Quick Question about Send & Return FX

Have an urge to learn, or a calling to teach? Want to share some useful Youtube videos? Do it here!
ReachingAlpine
Posts: 6
Joined: 27 Feb 2018

Post 18 Jul 2019

This is my first time really using the Send and Return FX. I'm having an issue with a kind of doubling effect while trying to use the send return. The doubling effect sounds like the notes are being played twice really fast resulting in a doubling off sound. Any advice as to what to do?

Thanks,

RA

User avatar
Loque
Posts: 5645
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

Post 19 Jul 2019

Sounds like latency. Shouldn't be there if Delay Compensation is on. Can you post a picture of your setup?
:reason: 10, Win10 64Bit.

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7816
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 19 Jul 2019

Could it be you're using a device with high latency, such as a brick wall limiter or similar (Neptune, Polar)?

Using a send and return should automatically compensate for latency, provided you're talking about legacy devices that don't otherwise add their own latency. This has been the case since the introduction of the SSL "big mixer".
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
dannyF
Posts: 62
Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Location: Nottingham, UK

Post 19 Jul 2019

I know what you mean OP. I've never properly figured out how to use this I think. I turn up the FX amount and it just seems like its making the volume louder ( not the FX )..... it certainly sounds different than using an effect inline.

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7816
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 19 Jul 2019

dannyF wrote:
19 Jul 2019
I know what you mean OP. I've never properly figured out how to use this I think. I turn up the FX amount and it just seems like its making the volume louder ( not the FX )..... it certainly sounds different than using an effect inline.
Think of sends as being the same as inline, but for more than one channel. The main difference is that with an inline effect, you use a dry/wet control to adjust the amount. This means you are actually turning DOWN your direct “dry” signal as you increase the FX amount. Add to that the fact you have no idea how much the level changes, since the dry/wet control reads in percent, not in dB!

But with sends, you are always ADDING the FX to the original “dry” signal (make sure send FX are set to 100% WET), and the dry signal never changes level. This makes things simpler from a mix perspective IMO, because you often set your levels first, then add FX. So when you add a little reverb to the vocal, the vocal level itself isn’t changing at all. If using an insert, you will be changing your mix when adding FX because you’ll be affecting the level of the dry signal!

So I find it best to use insert FX early in the mix process, before I’m happy with balances and also when I’m sure that only one instrument needs this FX. Examples could be when I want a super long reverb on one chord, to create a specific effect at one point in a song, or adding a repeat delay that.

As a general rule, I always use saturation/EQ/dynamics as inserts, and reverb/delay primarily as sends (or sometimes as individual inserts as mentioned above).
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
dannyF
Posts: 62
Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Location: Nottingham, UK

Post 19 Jul 2019

selig wrote:
19 Jul 2019
dannyF wrote:
19 Jul 2019
I know what you mean OP. I've never properly figured out how to use this I think. I turn up the FX amount and it just seems like its making the volume louder ( not the FX )..... it certainly sounds different than using an effect inline.
Think of sends as being the same as inline, but for more than one channel. The main difference is that with an inline effect, you use a dry/wet control to adjust the amount. This means you are actually turning DOWN your direct “dry” signal as you increase the FX amount. Add to that the fact you have no idea how much the level changes, since the dry/wet control reads in percent, not in dB!

But with sends, you are always ADDING the FX to the original “dry” signal (make sure send FX are set to 100% WET), and the dry signal never changes level. This makes things simpler from a mix perspective IMO, because you often set your levels first, then add FX. So when you add a little reverb to the vocal, the vocal level itself isn’t changing at all. If using an insert, you will be changing your mix when adding FX because you’ll be affecting the level of the dry signal!

So I find it best to use insert FX early in the mix process, before I’m happy with balances and also when I’m sure that only one instrument needs this FX. Examples could be when I want a super long reverb on one chord, to create a specific effect at one point in a song, or adding a repeat delay that.

As a general rule, I always use saturation/EQ/dynamics as inserts, and reverb/delay primarily as sends (or sometimes as individual inserts as mentioned above).
Thanks for this Selig. Maybe now I'll get to using it properly after all these years! The key ah-ha moment was when you said to set the send FX to 100% wet ( I assume you mean on the actualy effect unit itself ).

User avatar
dannyF
Posts: 62
Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Location: Nottingham, UK

Post 21 Jul 2019

selig wrote:
19 Jul 2019
dannyF wrote:
19 Jul 2019
I know what you mean OP. I've never properly figured out how to use this I think. I turn up the FX amount and it just seems like its making the volume louder ( not the FX )..... it certainly sounds different than using an effect inline.
Think of sends as being the same as inline, but for more than one channel. The main difference is that with an inline effect, you use a dry/wet control to adjust the amount. This means you are actually turning DOWN your direct “dry” signal as you increase the FX amount. Add to that the fact you have no idea how much the level changes, since the dry/wet control reads in percent, not in dB!

But with sends, you are always ADDING the FX to the original “dry” signal (make sure send FX are set to 100% WET), and the dry signal never changes level. This makes things simpler from a mix perspective IMO, because you often set your levels first, then add FX. So when you add a little reverb to the vocal, the vocal level itself isn’t changing at all. If using an insert, you will be changing your mix when adding FX because you’ll be affecting the level of the dry signal!

So I find it best to use insert FX early in the mix process, before I’m happy with balances and also when I’m sure that only one instrument needs this FX. Examples could be when I want a super long reverb on one chord, to create a specific effect at one point in a song, or adding a repeat delay that.

As a general rule, I always use saturation/EQ/dynamics as inserts, and reverb/delay primarily as sends (or sometimes as individual inserts as mentioned above).
Selig, does it work the same way via hardware effects? ie if one had setup a hardware send/return ?

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7816
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 21 Jul 2019

dannyF wrote:
21 Jul 2019
selig wrote:
19 Jul 2019

As a general rule, I always use saturation/EQ/dynamics as inserts, and reverb/delay primarily as sends (or sometimes as individual inserts as mentioned above).
Selig, does it work the same way via hardware effects? ie if one had setup a hardware send/return ?
Yes, at least for me! I started as a studio engineer in the 1980s, and was lucky to work at a studio in 1984 that was just installing an SSL 48 channel E series (only the 2nd one in Nashville at that time). So for me, working in Reason is not all that different than working with hardware.

Which can also mean I'm stuck in my old ways, so take my comments with a grain of salt (as always). ;)
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
dannyF
Posts: 62
Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Location: Nottingham, UK

Post 21 Jul 2019

selig wrote:
21 Jul 2019
dannyF wrote:
21 Jul 2019


Selig, does it work the same way via hardware effects? ie if one had setup a hardware send/return ?
Yes, at least for me! I started as a studio engineer in the 1980s, and was lucky to work at a studio in 1984 that was just installing an SSL 48 channel E series (only the 2nd one in Nashville at that time). So for me, working in Reason is not all that different than working with hardware.

Which can also mean I'm stuck in my old ways, so take my comments with a grain of salt (as always). ;)
humble as ever. =)

actually I meant, and to be clearer.... "does it work the same way as a hardware send/return setup in Reason ?"

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7816
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 22 Jul 2019

dannyF wrote:
21 Jul 2019

humble as ever. =)

actually I meant, and to be clearer.... "does it work the same way as a hardware send/return setup in Reason ?"
Not so much humble as a realist - no matter how well a technique works for me, there are probably more folks for whom that same technique will NOT work. It's as much about personal workflow as genre and expectations.

And sorry to be so dense, but I'm still not clear on the specifics of your question (but am happy to try to answer it).
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
diminished
Posts: 932
Joined: 15 Dec 2018

Post 22 Jul 2019

I believe OP describes using insert effects as sends (which you shouldn't do), hence the doubling. Or send effects that are not 100% wet.

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7816
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 22 Jul 2019

diminished wrote:
22 Jul 2019
I believe OP describes using insert effects as sends (which you shouldn't do), hence the doubling. Or send effects that are not 100% wet.
There is no advantage to send effects that are not 100% wet, and if there's latency involved, there ARE disadvantages.
In a latency compensated (or analog) mixer, changing the blend (dry/wet) of a send FX is exactly the same as adjusting send/fader levels. Another disadvantage comes if you have more than one channel sending to the FX, as you will be affecting the level of all channels feeding the FX if you adjust the blend control.

If you're talking about EQ/filter/dynamics on sends, it's tricky. I've never liked the sound of parallel filtering/EQ for the most part, specifically when done in the mixer. Parallel dynamics has it's place, but one may want to be clear about using non-linear processes (dynamics/saturation/distortion/etc) on sends, specifically when sending more than one source into the FX.

There is a big difference between non-linear processors on a mix vs the same processors on each individual channel. When you process the group, it's the sum of the tracks you are processing, and the sum of the tracks that is used to affect that process (as with all level based/non-linear processing).

Hope this rambling is in some way making sense - still waiting on morning coffee to kick in…
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
dannyF
Posts: 62
Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Location: Nottingham, UK

Post 22 Jul 2019

basically I am asking if using hardware in place of RE's would the same thinking apply ( setting effects at 100% ) ?

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests