FX send

[julius_the_cat]

Why is an auxillary send a better choice for an effect, eg reverb/delay for vocals, than a subgroup insert? thanks.

[The Real MC]

EQ, filters, compressors - use the inserts. Inserts are pre-fader, aux sends are post fader. You don't want compression on post-fader signals (except when using them as limiters). I patch a high pass filter to my vocal subgroup insert when the 100hz locut switch isn't enough.

 

Delay/reverb/modulated delay - use aux sends. Many boxes can be noisy, better to keep it at a minimum using the returns. Also returns can be routed to monitor foldbacks if the singer(s) wants some FX in their monitors, and on better consoles returns can be routed to L/R or subgroups.

[agedhorse]

Auxes are a post-fader proportional mix of the signal that you want effects applied to, then that wet signal is mixed back into the original signal at the proportion desired.

 

The insert is a loop that the entire signal is passed through a device processed and returned in it's entirety to the signal path. It is not genetally appropriate for processing reverbs and delays with because you would have no control over the individual components in the effected signal.

 

There are exceptions, but they are not common.

[Craig Vecchione]

 

Originally posted by julius_the_cat Why is an auxillary send a better choice for an effect, eg reverb/delay for vocals, than a subgroup insert? thanks.

 

 

You could use a group insert for 'verb effects, etc, but keep in mind that you have no control over how much of each channel's signal is going to the effect (the relative channel faders are for channel level, but may not necessarily be the amount of effects send you want), assuming you have more than one channel assigned to the group. Also you have less control over how much of the wet signal is returned to the console....using either an unused channel as a return, or using a dedicated return will allow you a bit of control over the effect wet signal by using the return fader. This isn't a huge issue if the effect has an output level, and most do, but that control is over at the effects rack and less convenient to control from there.

[julius_the_cat]

OK, so the advantage of the aux is I can use a knob to adjust the amount of the channel signal going to the effect whereas pushing the subgroup button is like an on/off switch. The fader position for the channel does affect the amount of signal going to the subgroup but also determines signal into the main mix, which may be suboptimal.

 

So I have the vocals in channel 1&2 and adjust aux 5 knob to send it to the effect and use either another channel (say channel 10) or ST return. The reverb unit has a mix knob to adjust from dry to wet.

 

Is it best to have channels 1,2 and channel 10 with the effect (set and left at 100% wet) going into the main mix and then adjust the faders to determine the amount of wet signal? Or do I take channel 1&2 out of the main mix using only channel 10 and use the knob on the effects unit to adjust the wet/dry? In our small rack the effects unit is pretty close to the mixer.

 

Thank you for reading.

[TimmyP]

Use the wet/dry mix on the effect only if it is inserted. When sending via aux and then returning (which is the usual method) , if the signal from the reverb is not 100% wet, the dry portion will comb filter with the original signal and sound very bad.

[agedhorse]

No...

 

The aux 5 send on each channel is set post-fader (default) and the positiuion of the aud 5 send knob on each channel determines how much of each channel's post-fader signal is sent to the effect unit. The effect unit is set 100% wet, and the output of this is returned to a spare channel or a dedicated aux return and this wet signal is mixed (added) into the dry mix of vocals that you already have from your channel faders going to the mains.

 

If you use a channel for return, be absolutely sure the aux 5 control on that channel is all the way down or danaging feedback can result.

[Craig Vecchione]

 

Originally posted by agedhorse If you use a channel for return, be absolutely sure the aux 5 control on that channel is all the way down or danaging feedback can result.

 

 

That's a good control to have that one missing knob that seems to somehow occur on every console that's more than a few years old. Even if you forget, it's really hard to turn that control up with no knob.....

[julius_the_cat]

What if I use post-fader aux 5 and adjust the aux 5 send knob to deliver the correct amount of signal to the effects unit.

 

Then later I want to reduce the volume on the dry vocals channel, will the wet return channel be reduced similarily so that they remain proportional?

[Craig Vecchione]

 

Originally posted by julius_the_cat What if I use post-fader aux 5 and adjust the aux 5 send knob to deliver the correct amount of signal to the effects unit. Then later I want to reduce the volume on the dry vocals channel, will the wet return channel be reduced similarily so that they remain proportional?

 

 

 

Yes. Since the send is post-fader, the channel fader has an effect on how much signal is sent to the auxiliary, just as the actual channel's aux send knob.

 

So if you have say, two channels you want to use reverb. One for lead, the other for backing vox. You set your main mix volumes for a good level. You then use post-fader aux's to send some of each channel to the reverb. When you raise the lead vocalist's channel fader for an important solo, more of that channel's signal goes to the reverb too....so the proportion overall is the same.