Inserts in return channel of send FX - question

[Nielsen]

I'm wondering whether it's in any way possible to route inserts in the return channel of a send FX, so the insert on the return only affects the sends on some channels. Let's say the following:

Delay device is routed in a send / return configuration with the return going through its own mixer channel. On the return channel a high-pass filter is applied as an insert device. This way the echo of the delay send FX only affects certain frequencies. However, the high-pass insert on the return channel might only work well on one instrument. Now the same delay send FX is needed on other instruments, but these would be better off bypassing the insert creating the high-pass filter on the return channel.

So is it possible to bypass the insert on some instrument channels while keeping it on others, or would I need to create another but identical send FX without the insert on the return channel?

[Loque]

I am curious how this could work to? I wanted the same and my only solution i found, was a parallel channel for the instruments on PRE for the send fx, volume fader set to 0, put the filter here as insert and Coto the amount through the fx send. Did not felt elegant..
Another idea was using phase inversion in a similar way to still be able to use the volume fader, but the right routing was not possible.

[Timmy Crowne]

You could daisy-chain two send channels. One would only have the filter. The other would have the delay. Instead of routing the filter channel’s return back to the master section, it would enter a spider merger at the top of the delay channel. That way, you could send some instruments through the filter first and others directly to the delay.

You could just cable this together under the master section with the standard send/return jacks, or if you want to use a mix channel you can use the “direct out” of the filter’s channel.

[RandomSkratch]

Would it not be quicker to just have two separate sends/returns?

[selig]

The way I’ve done this in the past is to use two sends, merged to one delay. BUT on one of the sends BEFORE the merge, you ADD a filter.

So both sends feed the same filter, but one goes through a filter and the other does not.

I’ve used this technique in the past to share a reverb but allow one send to add a de-esser so you could send vocals to the reverb via the de-esser and all other instruments straight to the reverb (effectively bypassing the de-esser).

This works on any mixer, even analog mixers that have a “mult” in the patch bay.
[emoji3]

[EDIT- I also realized that if there’s only one channel that needs the ‘special’ modifier (the filter in your example), and if you don’t want to (or can’t) dedicate TWO sends for this, you can use a parallel channel for the filter, then merge the direct out of the parallel channel with the send before hitting the delay.]

Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[Nielsen]

Many thanks for your suggestions. I'll keep them in mind.