Cubase: sending FX channels to groups?

[instyle]

Drums to pre-fx
pre-fx to post-fx
fx to post-fx

Should be doable, no?
Actually I don't see the problem at all, as long as you're not trying to route to a lower group number you're ok, right?

So if you have:
group 1, drum group
group 2, drum fx 1
group 3, drum fx 2
group 4, drum fx 3
group 5, drums with fx

should that not work?

yes, that would do. that's also exactly what i meant with my first post. the issue is, that as soon as you have to insert new groups you mess up your routing or you can't route to where you would like to. in my projects, it happens very often, that you can't really plan everything ahead. therefore i often have to insert a new group.

e.g. i just created a "toms" group to compress them together, but still they have to go to the toms fx. therefore you would create a new group (which would be nr. 6, even if you move it to second position), but can't route from there to group 5. in that case you can only change group 2 to what the toms group should do and change all following groups. that's pretty annoying.

btw: can anyone tell me what "PDC" means in this context? i guess it's about the latency compensation that steinberg introduced for groups...

cheers,
instyle

[stefancrs]

Drums to pre-fx
pre-fx to post-fx
fx to post-fx

Should be doable, no?
Actually I don't see the problem at all, as long as you're not trying to route to a lower group number you're ok, right?

So if you have:
group 1, drum group
group 2, drum fx 1
group 3, drum fx 2
group 4, drum fx 3
group 5, drums with fx

should that not work?

yes, that would do. that's also exactly what i meant with my first post. the issue is, that as soon as you have to insert new groups you mess up your routing or you can't route to where you would like to. in my projects, it happens very often, that you can't really plan everything ahead. therefore i often have to insert a new group.

e.g. i just created a "toms" group to compress them together, but still they have to go to the toms fx. therefore you would create a new group (which would be nr. 6, even if you move it to second position), but can't route from there to group 5. in that case you can only change group 2 to what the toms group should do and change all following groups. that's pretty annoying.

btw: can anyone tell me what "PDC" means in this context? i guess it's about the latency compensation that steinberg introduced for groups...

cheers,
instyle

When using "hard-wired" hosts like cubase, and if they also have full pdc, this is something you will _have_ to live with.

pdc is the latency compensation yes, and in cubase they do this on all fx, inserts and busses etc. That's why you're no allowed to route any way you like.

Imagine this
bus 1 has 10ms latency
bus 2 has 5ms latency
what would happen if you'd route an instrument to bus 1, then send stuff from bus 1 to bus 2 and want to send it back? What would the resultant latency be?

It's not calculatable since you've created a loop.

But! They _could_ allow free routing as long as you don't create a loop, that's how it's handled in for instance podium (which also has full pdc).

Because trying to rearrange the groups (not visually) is a pain in the ass, I guess you'd basicly would have to copy / save each channels setting and then recreate the channels. No fun at all.

[instyle]

When using "hard-wired" hosts like cubase, and if they also have full pdc, this is something you will _have_ to live with.

that's what i was afraid of...

But! They _could_ allow free routing as long as you don't create a loop, that's how it's handled in for instance podium (which also has full pdc).

well' let's hope for the next edition of cubase (sx4?), but I guess, they have to rewrite part of the VST engine...

Because trying to rearrange the groups (not visually) is a pain in the ass, I guess you'd basicly would have to copy / save each channels setting and then recreate the channels. No fun at all.

that's what I started doing. I also just recently found a nice feature "track export" which comes in quite handy in comination with import/export of mixer settings if you have several versions of a track, e.g. when making several different radio spots of a series...

cheers and thanx for your explanations,
instyle

[stefancrs]

If you really find cubase channel handling akward, check out the alternatives. I myself prefer podium over cubase, but check out tracktion and energyXT as well. Afaik you can handle these kind of routings quite well in tracktion, but you might need to use the racks or something. In podium and eXT you most definately can handle this without any weird workarounds.

[Pollux]

(sorry for digging up that old thread...)

e.g. i just created a "toms" group to compress them together, but still they have to go to the toms fx. therefore you would create a new group (which would be nr. 6, even if you move it to second position), but can't route from there to group 5. in that case you can only change group 2 to what the toms group should do and change all following groups. that's pretty annoying.

I don't see what you mean: I only have Cubase SX1 demo right now, but if I'm not mistaken when you create a new group channel, as long as you move it in the right position you can do anything you like if doesn't generate feedbacks. But apparently you're trying to say that your routing options depend, not only on the position of the groups, but also on the order in which you *created* them?!? (thus forcing you to do all this moving around) That would be plain stupid... Is this a new "feature" in SX2/SX3, is there a subtlety I'm overlooking, or did I just not understand your point?

[instyle]

But apparently you're trying to say that your routing options depend, not only on the position of the groups, but also on the order in which you *created* them?!? (thus forcing you to do all this moving around)

Yes, that's exactly the point. The INTERNAL order of groups does not change when you move them around. Therefore the routing options depend on the order in which you created the groups.

This calls for a lot of planning in advance or as an alternative for a lot of changes to apply to existing groups. (it often happened to me that I suddenly want to insert an additional subgroup for drum tracks, e.g. combine the toms or use two kick mics and apply dynamics together, etc.).

You have to think about such stuff in advance...

cheers,
instyle

[Pollux]

Thanks for the reply; but that's weird?!?
I mean, when I fire up Cubase SX Demo, I can create a few group tracks, route the output of the 1st to the 3rd, the 2nd to the 3rd, then when I move the 3rd up so that it's between the 1st and the 2nd, the only change is that the 2nd is now routed to the output buss, but now I can route the 3rd to the 2nd, which is exactly what I wanted...
Is the behaviour different in your version, or does this work correctly for you too? (then maybe you could tell me a minimal testcase to see when it fails)

I was actually thinking about buying Cubase SL3 this afternoon, but that "feature" is making me think twice about it...

[instyle]

Thanks for the reply; but that's weird?!?
I mean, when I fire up Cubase SX Demo, I can create a few group tracks, route the output of the 1st to the 3rd, the 2nd to the 3rd, then when I move the 3rd up so that it's between the 1st and the 2nd, the only change is that the 2nd is now routed to the output buss, but now I can route the 3rd to the 2nd, which is exactly what I wanted...
Is the behaviour different in your version, or does this work correctly for you too? (then maybe you could tell me a minimal testcase to see when it fails)

I was actually thinking about buying Cubase SL3 this afternoon, but that "feature" is making me think twice about it...

hi pollux i'll have to verify your "simple case" when I'm back at my studio, maybe tonight. i'll come back to you

cheers,
instyle

[SJ_Digriz]

I believe Pollux is correct. The original version of SX allowed re-ordered Groups BUT the routing got changed whenever you moved them. So, you can't actually get uphill connections. This has changed in 2 and 3 when complete PDC was instituted. Now Group channels are fixed.

[Pollux]

What do you mean "fixed"? This is all but a fix -- I'd rather lose a tiny weeny bit of freedom as to which track is at the top and which one at the bottom, than set my whole routing in stone! Obviously the best solution would be if Cubase did the topological sort itself, but SX1's solution sounds OK to me, while SX2/3's solution sounds awfully bad. Imagine: if I use a reverb group track to act as a send effect, then I won't even be able to create a new group track and route its output to the reverb! That's insane! I would honestly be surprised if anyone found that system better...

And why doesn't Steinberg provide a demo for SX2/3, by the way? I'd like to know what I buy...

[SJ_Digriz]

And why doesn't Steinberg provide a demo for SX2/3, by the way?

Based on my vast insider information network with Steinberg I can tell you....I don't know.

What do you mean "fixed"?

What I mean by fixed is that the routing is maintained even when you move the groups(except in some situations where you put them in folders). You still can't do uphill mixing.

Having the routing get blown up because you moved the group was the dumbest bug in the world. I won't debate the Cubase routing issue anymore. If it pisses you off and you won't take the time to learn how to use it, then go use Tracktion or Live and bitch about stuff they can't do on their boards.

[flex42]

IIRC a Steinberg mod said that there's no other way possible (full PDC being implemented in SX 2 being the "culprit")...

[SJ_Digriz]

IIRC a Steinberg mod said that there's no other way possible (full PDC being implemented in SX 2 being the "culprit")...

Yeah, then it was pointed out to them how stupid that claim was and several ways to deal with it.

Would it be better if they were moveable? Sure. Is it a huge show stopper that you can't plan ahead for? No. It is a minor annoyance that anyone who uses the software for any period of time works out for themselves to the point it is a non-issue.

[Pollux]

SJ_Digriz: Ah, I understood fixed-as-in-repaired, not fixed-as-in-permanent, sorry about that (which explains why I tried to detail why I thought it was actually an issue).

By the way, the only mention of this I can find in the manual is "You can route the output of a group to an output bus or to another group with a higher number", but they don't explain the concept of a group number anywhere. Guess they're not too proud of it And I suppose "higher number" = "later creation time", right?

[SJ_Digriz]

SJ_Digriz: Ah, I understood fixed-as-in-repaired, not fixed-as-in-permanent, sorry about that (which explains why I tried to detail why I thought it was actually an issue).

By the way, the only mention of this I can find in the manual is "You can route the output of a group to an output bus or to another group with a higher number", but they don't explain the concept of a group number anywhere. Guess they're not too proud of it And I suppose "higher number" = "later creation time", right?

right, but I'm not sure what more explenation is required. The groups are numbered and the number is visible.