"Pre-fader (Cue)" in Bitwig , for what ?

[Anatolio]

I read the Bitwig instructions, but I didn't fully understand. Please explain: 1) Why do I need the "Pre-fader (Cap) in Bitwig" mode enabled in the Fx Track Inspector panel?
2) Enabled buffer mode with options "auto", "pre", "post" - how does it work and what is it used for?

[lfm]

I think you could see pre fader cue as a personal mix for different musicians.
- each want more of some parts of a mix to do a good job
- not so much for the mix itself

That is how I understood it....

[Anatolio]

I think you could see pre fader cue as a personal mix for different musicians.
- each want more of some parts of a mix to do a good job
- not so much for the mix itself

That is how I understood it....

Thank you for the answer, but still these options are not clear yet. it would be great if someone with experience could explain with real examples why and how it works..

[skwrl]

The pre-fader (cue) button determines how the "auto" function works per effect track.

The three options of "auto/pre/post" are for sending to an auxiliary (effect) track and the default "auto" function is "post fader". This means that any level of volume sent to an effect track is sent after the the volume fader of the track being sent from. When selecting the "pre-fader (cue)" button on your FX track you are changing how the default "auto" sends to that effect so that volume from the source track is sent prior to said tracks fader.

Post fader sends make the volume sent to an effect relative to the volume of the track. Turn down the tracks volume, the effect volume goes with it.

Pre fader gives the effect a discrete volume separate from the volume of the source. You can turn your source down to nothing and still hear the effect at its own volume.

[lfm]

So Bitwig calls send pre/post fader for cues?

[Anatolio]

The pre-fader (cue) button determines how the "auto" function works per effect track.

The three options of "auto/pre/post" are for sending to an auxiliary (effect) track and the default "auto" function is "post fader". This means that any level of volume sent to an effect track is sent after the the volume fader of the track being sent from. When selecting the "pre-fader (cue)" button on your FX track you are changing how the default "auto" sends to that effect so that volume from the source track is sent prior to said tracks fader.

Post fader sends make the volume sent to an effect relative to the volume of the track. Turn down the tracks volume, the effect volume goes with it.

Pre fader gives the effect a discrete volume separate from the volume of the source. You can turn your source down to nothing and still hear the effect at its own volume.

Thank you for your reply!
The difference between pre-fader and post-fader is clear, in this area I have complete clarity. For example, the sound from a track sent to an fx track with reverberation in the "pre-fader" mode will not depend on changing the volume level of the track.

.. and the default "auto" function is "post fader".

Strangely, the "Auto Uses the FX track's "Pre-fader" setting" button on the track inspector panel speaks of the "pre-fader" mode on the FX track, although logically the presence of the "pre-fader (cue)" option - the "auto" mode on the track is exactly the post-fader mode, as you wrote.

It turns out that on the track we can specify the pre-, post - or parent mode of the fx track by selecting "auto", which by default is "post-fader". The "auto" mode is needed if we want to switch the fx track to the "pre" mode, so that the level of effects on it from the tracks does not depend on the track volume faders and at the same time there is no need to change the mode in the track itself -"auto" is set there. I figured it out here, of course.

Only one thing remains unclear: why in the fx track below the "pre-fader (cue)" button there are auto, pre, post options, like in a regular track, as well as the possibility of enabling the delay buffer (watch the video). What is it and why do you need it for an fx track at all ? I thought that this changed the signal routing mode from the fx track onwards, but the sound did not change on the master track in any way. By the way, the signal from the fx track goes to the master, right?

[Tj Shredder]

An FX track has sends as well, you can send the signal to another fx…

[skwrl]

The first send on your FX track is a feedback into the same effect track. The buffer will help reduce overloading? I think. I tested with a delay device and without the buffer I got into instant self oscillation, but with it enabled I had a useable double-ish delay.

And yes, the default output of an FX track is to the master.

[Anatolio]

An FX track has sends as well, you can send the signal to another fx…

Yes, you can change the routing, for example, by making the output of fx 1 to fx 2 instead of the master, but at the same time the effect of fx 2 will go from the solo fx 1, regardless of the handle that is next to "auto", "pre", "post" in the inspector panel on fx 1. And this is different from sends in the usual track. There the handle determines the level of the effect. So what is this handle for and why are these modes in the fx track ? It feels like the effect is being sent to the same source track of the fx, but the logic is "pre" or "post", so why is it unclear.

[Anatolio]

And yes, the default output of an FX track is to the master.

Thanks.

The first send on your FX track is a feedback into the same effect track. The buffer will help reduce overloading? I think. I tested with a delay device and without the buffer I got into instant self oscillation, but with it enabled I had a useable double-ish delay.

In the message above, I wrote that it feels like sending from the fx track is sent to the same fx track (mixing), you confirm my guesses. But then two questions :

1) Why might it be necessary to add a feedback signal to the original fx track? To enhance the effect ?

2) How does this mixing work in the "pre" and "post" modes? The signal in the "pre" mode is taken up to the fader of the fx track and mixed with feedback up to the fx fader. The signal in "post" mode is taken after the fader of the fx track and mixed with feedback before the fx fader. Right or otherwise ?

[skwrl]

For your first question, I'm not sure about using this as a mixing task kind of technique, just for creative purposes. It's an extreme kind of enhancement to an effect chain because it is creating a feedback loop.

I think the challenge I have with the wording presented is calling it a feedback signal. This kind of send is creating a feedback loop through the effect. A real world example would be putting microphone in front of a speaker and the resulting squeal it would produce. The only difference between pre and post send in a feedback loop would be control over the amount sent back into the loop: pre fader is full volume into the loop, post fader gives you some control (with the side effect of total volume being affected for the track).

[Anatolio]

For your first question, I'm not sure about using this as a mixing task kind of technique, just for creative purposes. It's an extreme kind of enhancement to an effect chain because it is creating a feedback loop.

I think the challenge I have with the wording presented is calling it a feedback signal. This kind of send is creating a feedback loop through the effect. A real world example would be putting microphone in front of a speaker and the resulting squeal it would produce. The only difference between pre and post send in a feedback loop would be control over the amount sent back into the loop: pre fader is full volume into the loop, post fader gives you some control (with the side effect of total volume being affected for the track).

You gave a good example with a microphone in front of the speaker. And I agree that the options discussed lie in the plane of a rare creative experience.

I took note of your view on the pre- and post in mixing on the fx track and I'll calm down on this -in practice, both options give almost the same overload, I didn't notice much difference. And I don't plan to do this mixing. I am very glad that we managed to figure it out. Thank you so much for the answers!

[skwrl]

I took note of your view on the pre- and post in mixing on the fx track and I'll calm down on this -in practice, both options give almost the same overload, I didn't notice much difference.

The only difference I could find here was that the overloaded/oscillating sound could be maintained with pre-fader mode. It could probably have some creative use, but it’s not within my uses haha.

For an interesting feedback-based sound design, I recommend trying out the experiment I set up. I’ll save the project and link it later on; it has a nifty method to create some ringing on a pulse.

[Anatolio]

I took note of your view on the pre- and post in mixing on the fx track and I'll calm down on this -in practice, both options give almost the same overload, I didn't notice much difference.

The only difference I could find here was that the overloaded/oscillating sound could be maintained with pre-fader mode. It could probably have some creative use, but it’s not within my uses haha.

For an interesting feedback-based sound design, I recommend trying out the experiment I set up. I’ll save the project and link it later on; it has a nifty method to create some ringing on a pulse.

Yes, it would be interesting to get acquainted with your effect