using sends vs inserts explained

hardware, software, tips and tricks
Forum rules
By using this "Production" sub-forum, you acknowledge that you have read, understood and agreed with our terms of use for this site. Click HERE to read them. If you do not agree to our terms of use, you must exit this site immediately. We do not accept any responsibility for the content, submissions, information or links contained herein. Users posting content here, do so completely at their own risk.

Quick Link to Feedback Forum
Locked
User avatar
Depone
Posts: 3526
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:49 pm
Location: South-West UK
Contact:

using sends vs inserts explained

Post by Depone » Fri Apr 15, 2011 9:08 am

Ok so this comes up frequently, so i decided to explain the pros / cons, and how using sends isnt just an old analogue protocol, but an essential part of my modern production...

One of the key, and in my eyes, most important reson to use sends for effects (time based, reverbs, delays etc and not dynamic changes such as compression) is that you can create a tracks 'listening space' and makes it a much more coherent sounding song. For example if you are using multiple reverbs on multiple inserts, its not really going to 'glue' together.

Typically I will set up two and sometimes 3 reverbs, one short one, and a longer one. Ok, for the short one, I would use it on snare(s), and also percussion and more. the beauty of using sends is that you can literally send whatever you want to it, and how much you want it to be effected. I usually also send percussion/ hats to this short snare verb but at a really low level, so you dont notice its got any verb on there, but it does add something to the overall mix.

My second most important use for sends is that your original audio is unaffected... and so you can group bits together in a buss for further processing, while still having reverb, but its not in that drums grouped and compressed. It keeps itself completely seperate. This is really useful for paralell compression, as you still get snare 'verb, but you dont hear it pumping away with the compression. towards the middle of making a track, i tend to buss each type of instrument (basses, drums, leads) together so i have total control of the overall mix. This is ware you can also buss all the send types together, like all reverbs, all delays, all flangers etc.. so you can control the global dry/wet of all the effects.

Now some people say they prefer using inserts for things like snare reverbs... but think to yourself why? its much more flexible, CPU saving and dynamic to use sends.

Post your own pro's / Con's here in this thread, and explain why you work a certain way. and i wont take "because im lazy i do it this way" for an answer :D

ponte_ricky
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:47 pm

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by ponte_ricky » Fri Apr 15, 2011 11:26 am

Good th
read, you're absolutly right. I love the flexibilty of using sends and it allows for much more creative control

flatfaced
Posts: 201
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:20 am

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by flatfaced » Fri Apr 15, 2011 12:19 pm

do you use distortion on sends ? - 1 dislike...

also its really nice to EQ the send or sidechain its reverb/delay for example by itself...

s3f
Posts: 82
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 1:37 pm

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by s3f » Fri Apr 15, 2011 3:26 pm

something that's been bothering me for a while now: what's the difference between using a bus channel to apply the same effect to different instruments and using a send?

User avatar
Depone
Posts: 3526
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:49 pm
Location: South-West UK
Contact:

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by Depone » Fri Apr 15, 2011 4:06 pm

s3f wrote:something that's been bothering me for a while now: what's the difference between using a bus channel to apply the same effect to different instruments and using a send?
Good question.

If your just bussing things together, then effecting them with reverb etc, that's like the end of the chain. you cant then split those instruments back into other groups or outputs for example.

Unless you are getting confuzed with the terminology? When you use sends, you are sending a duplicate of your channel to an auxiliary effect return, or bus, in the hardware world, this is just another channel strip fader that the effects outputs are routed to, but in the digital world, they are called aux tracks and in cases busses. Did that help? or am i not reading your question correctly?

User avatar
paravrais
Posts: 2869
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:31 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by paravrais » Fri Apr 15, 2011 4:43 pm

I used to work the same as you but more recently I've found myself using inserts and copying them to other tracks instead. That way I can tweak things a bit if I need to.

To be honest I should probably go back to using sends but somehow it feels like more work to me :s I'm odd.

s3f
Posts: 82
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 1:37 pm

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by s3f » Fri Apr 15, 2011 5:20 pm

Depone wrote:
s3f wrote:something that's been bothering me for a while now: what's the difference between using a bus channel to apply the same effect to different instruments and using a send?
Good question.

If your just bussing things together, then effecting them with reverb etc, that's like the end of the chain. you cant then split those instruments back into other groups or outputs for example.

Unless you are getting confuzed with the terminology? When you use sends, you are sending a duplicate of your channel to an auxiliary effect return, or bus, in the hardware world, this is just another channel strip fader that the effects outputs are routed to, but in the digital world, they are called aux tracks and in cases busses. Did that help? or am i not reading your question correctly?
i think i get it... so the effects used in a send are parallel to all the other effects, whereas in an insert they're serial? that about right? :corntard:

User avatar
lyons238
Permanent Vacation
Posts: 1725
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 12:04 am
Location: USA - Providence, RI

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by lyons238 » Fri Apr 15, 2011 6:03 pm

thanks for this man. gave me a little better understanding...
New WIP (not much I know)
Soundcloud
Delayed WIP
Soundcloud
Image
Dark Matter

User avatar
fuzz_2k
Posts: 2717
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:53 pm
Location: Brighton/cheltenham - UK
Contact:

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by fuzz_2k » Fri Apr 15, 2011 6:10 pm

Depone wrote:This is really useful for paralell compression, as you still get snare 'verb, but you dont hear it pumping away with the compression.
I'd never thought about that, I've been having issue's with the snare's reverb not sounding nice after compression, and this should slove that problem :D

The only issue i have with using sends is that the more send effect i apply, the louder the sound becomes...
Is this the case for everyone?
static_cast wrote:STOP MESSING WITH THE KICK DRUM AND MAKE SOME MUSIC
http://soundcloud.com/fuzz2k
Soundcloud
OtherbrotherRecordings
Gradient Audio
AlterkationRecordings
GammaAudio

User avatar
vertx
Posts: 726
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 12:31 am
Location: ➫ ➬ ➩ ✈

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by vertx » Sat Apr 16, 2011 4:14 am

Yeah same with me but it makes sense doesn't it? Your adding another layer to the original = less cake, I didn't realise it was different with an insert?

User avatar
Basic A
Posts: 6037
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 10:53 am
Location: Pittsburgh - You might know me as Teknicyde
Contact:

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by Basic A » Sat Apr 16, 2011 8:16 am

One day, I will update FL, and all this will be much more useful too me. Until then. Nope, worthless less Im using other people's pc's.

EDIT : And before its suggested no I dont use a pirated copy, Im just scared of change.
Soundcloud
Soundcloud

Image
:::::: Basic A. ::::: [url=hhttp://soundcloud.com/teknicyde]Teknicyde[/url] ::::: [url=hhttp://soundcloud.com/drjinx]Dr. J!nx[/url] :::::
Phantom Hertz - Fentplates - Reboot Records - Cosmology - Applied Mathematics

flatfaced
Posts: 201
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:20 am

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by flatfaced » Sat Apr 16, 2011 9:16 am

fuzz_2k wrote: The only issue i have with using sends is that the more send effect i apply, the louder the sound becomes...
Is this the case for everyone?
Sounds to me like your usin FX with no option for 100% wet and the dry signal is copyin itself

Still askin if anyone's usin distortion on send ?

User avatar
Depone
Posts: 3526
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:49 pm
Location: South-West UK
Contact:

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by Depone » Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:20 am

flatfaced wrote:
fuzz_2k wrote: The only issue i have with using sends is that the more send effect i apply, the louder the sound becomes...
Is this the case for everyone?
Sounds to me like your usin FX with no option for 100% wet and the dry signal is copyin itself

Still askin if anyone's usin distortion on send ?
Yea sounds about right.
Sometimes i use distortion on a send. Why not?

flatfaced
Posts: 201
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:20 am

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by flatfaced » Sat Apr 16, 2011 1:27 pm

i dont know maybe cuz am actually sending the dry signal to the processed one - i think it sounds a way nicer..I know you could achieve it with send also but there is no point of doin it imo...

User avatar
Assassin
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 12:31 pm

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by Assassin » Sat Apr 16, 2011 1:39 pm

I nearly fainted, it's a thread that...has a point to it.

User avatar
Ldizzy
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 9:47 am

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by Ldizzy » Sat Apr 16, 2011 3:21 pm

I fell in love with sends a few years back. and went from straight 2 channel stereo mixing of grimy hip hop beats with a shitload of processors stacked on top of each other... to ultra complex (sometimes too complex) auxing.. and it changed my life (doesn't necessarily mean im good at mixing haha)

since then... ive experimented loads with sends and with inserts... both have different applications... and both are useful (but i aint reinventing the wheel by saying that)...

I honestly think Dep explained the main differences in a perfect fashion :D uze a pedagogue homeboi

to that.. Ill just add my little view on the potential applications of sends... so we may get some more adepts of it...

Three perks of using sends imo :

1) Keep the original intact/focus on one aspect of the tweaked sound

sometimes u try to tweak a sound, and still can't apply the change u want to apply without losing something else from the original... whenever that happens... it often means you should use a send rather then an insert...

eg : trying to bring some snap to a snare without destroying its original envelope...

So with processing methods (s.a. compression) : i basically see them as a way to isolate aspects of a sound (aspects of its spectrum mainly) and process it separately...

2) Easy experimentation

they are also a GREAT way to EXPERIMENT..

''what if i made this sound part of the ambiance as well.. let's try" (tweaks just one little knob... sends to verb/delay track.. sets amount until it sits where it should... ahhhhh (relief and awe))... and it all sounds cohesive :D

...all without the overuse of cpu (unless u have a bombastic computer and dont mind duplicating stuff around like da homie paravrais :6: ;-) )

3) Complex processing and automation

From there, it also allows you to apply more (and sometimes very) complex processing without rinsing your original sounds...

eg : a common technique i hear in dance mixes from the 90s is putting reverb and complex delays to a vocal track send... and then ducking that send with a sidechain compressor.. using the signal coming from the original dry track... so whenever the singer is singing, you get a very clear, dry signal with a little effect on the sides... and when he or she stops... the effects take over and kinda drown/swallow the vocal... like it gets lost in outerspace... very very cool when well executed.. and it doesnt fuckup your listening of the actual singing...

eg2 : a very very simple example i shouldve cited first... unless u have a cool reverb plugin... sends allow you to process the reverb itself.. quite frankly, i wouldnt be safe putting verbs all across the mix without equing them...

eg3 : you can very easily take your effects and move them around the stereo field without moving the original sound... verbs on the sides, dry in the middle.. and they clash a whole lot less...

etc etc etc

here, u got my 0.02 CAD.
Sharmaji wrote:2011: the year of the calloused-from-overuse facepalm

djwhupass
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 3:45 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by djwhupass » Sat Apr 16, 2011 7:07 pm

I gotta say....I've always used inserts but this thread has me re-thinking my template and thinking of all the possibilities that using sends creates.

I'm still fairly new and stuff like this thread is a huge help for the newer guys.

Thanks for posting this!

User avatar
Depone
Posts: 3526
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:49 pm
Location: South-West UK
Contact:

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by Depone » Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:26 pm

Ldizzy wrote:I fell in love with sends a few years back. and went from straight 2 channel stereo mixing of grimy hip hop beats with a shitload of processors stacked on top of each other... to ultra complex (sometimes too complex) auxing.. and it changed my life (doesn't necessarily mean im good at mixing haha)

since then... ive experimented loads with sends and with inserts... both have different applications... and both are useful (but i aint reinventing the wheel by saying that)...

I honestly think Dep explained the main differences in a perfect fashion :D uze a pedagogue homeboi

to that.. Ill just add my little view on the potential applications of sends... so we may get some more adepts of it...

Three perks of using sends imo :

1) Keep the original intact/focus on one aspect of the tweaked sound

sometimes u try to tweak a sound, and still can't apply the change u want to apply without losing something else from the original... whenever that happens... it often means you should use a send rather then an insert...

eg : trying to bring some snap to a snare without destroying its original envelope...

So with processing methods (s.a. compression) : i basically see them as a way to isolate aspects of a sound (aspects of its spectrum mainly) and process it separately...

2) Easy experimentation

they are also a GREAT way to EXPERIMENT..

''what if i made this sound part of the ambiance as well.. let's try" (tweaks just one little knob... sends to verb/delay track.. sets amount until it sits where it should... ahhhhh (relief and awe))... and it all sounds cohesive :D

...all without the overuse of cpu (unless u have a bombastic computer and dont mind duplicating stuff around like da homie paravrais :6: ;-) )

3) Complex processing and automation

From there, it also allows you to apply more (and sometimes very) complex processing without rinsing your original sounds...

eg : a common technique i hear in dance mixes from the 90s is putting reverb and complex delays to a vocal track send... and then ducking that send with a sidechain compressor.. using the signal coming from the original dry track... so whenever the singer is singing, you get a very clear, dry signal with a little effect on the sides... and when he or she stops... the effects take over and kinda drown/swallow the vocal... like it gets lost in outerspace... very very cool when well executed.. and it doesnt fuckup your listening of the actual singing...

eg2 : a very very simple example i shouldve cited first... unless u have a cool reverb plugin... sends allow you to process the reverb itself.. quite frankly, i wouldnt be safe putting verbs all across the mix without equing them...

eg3 : you can very easily take your effects and move them around the stereo field without moving the original sound... verbs on the sides, dry in the middle.. and they clash a whole lot less...

etc etc etc

here, u got my 0.02 CAD.
Very very good stuff! I would also like to add that chaining delays and verbs together using sends for some really far out sounds
. Like 1 delay delayed to another at another tempo, to another etc... possibilities are endless.

User avatar
djake
Posts: 4314
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:03 am
Location: I found my way out of the mine

Re: using sends vs inserts explained

Post by djake » Sat Apr 16, 2011 11:19 pm

Ive made entire songs using just sends, ive also mades hours of noise.

I love sends more than life itself!

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests