Newbie: Difference between FX chain and FX bus

[bobruzzo]

Newbie here with Reaper. I am reading the manual and I like the idea of an effects chain/bus but I am not familiar with doing that. In my other software for recording I normally put what ever effects I need on individual tracks. For example I might have an instance of a compressor and EQ on guitar track.....a compressor and tube drive on bass track.....an EQ, compressor and reverb on drum track....
But I like the idea of a "chain" or "bus" but do not understand how you can globally set a "master" chain that uses ONE INSTANCE of an effect on ALL tracks with DIFFERENT settings of the same FX on each track. Bus and chain confuse me cause they sound like the same thing. I was reading how you can set a DEFAULT FX chain applied to ALL TRACKS. For example I would most likely use a compressor/EQ/reverb (set to disabled till I need or want to use them) on all tracks. That way those FX will already be set on the tracks when I start a new project and I wont have to go and individually select a separate FX for every track. Then as I finish, say a guitar track, I can then go into the FX chain (or bus) and turn them on and tweak them. I hope I am explaining this right. I have no experience with busses or chains because for years I have always applied individual instances of effects on individual tracks.

[Fergler]

"But I like the idea of a "chain" or "bus" but do not understand how you can globally set a "master" chain that uses ONE INSTANCE of an effect on ALL tracks with DIFFERENT settings of the same FX on each track. "

You can't do that, but you can have everything else you described. There are 2 ways to do it:

1. Make a track folder e.g. all your vocal tracks under a folder. In Reaper all audio is tracks that are in a folder are routed through the folder. To put them in a folder, just create a new track and then select all the vocal tracks and drag them onto the folder track. You should see a blue line showing you if you are doing this right or not.

2. Send all the vocal tracks to a bus. A bus is a track that usually has no audio of it's own and just receives audio from other tracks. You have a choice here, you can either send the tracks to the bus AND have them play from their original tracks (double volume, if no effects on the bus) or you can untick the 'Master/Parent send' in the box in the IO box for each track that is sending to the bus, this will make it so only the bus plays the audio.

You can control send levels in the IO box of any of the tracks, but most easily from the bus track as it will show all it's receives.

Example use:

With 'Master/Parent send' unticked, sending all the audio to one bus, you can now put your effects on the bus. This is identical to a folder set up except that the tracks don't have to be all next to eachother in the TCP. This could be useful in some cases.

Or with the 'Master/Parent send' at default (ticked), send all the vocal tracks to the bus, and put for e.g. a reverb on it and set the reverb to 100% wet and 0% dry. You can now mix in reverb on the vocals and control each vocal send level individually to affect how much they appear in the reverb.

[Swamp Ape]

FX Chains are the string of fx directly on a track. If you want every track to have eq and comp, set one up how you like and set it as the default. Every track will now have these when you create them.

FX Busses are when the audio from one track is sent to another, empty track with an FX Chain on it. This is how I would advise you to do your reverb, rather than adding an instance to each track. This way you can use one instance for the whole song and individually control how strong each track send is.

As Fergler said there is no way to have one instance of a plugin with multiple settings.

[planetnine]

Note, a string of FX in a track can be saved as a "chain", hence the common use of the terminology in REAPER.

A buss is just a common signal path used for mixing signals on. With FX, the sends mix and feed an FX or multiple FX (chain ). Typically used for applying reverb to multiple tracks with a common FX unit or plugin.

Technically, reverbs and delays and such where the FX is mixed with the dry signal are "effects", whereas compressors, gates, etc where the signal is passed in its entirety through the "FX" are called processors.

The term is somewhat vague now as compressors can be used as effects (buss compression), and effect as processes with wet/dry control, so everything is called FX or plugs

Just in case you hear the terms banded about...



>

[bobruzzo]

OK I get it now....so I really don't need a BUS...the chain idea is great though. I'd like to be able to have all new projects come with the FX already on the tracks I am going to need anyway, like EQ, compression, reverb....already set and ready to use when I need to on the tracks. Then I can always manually add any other less prioritized effects like a phaser, delay etc...things I don't normally use on a track by track basis.
So I will have to learn how to make an FX chain and apply it to all new projects but have them disabled till I need to click them on. Thanks for the explanations. I might actually start to get a song done tonight or at least started.

[Swamp Ape]

I said this earlier, but I think you'll do much better having a reverb bus rather than slapping an instance on every track. It'll save lots of CPU and tie the track together better in most cases.

[planetnine]

Originally Posted by Swamp Ape

I said this earlier, but I think you'll do much better having a reverb bus rather than slapping an instance on every track. It'll save lots of CPU and tie the track together better in most cases.

This ^^

It's how it's mostly done by people who do it for a living



>

[SonicAxiom]

this is how I manage several send fx busses conveniently with any no. of instrument/voice tracks making use of them.

In this example, there's only one track (Voc) to make use of the fx busses. Track 1 is the vocal track that will need one or more send fx during mixdown like reverb + bit of delay + bit of early reflections, etc. I prepared an fx sum track (track 2, folder track) with a no. of different fx bus tracks that I usually need as its child tracks and saved it all in one track template.

Track 3 (first child track of fx sum) holds a pre-configured room reverb plugin loaded in the track fx. Track 4 has a different reverb fx etc. and tracks 6 and 7 have two different delay fx loaded. On the right hand side you see the track routing of track 1 (vocal track). I created sends to all of the fx tracks but only pull up those desired.

First advantage of this configuration is that you can easily mute all fx returns at once simply by muting the fx sum track. Second advantage is that you can place a compressor and/or eq plug on the fx sum track to smooth out and enhance the fx sum signal all together.

In this eyample, I don't use the first two fx (small room reverb and medium jazz club) but I'm using the big hall reverb and both delay types.

[LOSANO]

Originally Posted by SonicAxiom

this is how I manage several send fx busses conveniently with any no. of instrument/voice tracks making use of them.

In this example, there's only one track (Voc) to make use of the fx busses. Track 1 is the vocal track that will need one or more send fx during mixdown like reverb + bit of delay + bit of early reflections, etc. I prepared an fx sum track (track 2, folder track) with a no. of different fx bus tracks that I usually need as its child tracks and saved it all in one track template.

Track 3 (first child track of fx sum) holds a pre-configured room reverb plugin loaded in the track fx. Track 4 has a different reverb fx etc. and tracks 6 and 7 have two different delay fx loaded. On the right hand side you see the track routing of track 1 (vocal track). I created sends to all of the fx tracks but only pull up those desired.

First advantage of this configuration is that you can easily mute all fx returns at once simply by muting the fx sum track. Second advantage is that you can place a compressor and/or eq plug on the fx sum track to smooth out and enhance the fx sum signal all together.

In this eyample, I don't use the first two fx (small room reverb and medium jazz club) but I'm using the big hall reverb and both delay types.

Excellent illustration.

[Time Waster]

In this example, is the FX Sum tack a folder track, or do you just send all of the FX tacks to the FX Sum track with no master/parent send? I don't really fully understand folder tracks yet.

[SonicAxiom]

yes, it's a folder track summing all its children's fx returns into one stereo signal. This mix then runs into Reaper's master track. As I use White Tie's awesome Imperial theme folders might look different with your theme. In Imperial theme, the first track of a folder has the green "led" and the last one has a yellow one. All child tracks in between have no "child indicator" with this theme. It takes a while to get used to this but then it's ok.

[Time Waster]

So a folder track is like a sub-mixer?

[SonicAxiom]

yes, as long as you keep the default master/parent send settings checked on all tracks involved and arrange them in a folder the folder track will carry the sum signal of all its child tracks. You could use this to have multiple vocal tracks in a folder and place all fx plugs to process these vocals in the folder track instead of redundant instances on all individual child tracks to make them sound identical. This greatly reduces processing power and makes parameter adjustments very quick and easy as you only have to tweak the settings once for all in the folder track.

You should make yourself familiar with the folder concept. It's very powerful and will speed up your work a lot.

[thequietroom]

Originally Posted by SonicAxiom

yes, as long as you keep the default master/parent send settings checked on all tracks involved and arrange them in a folder the folder track will carry the sum signal of all its child tracks. You could use this to have multiple vocal tracks in a folder and place all fx plugs to process these vocals in the folder track instead of redundant instances on all individual child tracks to make them sound identical. This greatly reduces processing power and makes parameter adjustments very quick and easy as you only have to tweak the settings once for all in the folder track.

You should make yourself familiar with the folder concept. It's very powerful and will speed up your work a lot.

This!

In addition to easy submixes its a great way to consolidate and organize your track panel. There is lots of ways to set up screens but start getting used to folders. It will do nothing but help

[Magicbuss]

Originally Posted by bobruzzo

OK I get it now....so I really don't need a BUS...the chain idea is great though. I'd like to be able to have all new projects come with the FX already on the tracks I am going to need anyway, like EQ, compression, reverb....already set and ready to use when I need to on the tracks. Then I can always manually add any other less prioritized effects like a phaser, delay etc...things I don't normally use on a track by track basis.
So I will have to learn how to make an FX chain and apply it to all new projects but have them disabled till I need to click them on. Thanks for the explanations. I might actually start to get a song done tonight or at least started.

Actually you really do need busses.

For instance - reverbs. You really do not want to put a reverb on each track that you think needs reverb. You create a reverb buss and then send audio to it from every track you deem to need THAT reverb. If you need a different reverb you just create another buss with a different reverb on it and send tracks tto that reverb. its much more processor efficient and its also the way mixing has been done in the analog realm for decades. It still makes as much sense in the digital realm.

So there are 2 classes of FX:

Insert FX which you insert directly on your track. These tend to be things like EQ and Compression

Auxilliary FX which are FX you set up on their own buss (AKA aux track, AKA receive, AKA parallel processing). You send a signal from multiple tracks and they are all processed on the aux buss and then mixed with the unprocessed signal. The effect on the buss is typically 100% wet and the fader stays at zero. The dry/wet mix is controlled by varying the send level from each track sent to the aux. Reverbs and delays are typical aux FX.

Things get really interesting when you start using compression and EQ as parallel/aux FX.

[SonicAxiom]

Originally Posted by Magicbuss

Actually you really do need busses.

For instance - reverbs. You really do not want to put a reverb on each track that you think needs reverb. You create a reverb buss and then send audio to it from every track you deem to need THAT reverb. If you need a different reverb you just create another buss with a different reverb on it and send tracks tto that reverb. its much more processor efficient and its also the way mixing has been done in the analog realm for decades. It still makes as much sense in the digital realm.

So there are 2 classes of FX:

Insert FX which you insert directly on your track. These tend to be things like EQ and Compression

Auxilliary FX which are FX you set up on their own buss (AKA aux track, AKA receive, AKA parallel processing). You send a signal from multiple tracks and they are all processed on the aux buss and then mixed with the unprocessed signal. The effect on the buss is typically 100% wet and the fader stays at zero. The dry/wet mix is controlled by varying the send level from each track sent to the aux. Reverbs and delays are typical aux FX.

Things get really interesting when you start using compression and EQ as parallel/aux FX.

+1 for all of this - and I see, it's all in your name already, MagicBuss :-)

[Jacos]

Great thread thanks all. Like the OP, I'm just learning to make and save FX instances and chains in Reaper. I'm using Fx busses for the first time. I hope this question is relevant and useful to the OP, or at least not a waste of space. If the latter, let me know and I'll make a new thread

My project has pairs of MIDI tracks (for recording - I don't need them much at the mixing/FX stage), and their corresponding audio tracks.

For ease of auditioning groups of tracks, eg strings, vocals, etc, I have a folder for each MIDI group and a folder for each audio group.

I also have a track (a folder) called "Project Audio" which contains, and also has receives from, each Audio group folder, which is useful for quick "hiding" of tracks in both TCP and MCP, and for quick solo/muting of all the project audio. ( as I also have some imported reference tracks I listen to bar by bar).

I'm finding folders can be a nuisance with changing track visibilities. The last track can be minimized or hidden in TCP. Folder levels get changed accidentally sometimes, and I have to find out where the output has got stopped.

So, how should I proceed with FX bussing to keep the project tidy and functional?

If I put the Reverb on, say, the Strings audio folder, it would make it a Reverb bus, but I would have to use a wet/dry mix in the reverb settings, yes?

Whereas if, instead, I put the FX on a separate (bus) track, it can be 100% wet.
The audio group folders can be collapsed for ease of viewing project.
I can submix the Strings Audio folder (dry) and also submix the sends to the FX bus.
I can mix the Strings Audio folder (dry) output against the (100% wet) Strings Verb bus output.
I can make a Buss Parent Folder, with all FX going to it.
All FX tracks would then sit together near the end of the TCP /MCP.
Pros and cons?

[nicholas]

Originally Posted by Swamp Ape

I said this earlier, but I think you'll do much better having a reverb bus rather than slapping an instance on every track. It'll save lots of CPU and tie the track together better in most cases.

In general and for the most part I would definitely agree with this, though there can be occasions when you might want to use a different reverb effect on a particular track (e.g. lead vocal).

[Swamp Ape]

Very true - I was just thinking in general terms.