Dubstepforum.com

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

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

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...

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?

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 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.

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?

thanks for this man. gave me a little better understanding...

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

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?

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?

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.

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 ?

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?

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...

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

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 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

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

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.

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!

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 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

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

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.

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

I love sends more than life itself!