Automating FX, Sends or Returns?

[FrankDebro1]

In my DAW, I keep the returns at unity and I automate the sends so that if I
have multiple things going to one effect, say lead vocals and backing vocals to
a plate verb setting, I can vary how much verb the lead vocal will get during a
chorus without affecting the amount the backing vocals are pushing. Here is
my question: Is it more common to ride the send levels or effect returns?

I have a mix I'm going to do on an SSL E series console in a few days. The
sends are not automated, so given that the SSL is the most popular mixing
console, does that mean most pro mixers automate effects returns rather then
sends? If so I guess I'll just have to use different effects for most stuff.
Thanks for your feedback.

[Bob Ross]

FrankDebro1 wrote:

> Here is
> my question: Is it more common to ride the send levels or effect returns?

Depends what you're trying to achieve.

I know that's a ****ty answer, but it's quite true: the two methods yield
different effects (no pun intended). If I've got several sources going to the same
Aux bus (feeding a plate, say) then I'm certainly going to ride the send for the
individual sources. But if I've got just 1 source feeding that plate, I have to
decide whether I want the sound of the plate being driven differently by different
parts of the musical phrase, or do I just want to hear more or less 'verb on
different parts of the musical phrase. It's a conspicuously different effect. The
difference is even more blatant with long delays, & w/ a digital desk I often find
myself doing separate passes (w/ updates & edits, etc) for both the send & the
return from any given track to any single outboard effect.

(No wonder "Instant recall" mixes take 10 times longer to write in the first
place!)

I should also point out that sometimes the quality of the effect determines
whether I'm riding the send or the return; noisy "vintage" reverb returns require
an awful lot more gain riding on their returns than pristine contemporary
processors.

/Bob Ross

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> In my DAW, I keep the returns at unity and I automate the sends so that if I
> have multiple things going to one effect, say lead vocals and backing vocals to
> a plate verb setting, I can vary how much verb the lead vocal will get during a
> chorus without affecting the amount the backing vocals are pushing. Here is
> my question: Is it more common to ride the send levels or effect returns?

It depends on the effect and the application. In the analog world,
generally the return level is set to the point where the background
noise coming out of the box is just below the noticable level, and the
amount of the effect is set by adjusting the input to the box (the
send level). But at times when you want no effect at all, it's a good
idea to mute the output (return). In the digital world, you may find
that you get better sound through the process by driving it at near
full level and reducing the return level, or the other way around.
Depends on how they do the arithmetic. Chances are the difference is
insignificant and you do what's most convenient. But generally, you
don't "fade out" an effect - if it's something like a chorus, it's
either on or off (at the level you decide is correct), and if it's a
reverb, it usually follows the signal going into it.

> I have a mix I'm going to do on an SSL E series console in a few days. The
> sends are not automated, so given that the SSL is the most popular mixing
> console, does that mean most pro mixers automate effects returns rather then
> sends?

They probably automate mutes on the returns, or mutes on the sends.
But why not ask the engineer you'll be working with in the studio how
he thinks it should be done?


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )

[WillStG]

<< (FrankDebro1) >>
<< In my DAW, I keep the returns at unity and I automate the sends so that if I
have multiple things going to one effect, say lead vocals and backing vocals to
a plate verb setting, I can vary how much verb the lead vocal will get during a
chorus without affecting the amount the backing vocals are pushing. Here is
my question: Is it more common to ride the send levels or effect returns? >>

Well typically your aux sends are post fader so everytime you move a big
fader you're "automating the send" so to speak, right? <g>

<< I have a mix I'm going to do on an SSL E series console in a few days. The
sends are not automated, so given that the SSL is the most popular mixing
console, does that mean most pro mixers automate effects returns rather then
sends? If so I guess I'll just have to use different effects for most stuff.
>>

To automate a send you might typically mult a tape return into a second
channel which only feeds the effect unit (by aux or by buss). So - you'd
sacrifice a big fader for every send you wish to automate. Mostly I've seen
guys only do that to "push" into a delay, but maybe you're doing electronica or
something. You can midi automate your effects units, change the programs and
reverb times etc. between the verse and chorus. In a big room room you should
have enough effects to dedicate a one for things important enough to mess with
like that...

Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Fox And Friends/Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits