are send FX the final stage in the reason routing?

[WeLoveYouToo]

hi all.
this has never really come up for me somehow but i am a bit confused about this.
i have a drum track, which has master send 1 mixed in at 50% in the SSL (or whatever you call the reason mixer screen). master send/return1 is a reverb.
now i want to put a gate on that drum track to gate the reverb.
but i can't seem to gate the reverb, only the dry signal.
the built in gate in the SSL seems to only react to the dry signal, and if i pop a C1 gate as an insert, that aslo affect only the dry signal.
i tried sending track 1 to a new bus, with the gate as the only fx on the bus, but the send reverb aslso seems to bypass that gate, which again only affects the original drum signal.
what am i missing?

[Loque]

I am not sure if you are really using a send fx. Nevertheless, you should take some time to understand Reasons routing, because you can use it straight forward or make it very complex.

In the SSL you can define the signal routing on top of each channel in the mixer view and you can assign the Dynamics past everything. But this is not your problem, since you probably just added a Send FX. You can manually route a Send FX to a Mixer Channel and thsn you have your dynamic control. Or go to your SendFX device and drop a Gate FX past it by holding shift key and manually connect it.

This were some basics. You can go crazy in Reason with the routings and this is thr most advantage of Reason, so take a moment to understand and learn it.

[PhillipOrdonez]

Sends or return tracks aren't part of the channel like inserts.
Super basic and not the only possible config (as Loque pointed out, you can switch things around, but I'm skipping most of the mixer in this example cause I just woke up and didn't sleep well at all)

Source --- insert FX --- fader --- master

In case of using sends it works like this

Source -- insert FX --fader -- master
\_ send effect -- master

You can put effects between said send and the master, like Loque also pointed out, you can do so manually, you can add gates or whatever. But has to be behind the effect, not on the channel of the source.

[Arrant]

If you want to gate the wet signal on a send FX then just pop the gate in after the send FX reverb plugin, before the wet audio hits the FX return input.

[ShelLuser]

This is what I'd describe as the main problem with "mainstream Reason". It's very easy to use Reason by using drag & drop and then 'doing' stuff, which is a good thing. Reason auto-connects the devices, and that's that. But at the same time it diverts people's attention away from Reason's true potential. Which I think is a shame...

what am i missing?

The <tab> key. In the mixer section check the master bus, and click the 'edit' button next to the fx-1 send effect (assuming that's what you set up). Now press the tab key and get ready to be amazed

You want to process the reverb signal further? Easy: remove the cable(s) going out of the reverb and into the master device and instead connect those to your gate. Then connect the output of the gate to the master. Easy.

[WeLoveYouToo]

ok, i really appreciate that everyone is basically telling me to learn the basics.
really helpfull stuff. some of these replies are more frustrating than figuring out my original question.

i am using a send because i want to use a particular reverb across multiple channels. i only want the gate on the instance of that reverb in the drums chanel. a couple people said to reroute it manually, but i still don’t understand how that is possible. i cant wire the reverb to a gate, obviously, as that would gate all instances of my reverb.
i guess the most important part of my question is “is send fx the final stage before the master section” and if not, how can i add any processing to the signal after the send but before the master channel

[Loque]

ok, inreally appreciate that everyone is basically telling me to “get good”.
really helpfull stuff.

i am using a send because i want to use a particular reverb across multiple channels. i only want the gate on that reverb in the drums. a couple people said to reroute it manually, but i still don’t understand how that is possible. i cant wire the reverb to a gate, obviously, as that would gate all instances of my reverb.
i guess the most important part of my question is “is send fx the final stage before the master section” and if not, how can i add any processing to the signal after the send but before the master channel

In that case i would use a parallel channel for the drums with a reverb having the same settings. And as others already had mentioned, its a difference if you put the Gate BEFORE or AFTER the fx.

Also note, that the RV7000 already has a build in gate, which can also be triggered via MIDI, so you could send it a MIDI signal from your drum to trigger the Gate, if you like.

I attached a simple and ugly song file having a drum with a parallel channel, which holds the reverb and an additional gate. And another synth is connected to send fx having a RV7000 showing you the "gate" area. I also added a Mix Channel to the send fx, which allows you to use the Mix Channel Dynamic area (and all other stuff from the Mix Channel).

I hope that helps.

[PhillipOrdonez]

ok, i really appreciate that everyone is basically telling me to learn the basics.
really helpfull stuff. some of these replies are more frustrating than figuring out my original question.

i am using a send because i want to use a particular reverb across multiple channels. i only want the gate on the instance of that reverb in the drums chanel. a couple people said to reroute it manually, but i still don’t understand how that is possible. i cant wire the reverb to a gate, obviously, as that would gate all instances of my reverb.
i guess the most important part of my question is “is send fx the final stage before the master section” and if not, how can i add any processing to the signal after the send but before the master channel

If you gate the reverb, it will gate the reverb (everything routed to it). Want to gate a reverb with it the drums in it? Then use a second reverb only for the drums and either year the internal gate of the reverb has one, or plug a gate after that one.

The send is another channel that can take audio from any channel. If you process a signal with a send that is receiving audio from several sources, everything in that reverb will be processed. Makes sense?

Channel1 ------- master
\______send --- gate --- master
/
Channel2 ------master

In the above scenario, the send gets audio from both channels and any processing will apply to both.

Hope that makes sense.

[selig]

If you want to gate a reverb, the gate MUST come AFTER the reverb - make sense?
If the gate is before the reverb, you'll only gate the dry signal, and (obviously) not the reverb!

[WeLoveYouToo]

I attached a simple and ugly song file having a drum with a parallel channel, which holds the reverb and an additional gate. And another synth is connected to send fx having a RV7000 showing you the "gate" area. I also added a Mix Channel to the send fx, which allows you to use the Mix Channel Dynamic area (and all other stuff from the Mix Channel).

I hope that helps.

i really appreciate the effort you put in to help me on this query, however i am on R10 so i cannot open your file.
but seriously thanks.

[WeLoveYouToo]

If you want to gate a reverb, the gate MUST come AFTER the reverb - make sense?
If the gate is before the reverb, you'll only gate the dry signal, and (obviously) not the reverb!

obviously.
i should probably re-pose my question becasue none of thisis helping, or perhaps i didn't communicate effectively.
so 1st of all, please don't help me with my issue as far as gating drums goes, i can route this many other ways to get the desired effect, and it's already taken care of, my drums are gated the way i want them becasue i just copy/pasted teh reverb vst and had one gated instance, and one non-gated instance.
so that's "solved"

what i REALLY want to know, is how do i process a sound post-send fx. just for the future.
i cannot figure out how to gate a reverb (or do any processing to any send effect) on any mix channel.
even if i send the channel to a bus, that send effect seems to bypass the bus as well.
i can still set up a 14:2 mixer and use one instance of a reverb with gate via that, so that's another workaround, but i'd like to know if it is possible to process audio in it's "post-send-fx" state. like, as if the track was bounced with the send fx applied (which is another option, but i usually figure out reverbs before i do final tweaks to the midi)

also, on a personal level, i want to share that i am a bit dyslexic, so while i am a great engineer and songwriter and have full faith in my ability to write, record, and mix, i have a really hard time with certain aspects of production due to having to stare at letters and sequences. the concept of "order" is frustrating as hell to me. it's why i ditched protools even though reason has much worse audio support, because in reason everything is connected with wires in a GUI, instead of drop down menus which force me to try and arrange signal paths in my head and that is really hard. i went to university in the early 2000's and we used an analog console, protools was still fairly new and required special hardware, we learned it inside out, but most of my education that stuck was with physical connections to outboard gear.

[selig]

OK, I'm mildly dyslexic too, so I can relate!
If already know signal flow from the analog world - it's really no different in the digital world (with the exception of any issues with latency).
Simple example: Snare drum on channel 1, send 1 to reverb, returned to master return section (default when adding a send FX). To gate reverb, add a gate after the reverb (select Reverb, add gate). '
That's it! IF this is overly simplified, just let me know and I'll give a more detailed answer.

[Kalm]

If you want to gate a reverb, the gate MUST come AFTER the reverb - make sense?
If the gate is before the reverb, you'll only gate the dry signal, and (obviously) not the reverb!

what i REALLY want to know, is how do i process a sound post-send fx. just for the future.
i cannot figure out how to gate a reverb (or do any processing to any send effect) on any mix channel.
even if i send the channel to a bus, that send effect seems to bypass the bus as well.
i can still set up a 14:2 mixer and use one instance of a reverb with gate via that, so that's another workaround, but i'd like to know if it is possible to process audio in it's "post-send-fx" state. like, as if the track was bounced with the send fx applied (which is another option, but i usually figure out reverbs before i do final tweaks to the midi)

This is the confusing part.
You ask to process a sound POST-SEND FX. I'm going to assume the actual FX is the reverb in this scenario.

By default, the Send FX busses go out the master section area (not the master channel itself) back into a dedicated return channel and feed from any mix channel. Your reverb is in this section. You put a gate after it as stated.
If you're looking to process this further, you add another device within this chain. It all goes back to the master return sends and NEVER goes through a mix channel.

Instead of your send chain hanging by a thread, you can route the send to a mix channel instead. Then send the direct outs to the mixer OR back to the master returns.

The 14:2 mixer will simply bring in a parallel signal and simply recreate a second mixer, not just a send. So you can use that, but if you're trying to double up on multiple parallel processes or process the wet & dry blend through one master output before returning it;

I would simply send the return to a mix channel so that it lives in the mixer. You can then bus the return and the dry signals to a new bus for post processing. This is familiar to traditional daw workflows with AUXs.

[Benedict]

Draw it on paper with Boxes & lines connecting them.

Sounds dumb (or retarded)? Yes but this is the very basics of learning to see. For some reason, people seem driven to skip this step, but until you can see a thing in your mind, you can't make it. Teach your mind to see what you need it to see and it will reward you.



Hmmm, the image wouldn't embed from Dropbox so I FB'd it.

[selig]

If this helps, here is a simplified flow chart of how sends work in a mixer:


If you add a gate after the FX (reverb), you are gating the reverb.
If you add a gate in the channel insert, you are gating the channel signal.
Make sense?

[WeLoveYouToo]

OK, I'm mildly dyslexic too, so I can relate!
If already know signal flow from the analog world - it's really no different in the digital world (with the exception of any issues with latency).
Simple example: Snare drum on channel 1, send 1 to reverb, returned to master return section (default when adding a send FX). To gate reverb, add a gate after the reverb (select Reverb, add gate). '
That's it! IF this is overly simplified, just let me know and I'll give a more detailed answer.

i appreciate the pictures you and the other commenter drew up for me but this isn’t my question exactly.
i’ll try again:
as everyone has said on here, YES i get how a gate works on a reverb. please stop explaining that.
i also get how send fx work, in their default state. but i cannot seem to figure out how to route a signal like this:

audio track —> mixer channel —> add comp/eq/gate etc in the channel strip (blend in send fx) —> ? —>master out

the question mark is where in the example i gave, i would want to add a gate.
i can only seem to add the gate before the (blend in send fx) stage.
inwant to process the sound with the send fx mixed in, not just the sound pre-send.
i must be stuck on a technicality somewhere in the signal path when i try to route the signal with send fx back to another mixer channel that i just overlooked or spaced on.

and yes, i can reroute the send itself enitrely, but that would affect all channels that use that send, in which case there’s no sense in me using the effect as a send in this situation. i want to be able to give multiple tracks the same send fx, but then further alter that wet signal on only one or some of the channels.
the reason for this is that i usually have multiple tracks that i want to add the same reverb to, but gate the long decay differently on a per-channel basis. i can of course ctrl-v the reverb, but it saves alot of cpu to use one instance and send it.

the only way i have been able to do this is to micromix in the 14:2 all the tracks that require the send plus the gate, by adding a gate after the 14:2, which is close enough to what i would ideally want.
also the magic of a spider audio halfrack has set up a nice path for me.

anyways, thank you for all the help, i realize that this may just not be possible in the main mixer i guess.
i had assumed since reason is a digital mixer, i’d be able to modify it’s signal path with one of those blue light up buttons on the mixer or something.

[Benedict]

While you are telling us we don't understand, your explanation is very unclear. The pic I shared was about trying to help you to be more clear and ultimately more elegant. He won't say this but anything that Selig (or I) doesn't understand about mixing is probably not worth much.

To me, it makes absolutely no sense to be using a shared Send for a Gated Reverb sound. Sure it sounds fine when you only send it the Snare. But as soon as you send it the Claps as well, you get a signal that is too complex to allow for neat gating unless you hand Gating duties to MIDI or Automation so the reverb gate behaves more like a piano Sustain pedal - you gate the reverb at the end of each phrase.

I assume you are trying to do the classic 80s Gated Snare Verb thing only with each instrument having a unique gate length. This was always done as an Insert per instrument. If it were me Each Instrument would look like:

Thor
Chorus
Reverb+Gate (if I wasn't using RV-7000 I would use a Mixer and routing to manage the gating).
Mix Channel

Personally, I tend to put all my per-instrument FX before the Mix Channel but if you choose your routing carefully then you can also put them in the Insert box.

If Thor needed an Echo too I'd probably then use a Send each for Echo & Verb but that Verb send would not be shared with anything else. If I wasn't using the RV-7000 then I'd Shift-Insert a Gate after the Reverb and then wire it up to be in-line/between the Reverb and the Return (#2 in my pic above). But you said that wasn't it before so I am lost...

[WeLoveYouToo]

While you are telling us we don't understand, your explanation is very unclear. The pic I shared was about trying to help you to be more clear and ultimately more elegant. He won't say this but anything that Selig (or I) doesn't understand about mixing is probably not worth much.

To me, it makes absolutely no sense to be using a shared Send for a Gated Reverb sound. Sure it sounds fine when you only send it the Snare. But as soon as you send it the Claps as well, you get a signal that is too complex to allow for neat gating unless you hand Gating duties to MIDI or Automation so the reverb gate behaves more like a piano Sustain pedal - you gate the reverb at the end of each phrase.

I assume you are trying to do the classic 80s Gated Snare Verb thing only with each instrument having a unique gate length. This was always done as an Insert per instrument. If it were me Each Instrument would look like:

Thor
Chorus
Reverb+Gate (if I wasn't using RV-7000 I would use a Mixer and routing to manage the gating).
Mix Channel

Personally, I tend to put all my per-instrument FX before the Mix Channel but if you choose your routing carefully then you can also put them in the Insert box.

If Thor needed an Echo too I'd probably then use a Send each for Echo & Verb but that Verb send would not be shared with anything else. If I wasn't using the RV-7000 then I'd Shift-Insert a Gate after the Reverb and then wire it up to be in-line/between the Reverb and the Return (#2 in my pic above). But you said that wasn't it before so I am lost...

i know i haven’t been very clear, but i also am having a hard time understanding why noone understands my question as well. it is just frustrating to have people give me reason 101 answers to gating a snare, but not follow the concept of why a send fx cannot be further processed in a daw. but also i take full responsibility for being unable to articulate this query very well in the first place.

but what you said is correct. this is how it is traditionally done, and what i usually do. usually i put an fx chain on a per track basis if i need unique processing for that channel.

but at 96k with low latency to track, it’d be nice to be able to split one reverb vst instead of duplicating it, especially when not using rv7k or something low-cpu intensive.

but since reason is a piece of software, i had assumed the limitations of hardware wouldn’t apply.
and i SWORE that one of the routing buttons on the ssl would set send fx to be applied before the built in comp/eq/gate on the channel strip.

why CAN’T a signal be processed post-send... see what i am getting at? maybe sends are last on the routing chain because if they weren’t then the system would have to process them individually anyways is my guess.
(and yes, i realize i can route the send cables differently, but that would be separate from the inner-mixer routing anyways so it wouldn’t matter)
anyways, like i said, it’s a limitation of the software and it’s not like i NEED this routing, it would just be really handy, and as far as feature requests, this is a very minor one specific to special circumstances

[Benedict]

There is not really much of a practical reason that you want to Send an "untidied" signal to a Bus processor. There are times I will send to a chain of effects that is my Reverb space for the whole piece (Compression>Scream>Reverb>EQ).

Seeing a Send is one FX unit I really don't see how you can Split it. That feels like a breach of the laws of physics in some way. That Reason does obey (most of) the laws of physics is a good thing.

If you really wanted to create your own DIY Send system pre-SSL, there is not really anything stopping you past your ability to understand and wire it all up without making more of a mess/drama than it was worth. Which leads me back to wondering if there isn't a more elegant solution. What about making a Mix Channel instead of using the Return sockets? You can process the FX Return there.

I think rather than talking technical routing, think on the Story that needs to be told by the music and that will probably show a more elegant solution. The fans only want the results and don't care about the wiring.

[WeLoveYouToo]

There is not really much of a practical reason that you want to Send an "untidied" signal to a Bus processor. There are times I will send to a chain of effects that is my Reverb space for the whole piece (Compression>Scream>Reverb>EQ).

Seeing a Send is one FX unit I really don't see how you can Split it. That feels like a breach of the laws of physics in some way. That Reason does obey (most of) the laws of physics is a good thing.

If you really wanted to create your own DIY Send system pre-SSL, there is not really anything stopping you past your ability to understand and wire it all up without making more of a mess/drama than it was worth. Which leads me back to wondering if there isn't a more elegant solution. What about making a Mix Channel instead of using the Return sockets? You can process the FX Return there.

I think rather than talking technical routing, think on the Story that needs to be told by the music and that will probably show a more elegant solution. The fans only want the results and don't care about the wiring.

There is not really much of a practical reason that you want to Send an "untidied" signal to a Bus processor. There are times I will send to a chain of effects that is my Reverb space for the whole piece (Compression>Scream>Reverb>EQ).

Seeing a Send is one FX unit I really don't see how you can Split it. That feels like a breach of the laws of physics in some way. That Reason does obey (most of) the laws of physics is a good thing.

If you really wanted to create your own DIY Send system pre-SSL, there is not really anything stopping you past your ability to understand and wire it all up without making more of a mess/drama than it was worth. Which leads me back to wondering if there isn't a more elegant solution. What about making a Mix Channel instead of using the Return sockets? You can process the FX Return there.

I think rather than talking technical routing, think on the Story that needs to be told by the music and that will probably show a more elegant solution. The fans only want the results and don't care about the wiring.

like i said, for reason to allow processing post send would probably need to treat each individual channel as a separate instance of that send fx anyways, since it’s not comping the mix to send to the fx, so i think that’s what you mean by defying the laws of physics, right?

it just made sense in my mind that reason could send channel outputs to an fx and then re-introduce them into the mix, but i was wrong.

[WeLoveYouToo]

I would simply send the return to a mix channel so that it lives in the mixer. You can then bus the return and the dry signals to a new bus for post processing. This is familiar to traditional daw workflows with AUXs.

thank you for the write up, it was expertly written and didn’t try and re-explain the basics of gating to me.
it should be helpful to anyone else reading it should anyone else have the same question as i.

my problem was that i made an assumption about send fx that everyone else on the forums took for granted as non-sensical, but in my mind it made sense that i could somehow route reason to do it.

now i know better.

[Benedict]

like i said, for reason to allow processing post send would probably need to treat each individual channel as a separate instance of that send fx anyways, since it’s not comping the mix to send to the fx, so i think that’s what you mean by defying the laws of physics, right?

it just made sense in my mind that reason could send channel outputs to an fx and then re-introduce them into the mix, but i was wrong.

But it can as several people have already said yet you keep saying it can't be based on something that even you admit you cannot explain so I will say good luck and hope you work out what you are after

[WeLoveYouToo]

like i said, for reason to allow processing post send would probably need to treat each individual channel as a separate instance of that send fx anyways, since it’s not comping the mix to send to the fx, so i think that’s what you mean by defying the laws of physics, right?

it just made sense in my mind that reason could send channel outputs to an fx and then re-introduce them into the mix, but i was wrong.

But it can as several people have already said yet you keep saying it can't be based on something that even you admit you cannot explain so I will say good luck and hope you work out what you are after

dude, what do you want from me?
a send cannot function in the way i had hoped.
this issue has been resolved, i’m just trying to thank people for their time.

[Arrant]

Dude, I think you should dial down the attitude. Remember that people here are trying to help you with no profit for themselves.

Now, for possible solutions:
If the problem is to post-process a heavy send effect in different ways to save cpu, you could use a splitter after the send reverb. One splitter output would go to your normal return channel and another one to a new mix channel. In this mix channel you put your gate. There’s nothing stopping you from creating as many of these mix channels as you need, each processing the reverb differently.

Is this what you are after?

[mcatalao]

(...)

why CAN’T a signal be processed post-send... see what i am getting at? maybe sends are last on the routing chain because if they weren’t then the system would have to process them individually anyways is my guess.
(and yes, i realize i can route the send cables differently, but that would be separate from the inner-mixer routing anyways so it wouldn’t matter)
anyways, like i said, it’s a limitation of the software and it’s not like i NEED this routing, it would just be really handy, and as far as feature requests, this is a very minor one specific to special circumstances

This is the issue here. I am sorry to say, but you haven't understand yet the concept of a send. When you understand what a send is, you'll understand that what you want to do doesn't apply to a send, and to my knowledge no software can do it like that.

So, a send on a mixer is an additional output on a mixer channel, that goes into a second mixer. Think of it as a second mixer inside a mixer. This second mixer, mixes all this stuff and routes it "somewhere". But the important thing to retain here is that this mixer mixes all this stuff (in an audio software, it sums the sound).

On a regular Send concept, in reason's mixer, the send goes to an effect. But in an real environment, sends (which sometimes are also called Aux busses) are also used for monitoring, parallel processing and so on because analogue consoles are physically limited ant there's plenty live venue applications that can be done with help of sends, like filtered submixes for effects, to monitoring submixes - i've played and mixed live events a lot.

So, getting back to reason, the send 1 in channel 1 goes to the mixer and is summed with the send 1 of channel 2 , and channel 3 and so forth. Once the sound arrives the effect it already was summed by the send Matrix (lets call it matrix from now on, because it is a 8*n mixer).At this point you cannot separate channel one, from channel 2, from channel 3 in the send, either before or after the effect. Now the send has to return to somewhere, and in reason's default routing it returns to the master bus. So it is "summed" to all the remaining sends into the master, before the master bus inserts are applied (it is not parallel to the master bus, it is summed parallel to the channels, and the buses, into the master bus. In fact this is not a software limitation, it's just the way sends were created. So, if you process the send it will be processed for the whole send.

Sends are a solution to 2 old problems:
- It allows you to process more channels with less processor machines.
- It allows you to process multiple sources in the same context (for example mimicking a room natural reverberation or delay).

So the first problem is not so big now, since you have have as much iterations of the same effect processor as long as your computer can handle (you can use the same compressor in every track and you don't need to have 100 compressors for 100 tracks).

The second problem still exists. You need to place your sounds in the same stage, and reverb and delay are very important for that matter. You don't want to "kill" your computer with 100 reverbs, and you don't want the mess to set up 100 reverbs. And that's the most important feature of sends today, they sum the source and process the source at the same time, in parallel to the same chanels, how it happens naturally in a room (you hear the sound coming from a singer, and his reverb and delay from the room and if you have 2 singers, you will hear the both).