When to use effects in Mix Console vs per Instrument?
-
- Posts: 331
- Joined: 04 Jul 2017
- Location: Brooklyn, NY
I'm new to mixing. I see options in the mix console for compression, EQ etc. also we can insert effects. We can also obviously put effects directly on the instruments. To a beginner like me it all seems redundant but I know there's a reason for all of this. What is the best way to think about this? It gets even more complicated as I'm learning how to use busses to organize things. When do you use the effects in the mixer and how does that effect your choices to add effects directly to a track?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 3516
- Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Effects directly on the instrument when it's part of the sound design. Those go before anything in the mixer whereas anything insert section is whiting the mixer signal flow
-
- Posts: 331
- Joined: 04 Jul 2017
- Location: Brooklyn, NY
So when it comes to getting a punchy bassline that don't sound hollow for example, work directly on the bass track? (this is another topic I'm trying to learn) After that is there any use for doing anything in the mixer console?
-
- Posts: 3321
- Joined: 17 Apr 2015
- Location: Aachen, Germany
in general:
* Put FX that you need for the mix into the mixer.
* Put things for the sound (design) of an instrument into the combinator/path of the instrument before it hits the mixer.
* Put things for mastering into the mastering inserts or even post the Mixer and before the hardware interface.
* Put FX that you need for the mix into the mixer.
* Put things for the sound (design) of an instrument into the combinator/path of the instrument before it hits the mixer.
* Put things for mastering into the mastering inserts or even post the Mixer and before the hardware interface.
-
- Competition Winner
- Posts: 1940
- Joined: 17 Jan 2015
I prefer to use efects inside the mixer because they don't break latency calculations.
If you're using the effects on the context of sound design, then put them inside a combinator near the sound generating devices. This way when you add a given device to the rack, they also don't break latency calculations.
If you're using the effects on the context of sound design, then put them inside a combinator near the sound generating devices. This way when you add a given device to the rack, they also don't break latency calculations.
-
- Competition Winner
- Posts: 1940
- Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Well, there's that thing about latency that i put there. I won't be an issue if you don't use paralel channels but once you do, phasing will crap your mix.
Also there are other benefits about using inserts in the mixer:
1 - Order of routing: you can define how the effects are routed related to the effects in the mixer using the routing order button, so you can for example use pre-dynamics from some device, eq from the mixer, then dynamics from the mixer. Or put the inserts at the end after eq and dynamics.
2 - You can control some of the effects controls with remotes in the mixer (8 controls - 4 nobs and 4 buttons - are routed to the first combinator in the insert).
3 - The effects are affected by the gain structure directly so it's easier to control how something is affected with the mixer gain knob instead of going to the device in the rack to affect the device volume on and on.
4 - Did i tell you about latency calculations get broken when you pull effects out of the insert chain?
If you can, read the mixer chapter on reason's manual. It ilustrates quite well the routing inside the mixer channel.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 3516
- Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Excuse my typos... Corrected above ^
I'd say yes. That would be sound design. Again, the reason for this is the inserts by default come after the EQ and compressor in the channel strip. You can change it so that the before by clicking the insert pre button on the mixer, but my philosophy from recording is to get things sounding right from the source which would be before the mixer. Then you have space in that insert section to do any additional tweaks in addition to the built in channel processing. The delay compensation is the same either way as it's not a complex routing.
Granted, you can ultimately do whatever you want. but the primary difference is just where it falls in the signal chain.
-
- Posts: 680
- Joined: 16 Jan 2015
The mixer's eq and dynamics can be thought of as inserts that are automatically added to every channel. You're free to use them or ignore them in favor of alternate plugins placed in the inserts section. The order can be adjusted with the signal flow controls at the top of the mixer.
Typically, direct routing is used more for "sound design" rather than "mixing." The boundary is blurry and subjective, however.
And AFAIK effects placed directly on instruments shouldn't break latency compensation unless you're working inside an instrument Combinator. If you're just placing devices directly in the rack with standard serial routings, then latency is reported correctly.
If you do find yourself creating an instrument Combinator with latent effects, there are several equally valid solutions to latency:
- Pull the effects out of the Combinator and place them directly below it in the rack
- Move the effects to the inserts section
- Leave the effects unchanged and manually set the reported latency from the back of the mix channel device
- Leave the effects unchanged and do nothing, because there are no audible issues
Some VST instruments have latency too however, and the only solutions there are to either avoid the Combinator or manually report the latency (or do nothing).
The manual has a good section on delay compensation here.
Also worth reading:
Insert FX
Send FX
Typically, direct routing is used more for "sound design" rather than "mixing." The boundary is blurry and subjective, however.
And AFAIK effects placed directly on instruments shouldn't break latency compensation unless you're working inside an instrument Combinator. If you're just placing devices directly in the rack with standard serial routings, then latency is reported correctly.
If you do find yourself creating an instrument Combinator with latent effects, there are several equally valid solutions to latency:
- Pull the effects out of the Combinator and place them directly below it in the rack
- Move the effects to the inserts section
- Leave the effects unchanged and manually set the reported latency from the back of the mix channel device
- Leave the effects unchanged and do nothing, because there are no audible issues
Some VST instruments have latency too however, and the only solutions there are to either avoid the Combinator or manually report the latency (or do nothing).
The manual has a good section on delay compensation here.
Also worth reading:
Insert FX
Send FX
-
- RE Developer
- Posts: 12360
- Joined: 15 Jan 2015
- Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA
I think of it this way. I put effects in the rack if they would be included in tracks sent to a mix engineer such as amp sims or a filter effect essential to the part, or reverbs/chorus/flanger/phaser that are a part of the instrument (what others are calling sound design) and should not be removed.
I put effects in the insert when they are a part of the mix or need to be after the channel EQ/filter or dynamics (typically compression/saturation/EQ type effects). I use sends for reverbs and delays mostly.
I put effects in the insert when they are a part of the mix or need to be after the channel EQ/filter or dynamics (typically compression/saturation/EQ type effects). I use sends for reverbs and delays mostly.
Selig Audio, LLC
-
- Posts: 331
- Joined: 04 Jul 2017
- Location: Brooklyn, NY
Thanks for the tips. Let's see if I'm understanding better...I'm looking at it like photography or visual art. You have a raw image (this would be the sound design part) then you have all the subjective enhancer filters, saturation etc. to finish to taste? (this would be the inserts mixing part). Though it's all subjective from the beginning vision used to generate the design, the design part is what gives it form and the later part (mixing with inserts from the mixer) is giving the form character? Looking from a 3D artist perspective, the model is the basic form with the textures (sound design) and what you do with that finished model is the mastering part? For example, are we looking at the house on a sunny day or during a storm, is it in the city or by itself out in the country etc. Hope I didn't go too far or over thinking it lol.
I find myself getting caught up on the sound design part trying to make the song sound finished during that phase. Maybe this is why I been seeing the mixer inserts as redundant. My perspective is changing when approaching making a song in a DAW.
I find myself getting caught up on the sound design part trying to make the song sound finished during that phase. Maybe this is why I been seeing the mixer inserts as redundant. My perspective is changing when approaching making a song in a DAW.
-
- Posts: 680
- Joined: 16 Jan 2015
That's certainly a way of looking at it.
I think the most important thing is understanding what's actually happening when you place effects at each location (i.e. the underlying signal flow). That will let you refine your own workflow according to your needs. If you know what's happening, then you can fix problems as they arise.
I think the most important thing is understanding what's actually happening when you place effects at each location (i.e. the underlying signal flow). That will let you refine your own workflow according to your needs. If you know what's happening, then you can fix problems as they arise.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 3516
- Joined: 15 Jan 2015
I look at it this way. Sound design is getting the sound that you want. Mixing is getting that sound to work alongside everything else in the song. Those are 2 different things. Sometimes “close enough” is fine just to get the idea out.
-
- RE Developer
- Posts: 12360
- Joined: 15 Jan 2015
- Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA
I think of it the same way. One example would be a guitarist recording with effects pedals, then the mixer adding EQ or compression or reverb. The guitarist gets “their sound” (sound design) by adding the pedals right after the guitar, then during the mix the engineer may add EQ and dynamics on the insert, and using sends for reverb or delay.
Selig Audio, LLC
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 3516
- Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Exactly!selig wrote: ↑30 Jan 2025I think of it the same way. One example would be a guitarist recording with effects pedals, then the mixer adding EQ or compression or reverb. The guitarist gets “their sound” (sound design) by adding the pedals right after the guitar, then during the mix the engineer may add EQ and dynamics on the insert, and using sends for reverb or delay.
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 2 guests