Can I EQ some reverb send effect on (only) one track in Cubase?

[dellboy]

But what's the real world advantage of all this complicated stuff if you can just add inserts as you need them ?

To save on CPU cycles or what ?

[pdxindy]

edit* OK, I see you guys are using EQ to cut the bottom frequency of the reverb. So what is the advantage of going this complicated route when you could just use an insert on that one track ?

It is not complicated at all... just set up an extra send track and add the EQ to it. Actually I think it is the least complicated way to do it. Cause then you do not have 2 reverbs that you want to stay at the same settings.

[Guenon]

But what's the real world advantage of all this complicated stuff if you can just add inserts as you need them ?

To save on CPU cycles or what ?

That, and it sort of comes as a second nature when you've done it for so long . Adding an intermediary send track and putting an EQ on it to work in this manner takes me two seconds, so it's not really complicated in that sense. It's very straightforward and simple, and it's merely the method itself that might feel strange if not used to it, from previous production experience, and so on.

So for me, having multiple reverbs in situatios where I could use just one... feels more complicated - then I'd have more reverbs to adjust if I wanted to change something in the overall sound of the reverb itself, for example.

It's always very case-by-case and "use what feels right in the context of the project" and all that, this is just thinking out loud, about how I tend to approach these.

[Unaspected]

Sorry, man. Not trying to shut anything down - I felt that maybe the answers above had been missed, as there seemed to be some confusion arising. Only ways this could be simplified is if filtering can be applied within send channels or if it is acceptable to apply the HPF to the reverb buss itself. Though it might be that one wants a sound to stand out more in the reverb mix so it could require special processing before it hits the reverb buss.

I'm all for discussion.

I'm sorry. I read it wrong

No worries.

...In the case of using just a single reverb, adding an intermediary send channel with an EQ on it, and then in turn sending that channel into the one reverb... is also so basic functionality that it should be possible in any DAW by now.

In Bitwig you can actually split the signal to 2 parallel copies (still on a single track), high-pass one of them, silence that copy completely and use regular pre-fader send to route it to reverb.

That's just one track and one reverb send

I don't think you can do that in any other DAW?

I'm sure there'll be a way with Reaper but it would likely be a PITA to set up. It's not something that was available in PT or Logic when I used them - neither FL Studio. Also not something I've had to do often - though there will be tracks where you want specific instruments to be processed differently at parallel busses.

For what it's worth, for me personally the aesthetic of doing something like this by copying the track is something I tend to avoid the most. Even when tailoring the send effects for a single track (be it through signal chain splits, receiver devices or intermediary processing channels, or a combination of some sort) I much prefer the means that allow me to keep the track itself singular and intact - so that, if I perhaps do further edits to that track, I don't need to re-copy anything, and the sends just keep working as I set them.

Same. It's messy and reverb can be expensive to the CPU. Though I've found I break this rule when designing individual sounds - especially if I want to create alternatives for comparison. Then it can be quicker to simply copy the whole track with all its channel effects.

But, indeed, in a mix, filtering input to or output from reverb are the cleanest and quickest solutions.

It might be best to assess the situation depending on how much difference a process is going to make. Very difficult to get this kind of perspective when we're obsessing over sound and especially if we're working on something without external opinion. It can also take years to learn the broad strokes that work well and help one to avoid fussing over tiny details. Definitely not suggesting this is the case here but if strapping an HPF over the whole reverb sounds good enough, it probably is.

[Guenon]

I'm sure there'll be a way with Reaper but it would likely be a PITA to set up.

Nah it's actually very simple to do in Reaper, too . It's one of those things, that... anything like that can seem like it's complicated if it's not familiar, but after you've used it, it's something that can be set up in just a few seconds.

On the track you are interested in doing this kind of parallel send on, increase the channel amount from two (a regular stereo track) to four:



Then, load an EQ plugin on the track like you usually do, but tick its appropriate routing matrix boxes so that it receives channels 1-2 (the original stereo signal on the track) and outputs on channels 3-4 only:



Now you have the EQ'd signal, in parallel, on channels 3-4 of the same track, and you can add a send that sends just those channels into a chosen reverb plugin in the project:



There - as a result, and without adding any intermediary sends/tracks, in just a few seconds you now have a send control, in parallel on the same track, for an EQ'd send into a reverb, alongside other possible send controls that you see in the mixer control panel of the said track.

As you can imagine, this can be utilized for all kinds of other splits/parallelism/etc. too, not just EQing a reverb send of a particular track, heh

[Unaspected]

I'm sure there'll be a way with Reaper but it would likely be a PITA to set up.

Nah it's actually very simple to do in Reaper, too . It's one of those things, that... anything like that can seem like it's complicated if it's not familiar, but after you've used it, it's something that can be set up in just a few seconds.

On the track you are interested in doing this kind of parallel send on, increase the channel amount from two (a regular stereo track) to four:



Then, load an EQ plugin on the track like you usually do, but tick its appropriate routing matrix boxes so that it receives channels 1-2 (the original stereo signal on the track) and outputs on channels 3-4 only:



Now you have the EQ'd signal, in parallel, on channels 3-4 of the same track, and you can add a send that sends just those channels into a chosen reverb plugin in the project:



There - as a result, and without adding any intermediary sends/tracks, in just a few seconds you now have a send control, in parallel on the same track, for an EQ'd send into a reverb, alongside other possible send controls that you see in the mixer control panel of the said track.

As you can imagine, this can be utilized for all kinds of other splits/parallelism/etc. too, not just EQing a reverb send of a particular track, heh

Beautifully explained. Thank you.

[Guenon]

[antic604]

On the track you are interested in doing this kind of parallel send on...

Wow, that's kind of awesome (& well explained)! Thanks for taking the time to do it!

To return the favour, this is how you'd do it in Bitwig - basically you'd use FX Layer device to create parallel channel (like 3/4 in Reaper), that's muted and is sending the signal the reverb pre-fader. Great thing is you can those sub-channels in the mixer, too:

[_leras]

+1 from the Bitwig crew Antic!

Though I would likely add a track with an audio receiver and EQ then and group them in a group with two audio tracks.

Or create a group for the original track to EQ then add an fx channel inside the group with the eq/filter and send to it as others have said.

I prefer to keep fx split for something.more obviously fx split, where this is more routing.

Haven't really had this particular need though, I would probably be ok with filtering everything going to the reverb. It's making me think though!

[Trancit]

I'm sure there'll be a way with Reaper but it would likely be a PITA to set up. It's not something that was available in PT or Logic when I used them - neither FL Studio.

Just in favour to FL Studio...
With Patcher it´s a 2 click operation and to my knowledge the most advanced and easiest method to process a send from any channel to your liking before it hits the actual send effect...

[jancivil]

For what it's worth, for me personally the aesthetic of doing something like this by copying the track is something I tend to avoid the most. Even when tailoring the send effects for a single track (be it through signal chain splits, receiver devices or intermediary processing channels, or a combination of some sort) I much prefer the means that allow me to keep the track itself singular and intact - so that, if I perhaps do further edits to that track, I don't need to re-copy anything, and the sends just keep working as I set them.

exactly the same here. I would print the track and its consequents separately before making copies and doing extraordinary workarounds.
I tend towards neatness, I print the reverb and the instrument(s) as two 2-files typically, if I'm going to commit to audio, and if there's two different kind of things going to the one reverb here's 4 2-files. I'll consolidate, or not depending on the level of squalor produced in the end.

My basis for templates in the current config uses 3 different instances of MIR Pro, 1 per instance; one of them boosts bass pre-fader, one of them has a wide lowshelf in the room UI and some cuts in not unusual bass-mid spots, the other doesn't need 'help'.

[dellboy]

I'm sure there'll be a way with Reaper but it would likely be a PITA to set up. It's not something that was available in PT or Logic when I used them - neither FL Studio.

Just in favour to FL Studio...
With Patcher it´s a 2 click operation and to my knowledge the most advanced and easiest method to process a send from any channel to your liking before it hits the actual send effect...

Watched it all the through, great product, but still complicated. Perhaps after doing it a bit it becomes easier. It used to be that you made a demo and then the record company turned it into a finished product, but nowadays we have to be full blown studio engineers.

[Unaspected]

I'm sure there'll be a way with Reaper but it would likely be a PITA to set up. It's not something that was available in PT or Logic when I used them - neither FL Studio.

Just in favour to FL Studio...
With Patcher it´s a 2 click operation and to my knowledge the most advanced and easiest method to process a send from any channel to your liking before it hits the actual send effect...

I was meaning more basic mixer functionality - as with Bitwig and Reaper - but, indeed, a lot can be done with Patcher.