|
|
|
09-03-2014, 02:23 AM
|
#1
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Panning one Send-FX differently to multiple tracks
Hi
I have been trying to pan 1 reverb send-fx differently on multiple tracks, without success and with a weird outcome :
when I pan the reverb send on a track from the track-send routing window to the Right I get more dry sound without reverb, when I pan the reverb send to the Left I get more reverb,
all this without any panning occuring ??
maybe this is something very easy, but I cannot figure it out
only solution I see is creating several reverb tracks and panning those
individually according to the sending tracks, which I prefer to avoid
regards
Jazzooka
|
|
|
09-03-2014, 10:27 AM
|
#2
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,632
|
Plugins have a patch bay to allow you to route track channels to and from them as you choose. Click the box in the upper right corner of the plugin that says "2 in 2 out" ("1 in 2 out" or some variation, etc etc).
My guess in that the plugin in question on your receiving track only has the left track channel patched to it's input. If so, click in the box to add the right channel input.
|
|
|
09-09-2014, 07:08 AM
|
#3
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Thank you Serr for your reply
but something else is wrong
The reverbs I use are : Valhalla VintageVerb, Altiverb 6 and IK CSR
VVV has 1 in/2 out
Altiverb + IK CSR have 2 in/2out
Try this :
* pan your source track hard right
* send to a verb ( 1 in or 2 in does not matter )
* click on the send of your sourcetrack to open popup window with controls for the send
* drag the pan of the send to the right = more reverb (for 1 in) or same amount (for 2 in)
but reverb sound stays in the middle = reverb is not panned
* drag the pan of the send to the left = reverb disappears completely
?!?
What is happening here?
EDIT:
* Vintage Verb has only 1 Left in, no possibility to add a Right in, but possible to add a second Left in...
* With VintageVerb = when panning the sourcetrack hard Right and sending it to a reverb= reverb is not triggered at all
so here whether you pan the send Left, Right or Center= no reverb
* Just tried with Reaper's own ReaVerbate, with 2 in/2 out correctly checked in patchbay = sourcetrack hard Right sending to Reaverbate= Reaverbate outputs only from the Right even when the send's pan is Center.
When the send's pan is Right = little more reverb
When the send's pan is Left = no reverb at all
I thought it could be related to 3d party plugins but it seems Reaper's own verb display same behaviour
Anyone?
Last edited by Jazzooka; 09-09-2014 at 07:20 AM.
Reason: Incomplete
|
|
|
09-09-2014, 07:57 AM
|
#4
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,632
|
Understand that every track in Reaper has a MINIMUM of 2 track channels. "Panning" a signal from one track channel to the other doesn't magically translate to the output from a track panning on the stereo master bus.
The track channels run through the track. The panner is actually a pan matrix that attenuates one channel or the other to create the effect of panning. It is NOT a single channel that ends in a stereo panner.
So... mind what track channels that any signal you are sending from one track to another is in.
For example if you only have a signal present in track channel 1 and send this to another track. Panning the receive from L to R would make the signal fade out to nothing. There is only signal in the L channel (track channel 1 of the send bus). Again, these are always 2 wires (minimum) ending in a pan matrix. Never a single wire ending at a panner like it appears and like most normal people would expect.
|
|
|
03-08-2015, 05:12 PM
|
#5
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Wow, Serr, only saw your post now searching for the same problem, thanks for the answer, it explains a lot...
But not how to fix this
I would like to set up 1 reverb aux which receives multiple tracks like guitar, lead vocals, sax, trumpet
On those tracks that send ie guitar/lv/sax/tp I would like to pan the reverb independently
How do I do that in Reaper?
I tried with all my reverbs and couldn't find a solution, neither in the manual or the forum
Thanks a lot
Nico
Quote:
Originally Posted by serr
Understand that every track in Reaper has a MINIMUM of 2 track channels. "Panning" a signal from one track channel to the other doesn't magically translate to the output from a track panning on the stereo master bus.
The track channels run through the track. The panner is actually a pan matrix that attenuates one channel or the other to create the effect of panning. It is NOT a single channel that ends in a stereo panner.
So... mind what track channels that any signal you are sending from one track to another is in.
For example if you only have a signal present in track channel 1 and send this to another track. Panning the receive from L to R would make the signal fade out to nothing. There is only signal in the L channel (track channel 1 of the send bus). Again, these are always 2 wires (minimum) ending in a pan matrix. Never a single wire ending at a panner like it appears and like most normal people would expect.
|
|
|
|
03-17-2015, 12:16 PM
|
#6
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Bump? anybody?!
thx
|
|
|
03-17-2015, 03:32 PM
|
#7
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 749
|
Hi Nico,
I think a look at the signal-flow diagram in the manual will help.
1. Your sends are post-fader, I presume?
Change your sends to prefader. If your FX is 1in2out: No panning,obvious? If 2in/2out: Panning!
Vinod
|
|
|
03-18-2015, 06:59 AM
|
#8
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 12
|
Hi.. Try using VST version.. I´m on Mac and some plugins in AU format like Vintage Verb, Eventide UltraChannel, etc dont like panning or multiple pin conectors inputs... je...je...
we must notify to Sean Costello about that.. nut vst format works good..
|
|
|
03-18-2015, 09:04 AM
|
#9
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzooka
Wow, Serr, only saw your post now searching for the same problem, thanks for the answer, it explains a lot...
But not how to fix this
I would like to set up 1 reverb aux which receives multiple tracks like guitar, lead vocals, sax, trumpet
On those tracks that send ie guitar/lv/sax/tp I would like to pan the reverb independently
How do I do that in Reaper?
I tried with all my reverbs and couldn't find a solution, neither in the manual or the forum
Thanks a lot
Nico
|
You want to pan the reverberant component for each instrument to a different position right? But... you want to do that only using a single reverb plugin? (Perhaps because you have limited processing with a 10 something year old computer?)
There are stereo reverbs available that are intended to preserve panning of the input source... Honestly, this is going to be more time wasting screwing around than it's worth though to get dialed up. Then any little mix change you want to make turns into even more extra work.
If you can't get multiple reverb units up "live" without running out of CPU, try rendering reverb tracks. Render the reverb fx track panned center and without any post verb eq. Keep the panning live on the post render tracks so you can continue to tweak on this as you mix. Keep the post verb eq live (and just use the ReaEQ plug) too and this will give you the ability to eq the verb differently for different sources if/when that comes up.
That would be the path of least resistance for me if I was maxing the machine out.
|
|
|
03-19-2015, 04:42 AM
|
#10
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Thanks VinodXagent, Nikomacpro & Serr
I will try with VST format instead, indeed I noticed some weirdness with AU ( not only reverbs, but some strange stereo issues with other plugins whereas the VST just work as should )
I think I already tried changing the Pre/Post options of the sends, but will try again with VST's as well
@Serr : regarding the cpu-power, I rarely max out my Macpro, and most reverbs I use are not cpu-heavy : ValhallaVintageVerb, Altiverb, IK CSR, this is not an issue.
My goal is also not to follow the exact panning of every source with reverb sends, but to be able to pan a reverb ( or any fx send ) differently on each track, all from one reverb instance.
Using multiple instances of reverb to achieve that is not an option, because you loose the ability to change the reverb size/density/predelay/etc...simultaneously for all tracks sending to that reverb.
Which is something I often do when re-rooming ultra-dry/close-miked acoustic multitracks sent for mixing, where more subtle space, liveliness and air is needed.
Being able to change the room or any setting at once across multiple tracks, with having that verb panned differently everywhere is extremely flexible and efficient to finetune, panning sends per track is a pretty basic feature that I struggle to recreate with Reaper ( Cubase can do it since many years )
Is it such an uncommon use of aux sends in Reaperland?
Let's see if VST's will get me there
Peace
Nico
|
|
|
03-19-2015, 09:14 AM
|
#11
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzooka
@Serr : regarding the cpu-power, I rarely max out my Macpro, and most reverbs I use are not cpu-heavy : ValhallaVintageVerb, Altiverb, IK CSR, this is not an issue.
|
Well then it's easy. Just mix! Just put up individual reverb tracks for each specific instance of reverberation you need for your mix. Set their pans, levels, etc however you want. Only entertain workarounds when actually needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzooka
My goal is also not to follow the exact panning of every source with reverb sends, but to be able to pan a reverb ( or any fx send ) differently on each track, all from one reverb instance.
|
I'd maybe use a single reverb for the 'single instance of reverberation' component of the mix that I wanted to hear. Then add specific additional tracks (for verb, reflection, delay, whatever it is) for the additional components specific to certain tracks.
Or I might literally duplicate the reverb track and use the first instance for one group of tracks and the duplicate track for the rest. Again, whatever is the least work and most flexible (but never a compromise). That's the only point I'm going after. The simplest solution that puts the mix components you want to balance on their own tracks. Then you can simply mix (without having to readjust sends due to adjusting the mix).
If you do have elements to keep grouped, then you may feel the extra routing (or possibly parameter linking) is worth the effort. I think the stereo reverb method (preserving/passing thru the source stereo positioning) is the most cumbersome method to try is all. YMMV
Last edited by serr; 03-19-2015 at 10:19 AM.
|
|
|
03-19-2015, 09:48 AM
|
#12
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzooka
Using multiple instances of reverb to achieve that is not an option, because you loose the ability to change the reverb size/density/predelay/etc...simultaneously for all tracks sending to that reverb.
|
If ^ this is indeed the reason why you *think* you need to use a single instance, then fortunately, you're wrong. You just need to look into linking parameters using Parameter Modulation; if you wish to use multiple instances on different tracks, also look into bradleyfilms' linker plug-in.
Source: have linked multiple instances of Vee3 many times.
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
|
|
|
03-19-2015, 12:18 PM
|
#13
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Ok,some VST versions of plugins work clearly better than AU, with a correct implementation of the number of in/out channels sent through the plugins.
( some AU have only 1 in... )
So Serr, this explains what you wrote in your first reply regarding internal routing of a Reaper channel, now with VSTs I have 2 working ins/outs with reverbs.
And I am finally able to pan a sending signal, thanks Reaper fellows !!
However this whole topic made me think about stereo reverb-plugins' ability to follow/respond to this panned sound at the same panning spot, as not all plugins offer control of the stereo spread/placement, so I put all my reverb plugins to the test with interesting results :
I first sent a kick track and snare track to a reverb aux,
panned the send of the kick fully left, and the send of the snare fully right
* ValhallaRoom is the only one I have that does this with a good degree of precision with the Late Cross setting, follows the pan very closely without bleeding in the stereo image too much, very good
* ValhallaVintageVerb follows the pan but remains fairly wide in stereo
* Altiverb 6 only follows the pan if you keep the direct signal on
* UltraReverb follows the pan but remains also wide
* AudioDamage EOS follows the pan but remains also wide
* AudioDamage ADverb follows the pan just a teeny tiny bit
* Reaper's own Reverbate....besides the not, well, superb sound it follows the pan ok
* IK CSR possible to adjust some of the panning with the image though not super precise, otoh it's possible to do inverted stereo or widening
* Voxengo Oldskoolverb follows the pan pretty closely, amazing freebie!
Peace
Nico
|
|
|
03-19-2015, 12:39 PM
|
#14
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Thx for your input Serr, it is however not a workaround for me, I just like blending one reverb ( or a few ) across multiple tracks, with an independent panning control of said reverb per track.
It's nothing complex really....or maybe it is heresy in Reaperland !
I believe sending different tracks through their own individual reverb track of the same reverb with identical settings is not the same sonically : different tracks through one common reverb will create a blend, if in any way the input of said reverb models hardware or you insert a drive/distortion
prior to the reverb, it's an extra blend that you don't have with individual instances.
More tracks with identical verbs means more clutter of my mix window
I think your vision on things is just very different, which I can appreciate
Peace
Quote:
Originally Posted by serr
Well then it's easy. Just mix! Just put up individual reverb tracks for each specific instance of reverberation you need for your mix. Set their pans, levels, etc however you want. Only entertain workarounds when actually needed.
I'd maybe use a single reverb for the 'single instance of reverberation' component of the mix that I wanted to hear. Then add specific additional tracks (for verb, reflection, delay, whatever it is) for the additional components specific to certain tracks.
Or I might literally duplicate the reverb track and use the first instance for one group of tracks and the duplicate track for the rest. Again, whatever is the least work and most flexible (but never a compromise). That's the only point I'm going after. The simplest solution that puts the mix components you want to balance on their own tracks. Then you can simply mix (without having to readjust sends due to adjusting the mix).
If you do have elements to keep grouped, then you may feel the extra routing (or possibly parameter linking) is worth the effort. I think the stereo reverb method (preserving/passing thru the source stereo positioning) is the most cumbersome method to try is all. YMMV
|
|
|
|
03-19-2015, 12:47 PM
|
#15
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Hi Banned,
thanks for your input
don't worry I don't mind being proven wrong
and damn yes I know, I've read a bit about parameter modulation, only that seems a bit advanced for me right now, took a few month to learn Reaper coming from Logic (8 yrs) and Cubase (14 years), just bought the licence and I almost fluently type/click Reaperese, well at least the basics needed to record/edit and mix!
definitely will check it out, but for now, I think I am good to go
regards
Nico
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned
If ^ this is indeed the reason why you *think* you need to use a single instance, then fortunately, you're wrong. You just need to look into linking parameters using Parameter Modulation; if you wish to use multiple instances on different tracks, also look into bradleyfilms' linker plug-in.
Source: have linked multiple instances of Vee3 many times.
|
|
|
|
03-19-2015, 01:59 PM
|
#16
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
|
`
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzooka
don't worry I don't mind being proven wrong
|
Cool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzooka
More tracks with identical verbs means more clutter of my mix window
|
When you link the parameters of multiple instances, you really only have to look at the first one, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzooka
* ValhallaVintageVerb follows the pan but remains fairly wide in stereo
|
That is not my experience *at all* - it depends heavily on the mode and settings; it's fairly easy to make its output follow the input panning almost completely. But imho that also makes it sound more like a delay than a reverb (and that's a very good thing! ).
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
|
|
|
03-20-2015, 11:05 AM
|
#17
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Hi Banned,
you're absolutely right about VVV, my bad! amidst all this I didn't switch the algoritms, and they all provide a wide - pun intended - array of different results regarding panning, VVV requires me every x month when I play a bit more with it to say how awesome it is, there I said it
most definitely will find some time for the parameter linking, inspiring...
and you're also right about it's delayish feats
btw I tried also AudioDamage Ratshack Reverb in the test, but didn't include it just because the results sound more like a delay ( a cool nasty one at that )
peace
Nico
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned
Cool.
When you link the parameters of multiple instances, you really only have to look at the first one, though.
That is not my experience *at all* - it depends heavily on the mode and settings; it's fairly easy to make its output follow the input panning almost completely. But imho that also makes it sound more like a delay than a reverb (and that's a very good thing! ).
|
|
|
|
10-31-2016, 10:23 PM
|
#18
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 117
|
Notice that, after all the hand wringing back in 2015, no one was ultimately able to provide the OP with a solution. I would like to do the exact same thing: Set up a track with an effect (ie: reverb) have it receive sends from multiple track sources (guitar, vox, etc.), and be able to pan the reverb independently for each receive.
Lots of workarounds suggested, lots of trying to talk the OP out of his goal... damn, seems like a pretty basic goal.
|
|
|
10-31-2016, 11:51 PM
|
#19
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: I'm in a barn
Posts: 4,467
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lanceaustin
Notice that, after all the hand wringing back in 2015, no one was ultimately able to provide the OP with a solution. I would like to do the exact same thing: Set up a track with an effect (ie: reverb) have it receive sends from multiple track sources (guitar, vox, etc.), and be able to pan the reverb independently for each receive.
Lots of workarounds suggested, lots of trying to talk the OP out of his goal... damn, seems like a pretty basic goal.
|
There is no solution. If you want to pan the output of the reverb differently for each track, you just simply can't.
Everything is summed at the reverbs input.
You can pan the sends to the reverb, however. Just try that.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 06:28 AM
|
#20
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 6,551
|
The problem is that most reverbs don't do panning. It's not a routing issue.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 06:47 AM
|
#21
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 117
|
You can pan the sends to the reverb, however. Just try that.[/QUOTE]
The panning of a track's sand seems to be linked to the panning of the other track's receive. Changing one moves the other, so- same diff.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 07:28 AM
|
#22
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,632
|
You guys are after stereo convolution reverb.
If you use ReaVerb, you need two instances of it. One for the right channel and one for the left. Send post fader from the source channels and you get the stereo results.
|
|
|
11-13-2016, 03:25 PM
|
#23
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lokasenna
The problem is that most reverbs don't do panning. It's not a routing issue.
|
It might be the only limitation that I found in Reaper regarding routing.
In Cubase it works, you can pan the send, so if your guitar is panned L you can pan the reverb to the R and you'll only hear the reverb there.
Reaper being much more flexible routingwise, I simply don't understand why it isn't doable
|
|
|
11-13-2016, 03:37 PM
|
#24
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Hi Lance,
A few years later indeed, did not find a solution yet. It's a pretty much basic feature, though.
A complex and not really ok workaround :
- bounce/render the reverb with 1 track at a time solo'd that is sending to the verb
- result is only that track's reverb
- pan the bounced/rendered track where you want versus the original track
- repeat for every track sending to that one reverb
Downside :
- not all the tracks send at once to that single instance of reverb : no blending of all sources within 1verb
- if you bounce the reverb with all the tracks that send to it unsolo'd, and bounce/render them several times to pan the verb differently for every track that sends, it is a huge messy pile of verb.
Again, what would be the limitation in Reaper that prevents one from doing that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lanceaustin
Notice that, after all the hand wringing back in 2015, no one was ultimately able to provide the OP with a solution. I would like to do the exact same thing: Set up a track with an effect (ie: reverb) have it receive sends from multiple track sources (guitar, vox, etc.), and be able to pan the reverb independently for each receive.
Lots of workarounds suggested, lots of trying to talk the OP out of his goal... damn, seems like a pretty basic goal.
|
|
|
|
11-13-2016, 04:01 PM
|
#25
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Hi Serr,
Thanks for the idea, seems interesting to try out, but it is not about stereo results for me : it is really about simply panning the reverb sound differently per track, while those tracks send to the same single reverb instance.
Maybe some more info about the purpose might shine a light amongst all the helpful Reaper geeks around =
The single instance is about recreating an all-in-one-room feel where the room resonances and reverb buildup, diffusion, damping etc... react as if part of a band/section/or whole orchestra would play in the same room. Whether the sound of the reverb itself is realistic or wildly out of this world is not relevant.
Triggering one reverb is pretty different than sending to separate instances with separate panning.
Example : in your song you have a Fender Rhodes and a french horn section playing mid/low tessiture chords : both playing together in this range of frequencies will create a big buildup in low mid frequencies around 200Hz.
Send them together to one reverb, and their frequency buildup will trigger more reverb in that area, making it glue and blend as if they played in the same room.
The panning reverb sends differently per track is about creating air and depth around the sources and add cohesion, positioning and interesting image behind the dry sound : example : if you have an acoustic guitar playing Left and an electric rythm guitar playing Right, you send them both to the same reverb, then by panning each reverb send to the opposite direction of the dry sound, it will sound as if both guitars were recorded in the same room, with each dry sound bouncing off the "wall" behind the other dry sound.
And yes, still curious about a solution
Quote:
Originally Posted by serr
You guys are after stereo convolution reverb.
If you use ReaVerb, you need two instances of it. One for the right channel and one for the left. Send post fader from the source channels and you get the stereo results.
|
|
|
|
11-13-2016, 04:22 PM
|
#26
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 749
|
Press the mono Button in the Routing window for that send to your Reverb.
Your sending post-Fader,post pan, aren't you? Example: You Pan hard right to the Mix-Buss. Then you want to pan your Send hard left. The Sends "looks" at the left side after the Fader/Pan and there is obviously no signal, because you panned it hard right. If you press the mono button in the send routing window the send grabs the Sum of the left and right signal after the fader/Pan. Hope that helps.
Greetings from Hamburg
Vinod
Last edited by VinodXAgent; 11-13-2016 at 04:50 PM.
|
|
|
11-13-2016, 04:23 PM
|
#27
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Brighton
Posts: 1,989
|
I'll reply too,because id like to know. Its so important in a busy mix for instruments to reverberate in its own panning, to avoid clutter. I could not achieve that yet. I tried with two tracks with reverbs too, as well as just with one reverb, but as it is written in the tread, you have to do it pre fader for hard panned tracks, which then complicates things further because every time you wnt to change fader you got to do it twice. Pre fader is good for fine tuning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinodXAgent
Press the mono Button in the Routing window for that send to your Reverb.
Your sending post-Fader,post pan, aren't you?
|
Might work, although if something is panned hard right, post fader setting with mono will create no sound I believe. At least that's how things worked in the past.
Last edited by MikComposer; 11-13-2016 at 04:29 PM.
|
|
|
11-13-2016, 04:53 PM
|
#28
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 749
|
Try it like I did before I posted. Maybe I did something wrong.
|
|
|
11-14-2016, 01:37 PM
|
#29
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: I'm in a barn
Posts: 4,467
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzooka
Hi Serr,
Thanks for the idea, seems interesting to try out, but it is not about stereo results for me : it is really about simply panning the reverb sound differently per track, while those tracks send to the same single reverb instance.
|
what reverb are you using? ReaVerb and ReaVerbate operate in dual mono, as far as I can tell.
Some reverbs operate mono to stereo. Those reverbs will not follow the panning of the sends. And yes there are also true stereo reverbs - which also does something different. These are not going to follow the panning either - but they sound incredible.
IF the reverb plugin operates mono to stereo, I guess you can use two instances and force it work as two mono plugins.
I think for what you are wanting to do, just try ReaVerb, load up a stereo impulse and pan your sends going to the reverb.
|
|
|
11-14-2016, 01:44 PM
|
#30
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,269
|
Quote:
Some reverbs operate mono to stereo.
|
Cause that's what happens in a real room with a mono guitar amp for example - the amp is mono, the reflections via room dimensions makes it stereo. I know we know that, just couldn't resist. This procedure is not what makes two instruments sound like they are in the same room btw (just to be technically pedantic) but that shouldn't take away from the ask since it may have value in a mix in general.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
|
|
|
11-14-2016, 02:05 PM
|
#31
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: I'm in a barn
Posts: 4,467
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzooka
It might be the only limitation that I found in Reaper regarding routing.
In Cubase it works, you can pan the send, so if your guitar is panned L you can pan the reverb to the R and you'll only hear the reverb there.
Reaper being much more flexible routingwise, I simply don't understand why it isn't doable
|
it works just as you describe. send pre fader, set the panning as you wish. Again depends on your reverb though.
|
|
|
11-14-2016, 03:12 PM
|
#32
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
James : Thanks for the suggestion and the pics you posted, will try it out asap tomorrow.
Regarding reverbs, I have and use :
- Altiverb 7
- EA Phoenixverb
- EA Nimbus
- Valhalla Room/Vintage/Shimmer
- Eventide Ultraverb
- UAD EMT Plate
- Relab LX480
- PSP Springbox
- PSP 2445 Plate
- Waves IR-1/Renaissance/Trueverb
- Audio Damage Eos/ADverb
Will have to try Reaverb for the dual mono
Quote:
Originally Posted by James HE
what reverb are you using? ReaVerb and ReaVerbate operate in dual mono, as far as I can tell.
Some reverbs operate mono to stereo. Those reverbs will not follow the panning of the sends. And yes there are also true stereo reverbs - which also does something different. These are not going to follow the panning either - but they sound incredible.
IF the reverb plugin operates mono to stereo, I guess you can use two instances and force it work as two mono plugins.
I think for what you are wanting to do, just try ReaVerb, load up a stereo impulse and pan your sends going to the reverb.
|
|
|
|
11-15-2016, 01:48 PM
|
#33
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Just got back from testing out stuff with results :
- It only works with a few plugins, pre-fader (James you were right), which I can live with, not ideal, but hey worse things to worry about these days.
- The only reverbs out of my list that were able to output the sound where the source send is panned, and only there, without stereo spill :
* ReaVerb
* ValhallaRoom (with "Late Cross" set at zero in the "Late"-tab, works with all algos)
* ValhallaPlate ("Radium" algo only)
* Reverberate Liquidsonics (not on the list, but works, I guess this one is true stereo)
All the others could not follow the pan from the send.
Regarding stereo convolution suggestion : tried Altiverb and Waves IR-1 and nope still gives me a radiant stereo result - like said Reverberate however works.
What I don't get is : how the hell was Cubase able to give us that 10 years ago, without true stereo or modern complex plugins existing back then?
I do remember panning any send signal exactly where I wanted, and post-fader nonetheless.
Best
Nico
|
|
|
11-15-2016, 06:13 PM
|
#34
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Brighton
Posts: 1,989
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzooka
Just got back from testing out stuff with results :
- It only works with a few plugins, pre-fader (James you were right), which I can live with, not ideal, but hey worse things to worry about these days.
- The only reverbs out of my list that were able to output the sound where the source send is panned, and only there, without stereo spill :
* ReaVerb
* ValhallaRoom (with "Late Cross" set at zero in the "Late"-tab, works with all algos)
* ValhallaPlate ("Radium" algo only)
* Reverberate Liquidsonics (not on the list, but works, I guess this one is true stereo)
All the others could not follow the pan from the send.
Regarding stereo convolution suggestion : tried Altiverb and Waves IR-1 and nope still gives me a radiant stereo result - like said Reverberate however works.
What I don't get is : how the hell was Cubase able to give us that 10 years ago, without true stereo or modern complex plugins existing back then?
I do remember panning any send signal exactly where I wanted, and post-fader nonetheless.
Best
Nico
|
because it was cubase! They were modeling their workflow on how they worked in hollywood.
Could you explain to me what is exactly going on, what is the problem? I use valhalla reverb... generally I need to use reverbs because I use samples ( stereo ), but I do find problems with how reverb sounds, and I don't know why is that.
I did like how MIX FX works in FL btw. very simple.
EDIT@Well, maybe just playing with routing and inverting it would solve the problem?
Last edited by MikComposer; 11-15-2016 at 07:29 PM.
|
|
|
11-15-2016, 08:07 PM
|
#35
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: I'm in a barn
Posts: 4,467
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikComposer
because it was cubase! They were modeling their workflow on how they worked in hollywood.
|
The only possible difference in this situation is that cubase's sends are post fader, pre pan, (and that you paid $500 more for the program). There is nothing that can be magically done by a daw to change how a plugin behaves. (Take the money you save and snort some blow off a hookers backside and you'll feel just like you are in Hollywood)
Post fader sends in REAPER are also post pan.
If the sending track is mono, you can just hit the mono button in the send dialog and have it be post fader and (effectively) pre pan. If it's a stereo track that you are panning, and you want post fader and (effectively) pre pan on the send and still want to retain the stereo balance, snort another line, cause you are insane and worrying about things you probably shouldn't be...
or... switch to the REAPER V3 pan mode for the track. In this pan mode channels above 1/2 do NOT follow the pan pot, so you could then mult the signal to an upper channel and send from that channel the the reverb and it ignore the track pan.
Mik, you are having trouble with the way reverb sounds cause mixing is just really difficult to do well, you'll have to find your own way. Ceasing the incessant complaining about REAPER and the fanatical love of freebase umm.. Cubase and then proactively putting that energy into mastering things in REAPER as it is instead of blaming your tools will go a long way for you mate.
|
|
|
11-16-2016, 03:37 PM
|
#36
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Wrt to explaining what the problem is, I've explained in many posts since the first with different words...and you jumped in earlier because you wanted to know if what I wanted to achieve was possible...not sure I understand you.
Regarding Hollywood I don't see the link either.
For now am able to do what I wanted to find out with :
- send prefader
- Valhallaroom
panning sends away happily in Reaper
thx all
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikComposer
because it was cubase! They were modeling their workflow on how they worked in hollywood.
Could you explain to me what is exactly going on, what is the problem? I use valhalla reverb... generally I need to use reverbs because I use samples ( stereo ), but I do find problems with how reverb sounds, and I don't know why is that.
|
|
|
|
11-16-2016, 03:41 PM
|
#37
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 221
|
Hi James,
Thx for the additional info, exactly what I wanted to know, and indeed, was talking about mono tracks
Best
Nico
Quote:
Originally Posted by James HE
The only possible difference in this situation is that cubase's sends are post fader, pre pan, (and that you paid $500 more for the program).....Post fader sends in REAPER are also post pan.If the sending track is mono, you can just hit the mono button in the send dialog and have it be post fader and (effectively) pre pan.
|
|
|
|
02-05-2019, 10:21 AM
|
#38
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Please add midi learn to sends. Nuts and bolts before games!
Posts: 296
|
fix angel
every other analog mixer
every other digital mixer
sends post fader aux sends pre pan
for the necessary reason that they are mono sends usually.
how much can i pay you , reaper developers, to fix the 4 issues stopping reaper from working as a live mixer?
what about 10K?
1)learnable sends
2)post fader pre pan sends
3)allow master parent send to have not just a checkbox that sends all internal channels to master, but same controls as sends)
4)disable scroll wheel on mixer left/right elevetor bar scroll
about #4: ever use scroll wheel on a fader (its all i use for precise control), moved the mouse a little to the left by accident, and suddenly the mixer is scrolling to a new channel, then as the mouse gets to a new fader or pan, imediately changing that channel? its alarming and a disaster for live mixing.
__________________
"The Hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who, in time of moral crisis, maintain their neutrality." --Dante, "The Inferno"
and: www.larouchepub.com organize to effect change
|
|
|
02-05-2019, 11:26 AM
|
#39
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,632
|
There's no question that the minimum of two track channels + the panner that attenuates one or the other is unique to Reaper. Everything else (I think) has a minimum 1 mono signal path with a panner that feeds to a two channels. And of course pre-pan sends for default.
No argument and the requests for mono (1 track channel) speak for themselves!
Is it worth it to wrap your head around that difference for everything Reaper offers though. Very much yes IMHO! Can't argue that it's different and confusing at first though.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:22 AM.
|