the ability to re-route based on position (shift-drag) was added. Finally I could move Combinators around in an insert without flipping the rack OR loosing assignments!
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
Loque
Moderator
Posts: 8646
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

Post 18 Dec 2020

Yes, that was. The re-routing thing. You cannot easily re-route a mix channel. The other thing is, i often forgot where i had insert fx inside a mix channel and tried to visualize it somehow, but failed. So now i keep everything outside or inside a combinator, but at least outside of the mix channel. Its still difficult to find a specific device, but the chance is better that way.
:reason: 11, Win10 64Bit.

chaosroyale
Posts: 589
Joined: 05 Sep 2017

Post 18 Dec 2020

Great, thanks everyone.

I thought that was how it had to work, but I just had a nagging feeling I might have missed something. Guess I can photoshop a few FX combi skins to help me organize the rack better! That's always a nice little motivation booster.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 9053
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

Post 18 Dec 2020

I also sometimes do the exact opposite - put everything INSIDE the insert. For example, if using a Redrum, I put it in the insert so that everything related to that channel is in one place. Then I can "close up" everything in the Rack and see a single device for every instrument rather than a cluttered collection of stuff (which you can still do if you want!).

It's one step closer to how I feel a DAW should work, with one place for EVERYTHING related to each instrument. So, no separate Mix Channel + Sequencer Track for notes + Sequencer Track for fader automation + Rack for devices and so on. It should just be Drums, Bass, Pad, Lead, etc. with everything belonging to the drums in one place, everything related to bass in one place, and so on. You can expand any section for each sub-heading, such as Drums as the header, kick/snare/hat/toms/cymbals as the sub header as in "foldable" mixer channels and sequencer tracks. Same for the sequencer, you can see the primary Note/Audio/Automation data or zoom into individual lanes as needed.
Maybe one day… ;)
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 9053
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

Post 18 Dec 2020

chaosroyale wrote:
18 Dec 2020
Great, thanks everyone.

I thought that was how it had to work, but I just had a nagging feeling I might have missed something. Guess I can photoshop a few FX combi skins to help me organize the rack better! That's always a nice little motivation booster.
Yea, I just made one for my Mastering chain (Ozone Elements and Selig Gain, not much of a "chain"), because I keep THAT out of the Master Insert as well. Actually, I don't even use the insert jacks for mastering devices, only for the Master Compressor's side chain EQ/Filter setup (so it can be run PRE COMPRESSOR).
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
antic604
Posts: 655
Joined: 02 Apr 2020

Post 18 Dec 2020

selig wrote:
18 Dec 2020
It's one step closer to how I feel a DAW should work, with one place for EVERYTHING related to each instrument. So, no separate Mix Channel + Sequencer Track for notes + Sequencer Track for fader automation + Rack for devices and so on. It should just be Drums, Bass, Pad, Lead, etc. with everything belonging to the drums in one place, everything related to bass in one place, and so on. You can expand any section for each sub-heading, such as Drums as the header, kick/snare/hat/toms/cymbals as the sub header as in "foldable" mixer channels and sequencer tracks. Same for the sequencer, you can see the primary Note/Audio/Automation data or zoom into individual lanes as needed.
Maybe one day… ;)
So like almost any other DAW? Definitely!
Music tech enthusiast.
DAW, VST & hardware hoarder.
My "music": https://soundcloud.com/antic604

pepe444
Posts: 22
Joined: 29 Jul 2020

Post 18 Dec 2020

regarding the latency of different patching methods i dont know.
What i normally do is create a single mix channel for every thing, i dont mix in reason so for me is more practical when im finished and export all tracks .
I understand what you say about tracks being different in the timeline vs the mixer vs rack etc. its annoying
And i would be very happy if inside a combinator for example i could have a redrum and all mix channel seperatly for that redrum inside the combinator. Would very much improve visually when you have a lot of racks. and like that i would save a template for my patching and reload

User avatar
antic604
Posts: 655
Joined: 02 Apr 2020

Post 19 Dec 2020

selig wrote:
18 Dec 2020
I also sometimes do the exact opposite - put everything INSIDE the insert.
Damn, this is such an awesome tip! :o :clap:
Music tech enthusiast.
DAW, VST & hardware hoarder.
My "music": https://soundcloud.com/antic604

AnotherMathias
Posts: 32
Joined: 29 Sep 2020

Post 20 Dec 2020

antic604 wrote:
19 Dec 2020
selig wrote:
18 Dec 2020
I also sometimes do the exact opposite - put everything INSIDE the insert.
Damn, this is such an awesome tip! :o :clap:
I do this as well! It's my favorite way to try to keep the rack mess under control.

If you want to use the mixer channel EQ or dynamics, you have to enable "Insert Pre" in the Signal Path section at the top, to route the insert first in the audio path.
Also, if you create an empty mix channel first, and then insert a synth into the insert, you have to manually add a sequencer track for the synth (near the bottom of the contextual menu).

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], jaeproduced, Melody303, utdgrant and 6 guests