ReasonTalk.com

Today I was playing around with the Cubase 8 Trial and noticed you are able to have insert FX on each input channel of you Audio Interface so you can track through the insert FX so they get printed in the audio, essentially a processing chain before it the audio reaches the sequencer.

So I thought to myself why don't other programs have this, handy option IMO. Then I thought I need this in Reason, I haven't heard of anything like this in Reason before that prints into the audio while tracking, there must be a way, so I started thinking and the light bulb came on "Mix Channels" and "Reason's Hardware Device", simples.
If you take active inputs from the Reason Hardware Device (first 2 inputs are usually connect to the sampling input) and plug them into Mix Channels, Rec Source enable them and they are now available as recording inputs, simples. This allows you to have your favortie RE's as tracking inserts (printed into the audio while recording) and also the whole Reason mixer channel strip like its gate, EQ and Comp.


Here's the routing setup.

    


After the routing make sure you press "Record Source" on the Mix Channel (not the Audio Track(s)).

 


On your Audio Track select the input in the drop down menu to receive audio from the Mix Channel.

 


Having this routing setup disables the Audio Tracks input monitoring as the audio is now being monitored via the Mix Channel, so to disable or enable the input monitor of the incoming audio simply hit mute on the Mix Channel in the Rack or on the Mixer.
  

Pretty neat IMO.
Cheers

Why would you do this when you can use the effects without printing to the audio track so that you can then change the settings afterwards without having to commit to a final sound?

Ronin wrote:Why would you do this when you can use the effects without printing to the audio track so that you can then change the settings afterwards without having to commit to a final sound?

Its called "committing to your decisions" - was widely popular in the olden days

Ronin wrote:Why would you do this when you can use the effects without printing to the audio track so that you can then change the settings afterwards without having to commit to a final sound?

normen wrote:
Its called "committing to your decisions" - was widely popular in the olden days

I thought it was "widely popular" because it was the ONLY way to do things in the olden days!

The idea the Earth was flat was widely popular once too

lowpryo wrote:I thought it was "widely popular" because it was the ONLY way to do things in the olden days!

Mhm, just like tubes.

Ronin wrote:The idea the Earth was flat was widely popular once too

That didn't cause people to put more effort in what they do though.

lowpryo wrote:I thought it was "widely popular" because it was the ONLY way to do things in the olden days!

normen wrote: Mhm, just like tubes.

but tracking with FX is a workflow technique, and tubes actually color sound. you're comparing apples and bananas!

Tracking with analog gear is awesome - tracking with the exact same digital devices you could add after tracking not so much. If you track with outboard gear regularly you can do this without fear - but if you're not used to committing I would strongly suggest against doing so, as you can easily ruin what would otherwise be a perfectly good take - why take that chance if there's no advantage?

I would instead suggest putting these effects on the audio channel when tracking - you'll hear the exact same thing as the technique mentioned above but without any risk whatsoever. If you like what you hear you can easily bounce to a new track and end up with the same thing in the end: an audio track with the desired processing. 

Even if you want to print the sound of analog gear on a track, you can do the opposite of this. Record it clean, and then send it through outboard gear after the fact, to see if you like the sound, and make changes if you don't.

Live commitment free.

ScuzzyEye wrote:Even if you want to print the sound of analog gear on a track, you can do the opposite of this. Record it clean, and then send it through outboard gear after the fact, to see if you like the sound, and make changes if you don't.

Live commitment free.

Just to be clear, I ALWAYS track with compression and EQ when needed and when possible. But I've been doing this full time for over 30 years now, and learned this approach from professional engineers with a long history of doing the same. As I've mentioned in a thread here on this very subject, when you have no other option and plenty of practice (and great examples to follow), it's easy!

Otherwise, without this training and experience it's VERY easy to commit to things you later regret. This is why I don't advise it for folks who don't engineer as their day job or have similar experience and practice with this approach.

Ronin wrote:Why would you do this when you can use the effects without printing to the audio track so that you can then change the settings afterwards without having to commit to a final sound?

I personally like to track with some EQ and Compression (nothing heavy handed) when ever I can in order get closer to what I want in the end result which usually means less work needed in the mixing stage (less plugins and processing power used), in my experience.
During my studies I've found all our guest lecturers all showing us these great mixes consisting of great recordings which were all tracked through EQ and Compression on the way in. Because of this they don't tend to have many plugins running inside their DAW's (mainly just reverb, delay, EQ and some light compression) for the mixing stage because they got it right in the recording process and not trying to fix it in the mix. This does take a lot practice and knowing of your recording/monitoring environment and gear.
I know they're using hardware EQ's and Compressors but if there are no hardware EQ's or compressors available at the time this Reason setup allows myself to track with compression and EQ for more control as I like to commit to my decisions making the mixing process more of a creative process for myself.
By no means am I saying anyone should do this I just thought it would be nice to share with other Reason users what is an option and can easily be done in Cubase can also be done in Reason.

lowpryo wrote:

lowpryo wrote:I thought it was "widely popular" because it was the ONLY way to do things in the olden days!

normen wrote: Mhm, just like tubes.

lowpryo wrote:
but tracking with FX is a workflow technique, and tubes actually color sound. you're comparing apples and bananas!

Compression and EQ also color your sound.... And you can put plugins with tube distortion after the fact too. Not the same you say? Me too about this.

Nobody suggests you should do it like this but I totally get WHY one would do this as Kaos explains.

With todays mass storage and super duper computers
why limit ya self to just doing it the one way or the other
give ya self both world`s way
record both at same time one clean one effected.
can all ways use one or the other then as and when and delete anything you don't want.