Returns

[carilive]

Hi Everyone,

Please direct me to the simplist explanation of why I would want to use A Return and B Return - elementary, I'm sure ... but I never use them and probably should know what I'm missing. I just upgraded to Ableton 8 with keyboards, MIDI, and flute.

Thanks in advance

http://www.carilivestudio.com

[oddstep]

Imagine you want to put the same delay on both keyboards and flute. Well you either put a delay on each one and adjust the settings for each one in an identical way, or you can put a delay on return a and send 0 - 100% of the signal from these tracks to the return.
Another way to think about it is 70s dub. Its a collection of tracks that are being sent to a bank of effects, sometimes singly... the vocal fades up - gets caught by a delay, vocals fade out but delay is still there, sometimes as a group... everything gets sent to a spring reverb.
You don't need to use send return loops but it is often easier and can reduce the need for duplicating effect chains.

[TenSquare]

Imagine you are working on a 24 tracks project and you need to add some reverb on all the instruments. You have at least 2 solutions:

1. you can insert a reverb device in each track of your project, but then you will get 24 reverb devices (which can be CPU consuming) and you'll have to make the settings 24 times (which can be quiet boring)

2. or you can create one reverb device in a single "A Return" track and then send a copy of your 24 tracks to it using the "Send A" knobs. In that case the reverb device is shared by the tracks, you have to make just one setting for all the instruments (if there are changes to be made, you will make them just once!) and the reverb color is the same for all of them (which can be usefull to enhance the space coherency). If you need a lot of reverb on guitar but very few on the main voice, you just have to set the "Send A" knobs to the right value.

Now, if you need to add 2 types of reverb to your instruments instead of one (let's say a short and clear one + a long and dark one), just create 2 return tracks and put one reverb in each. Then use the "Send A" and "Send B" knobs to make the right adjustments.

All the best.

[oblique strategies]

All of the above.

Plus:
You can send Returns into each other to add reverb to a delay for example, & into themselves for feedback effects (this should be done cautiously since feedback can cause havoc!)

There's a lot of fun things that you can do using Sends & Returns - like classic Dub techniques.

The model is based on hardware method of working where you have external effects processors & a mixing board: you needed a way to get the sounds out from the mixing board: Sends, & then back into the mixing board: Returns.

[mholloway]

also:

the send-return relationship for FX generally is used to create a 'Parallel' FX routing situation, as opposed to the 'Serial' routing created by Insert FX. Meaning, when the send is set to post-fader and the effect on the return is set to 100% wet, you will hear both the original channel itself (at whatever level the fader is at) plus a copy of that channel, run through the effect, with 100% wet signal coming out the other end; then both are sent to the Master channel. In an insert situation, you lose part of the original mix in the wet/dry balance. Which is better to use depends simply on what you want to acheive. But drums, for example, if used with a healthy dose of insert delay, will start to disappear into the 'wet' so to speak, because you are hearing more Wet than Dry signal, whereas Drums using a Send to a Return with the delay will preserve all the volume of the original channel while also adding the delayed version into the mix.

-M

[kanuck]

also:

the send-return relationship for FX generally is used to create a 'Parallel' FX routing situation, as opposed to the 'Serial' routing created by Insert FX. Meaning, when the send is set to post-fader and the effect on the return is set to 100% wet, you will hear both the original channel itself (at whatever level the fader is at) plus a copy of that channel, run through the effect, with 100% wet signal coming out the other end; then both are sent to the Master channel. In an insert situation, you lose part of the original mix in the wet/dry balance. Which is better to use depends simply on what you want to acheive. But drums, for example, if used with a healthy dose of insert delay, will start to disappear into the 'wet' so to speak, because you are hearing more Wet than Dry signal, whereas Drums using a Send to a Return with the delay will preserve all the volume of the original channel while also adding the delayed version into the mix.

-M

slightly off topic but is it possible to have this same effect without using a return track? At the moment the only work around I've found was to create an effects rack and duplicate have 2 chains going one dry/one wet.

[mholloway]

also:

the send-return relationship for FX generally is used to create a 'Parallel' FX routing situation, as opposed to the 'Serial' routing created by Insert FX. Meaning, when the send is set to post-fader and the effect on the return is set to 100% wet, you will hear both the original channel itself (at whatever level the fader is at) plus a copy of that channel, run through the effect, with 100% wet signal coming out the other end; then both are sent to the Master channel. In an insert situation, you lose part of the original mix in the wet/dry balance. Which is better to use depends simply on what you want to acheive. But drums, for example, if used with a healthy dose of insert delay, will start to disappear into the 'wet' so to speak, because you are hearing more Wet than Dry signal, whereas Drums using a Send to a Return with the delay will preserve all the volume of the original channel while also adding the delayed version into the mix.

-M

slightly off topic but is it possible to have this same effect without using a return track? At the moment the only work around I've found was to create an effects rack and duplicate have 2 chains going one dry/one wet.

I'm sure there are various workarounds, like what you've done with racks, but I guess I fail to understand the point, since that's a major part of why Send-Returns exist in the first place...?

-M

[carilive]

Imagine you want to put the same delay on both keyboards and flute. Well you either put a delay on each one and adjust the settings for each one in an identical way, or you can put a delay on return a and send 0 - 100% of the signal from these tracks to the return.

I see, so if using the same effect on the keyboard and flute, it is best to use the Return. Does this also help with tracks that are not all on the same volume? For example, I have accompaniment keyboard line that is soft, and when the flute comes in with all of her effects (EQ, Compression, Limiter, Reverb, and maybe others) the flute is much louder. What can I look for to help me with keeping all the tracks the same level? ( I did find the Normalize, but was recently advised my flute is so much louder)

I'm trying to just listen to my music, make adjustments until it sounds right to me in the headphones, then I go to my "monitor" to check how it sounds in the real world ... but I'm missing something.

Thanks so much for responding oddstep. I can't wait to try it out!

[carilive]

2. or you can create one reverb device in a single "A Return" track and then send a copy of your 24 tracks to it using the "Send A" knobs. In that case the reverb device is shared by the tracks, you have to make just one setting for all the instruments (if there are changes to be made, you will make them just once!) and the reverb color is the same for all of them (which can be usefull to enhance the space coherency).

Thanks Tensquare - one question: what is the space coherency and why do I want to enhance it? Do you mean it will be a more efficent way to do what I'm already doing, with just one setting for all instruments? Are there other benefits too?

I appreciate your taking the time to respond. My music is already out there (http://www.ambientmusicgarden.com)on digital CD's and I'm happy with my compositions, but I'm so new to the recording/mixing/mastering part and don't want to blow it.

Thanks -

http://www.soundcloud.com/cari-live

[carilive]

The model is based on hardware method of working where you have external effects processors & a mixing board: you needed a way to get the sounds out from the mixing board: Sends, & then back into the mixing board: Returns.

Ok ... that just blew my mind - is this a standard procedure or a more advanced technique? Is this what the professionals do? Can you hear my "amateur" recording methods on my tracks? (be kind if you take a listen - I'm new to this).

Thanks for your detailed response - I really appreciate your taking the time to help!

http://www.soundcloud.com/cari-live

[carilive]

also:

the send-return relationship for FX generally is used to create a 'Parallel' FX routing situation, as opposed to the 'Serial' routing created by Insert FX. Meaning, when the send is set to post-fader and the effect on the return is set to 100% wet, you will hear both the original channel itself (at whatever level the fader is at) plus a copy of that channel, run through the effect, with 100% wet signal coming out the other end; then both are sent to the Master channel. In an insert situation, you lose part of the original mix in the wet/dry balance. Which is better to use depends simply on what you want to acheive.

mholloway,

Is this the same as recording a track, copy it to a second track, then adding effects only to the first track? I do this now and like the sound I get, especially when using reverb because I'm sortof addicted to reverb ... and that's a story for another time ...

I don't know what you mean by sending it to the master - I record, add effects, copy/paste, adjust dynamics, save, export audio.

Thanks for your time and help!

[oblique strategies]

The model is based on hardware method of working where you have external effects processors & a mixing board: you needed a way to get the sounds out from the mixing board: Sends, & then back into the mixing board: Returns.

Ok ... that just blew my mind - is this a standard procedure or a more advanced technique? Is this what the professionals do?

It's basic hardware signal routing for effects & processors: the sound goes out of the mixer through the Send, gets processed by an external signal processor, & comes back to the mixer on the Return channel. Before everything was done in the computer this was the only way to work. Think of it as plumbing, & your sound signals as water: it's all just pipes!

Return channels are usually used for effects like delay, reverb, phasers, flangers, etc. This allows multiple sounds to share an effect or effects.

Dynamics Processors, like compression, limiting, gating, & EQ are usually done in-line: meaning these are often used in a single channel/track to exclusively modify the dynamics of a single sound. This allows a signal processor to be dedicated to a single sound to shape that one sound only.

Mastering is another realm that uses dynamics processors across the entire stereo mix as the final manipulation of sound.

Listen to some vintage Jamaican Dub to hear Send knobs, effects, & the mixing board being played in real-time to alter the sounds & music: King Tubby meets Rockers Uptown - Augustus Pablo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fanxnVtLg4g

Now WATCH it being done!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhDtlFmi ... re=related

Watch & listen to Lee Scratch Perry work his magic on a recording session in his Black Ark studio in the mid-70's: dig the difference between the live sound being played in the room, & the processed, effected sound:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb8cumZtOCA

Now learn the history:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NeRYrUQ ... re=related

Now you're a Dub connoisseur!

[macmurphy]

Listen to some vintage Jamaican Dub to hear Send knobs, effects, & the mixing board being played in real-time to alter the sounds & music: King Tubby meets Rockers Uptown - Augustus Pablo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fanxnVtLg4g

Now WATCH it being done!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhDtlFmi ... re=related

Watch & listen to Lee Scratch Perry work his magic on a recording session in his Black Ark studio in the mid-70's: dig the difference between the live sound being played in the room, & the processed, effected sound:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb8cumZtOCA

Now learn the history:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NeRYrUQ ... re=related

Now you're a Dub connoisseur!

that just warmed up my evening

[mholloway]

mholloway,

Is this the same as recording a track, copy it to a second track, then adding effects only to the first track? I do this now and like the sound I get, especially when using reverb because I'm sortof addicted to reverb ... and that's a story for another time ...

I don't know what you mean by sending it to the master - I record, add effects, copy/paste, adjust dynamics, save, export audio.

Thanks for your time and help!

It's similar to what you are describing, but offers more control because you can control the amount of Send to the effect, whereas in your situation you are using a copy of the track so it's always equivalent to sending 100%. I think the Send-Return routing provides more flexibility (not to mention taking up less mixer/sequencer space).

As for 'sending to master' -- I simply meant that the audio channel and the return channel both have their output routed to the master channel in ableton live.

-M

[fishmonkey]

2. or you can create one reverb device in a single "A Return" track and then send a copy of your 24 tracks to it using the "Send A" knobs. In that case the reverb device is shared by the tracks, you have to make just one setting for all the instruments (if there are changes to be made, you will make them just once!) and the reverb color is the same for all of them (which can be usefull to enhance the space coherency).

Thanks Tensquare - one question: what is the space coherency and why do I want to enhance it? Do you mean it will be a more efficent way to do what I'm already doing, with just one setting for all instruments? Are there other benefits too?

sending multiple instruments through the same reverb can help to 'glue' the sounds together in space so that they don't sound so disembodied from each other. note however that you may also want to sculpt different sounds before they hit the shared reverb (e.g. with EQ).

if you are running out of CPU power or RAM, it also uses less resources on your computer to share effects between tracks when possible.

one other important reason for using sends/returns for FX like reverb is that the output of the return tracks is not directly dependent on the individual track's fader. for example, if you use reverb as an insert effect, then when you pull the fader down when mixing (either manually or with automation), then the reverb may be abruptly cut off. this sounds very unnatural, especially if you are relying on long dreamy reverbs. using the reverb on a return track avoids this problem.