Creating a delay matrix?
Creating a delay matrix?
I would like to create an arrangement of several channels each containing a delay effect wherein each channel has multiple sends. These sends would feed each channel input, creating feedback paths which could be "played". Have done this in hardware for years, but can't quite figure it in Live.
Help, anyone?
Reference my website www.pulsewidth.com under "sound tech".
TIA,
David Lee Myers
Help, anyone?
Reference my website www.pulsewidth.com under "sound tech".
TIA,
David Lee Myers
-
whiterabbit
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 5:25 pm
Chapter 12: Routing and I/O
not sure if I understand your explanation.
Routing is covered on Chapter 12 in the manual. if you can't create your loop with live's routing capabilities, maybe you can send the signal out and then back in (via rewire or via your audio interface..)
Routing is covered on Chapter 12 in the manual. if you can't create your loop with live's routing capabilities, maybe you can send the signal out and then back in (via rewire or via your audio interface..)
-
Clearscreen
- Posts: 1743
- Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2004 5:07 am
- Location: Melbourne AU
- Contact:
having had a quick read of your website what you're looking to do doesn't seem that difficult as you can create as many FX returns as you like as well as being able to route each track/return to wherever you want. have a read in the manual and experiment with switching the returns from pre to post fader processing. it may be harder than it appears though, so if you want to give us a clearer idea of where you're at with live and what exactly is tripping you up it might be helpful.
Hp Elitebook 2.8Ghz. Live 7.0.14 & Live 8.1.5, XP Pro. and stuff...
Yeah, you have to use the Send/Return channels (and create lots of them)
AFAIK, you can only "route" audio to one location (the master bus, a sub mix channel), but you can "send" it to several s3end channels.
Also, one audio track can receive mutliple inputs (i.e. you can use a standard audio track as a sub-mix)
The only limitation to routing is that you can't use an Audio Track's output as a splitter.
But with Send tracks and sub mix tracks, that shouldn't be too limiting.
Also, I'd suggest looking at Racks-- you could set up a single knob to sweep between several different delays (with or without any overlap) on a single channel, which can make for some very easy tweaking
AFAIK, you can only "route" audio to one location (the master bus, a sub mix channel), but you can "send" it to several s3end channels.
Also, one audio track can receive mutliple inputs (i.e. you can use a standard audio track as a sub-mix)
The only limitation to routing is that you can't use an Audio Track's output as a splitter.
But with Send tracks and sub mix tracks, that shouldn't be too limiting.
Also, I'd suggest looking at Racks-- you could set up a single knob to sweep between several different delays (with or without any overlap) on a single channel, which can make for some very easy tweaking
you cannot have feedback loops within racks.
If I understand correctly it seems that 'return' channels are the best solution for this problem as they allow feedback. You do need to right click the 'send' know in the return channel and activate it - since Live6 these have been set to default:inactive , requiring you to turn them on again.
I tend to use saturators on feedback loops to tame overloads in a vaguely analogue way, or alternatively in a totally 'waveshaping' way.
It is well worth reading the section of the manual on routing though. We may have misunderstood.
If I understand correctly it seems that 'return' channels are the best solution for this problem as they allow feedback. You do need to right click the 'send' know in the return channel and activate it - since Live6 these have been set to default:inactive , requiring you to turn them on again.
I tend to use saturators on feedback loops to tame overloads in a vaguely analogue way, or alternatively in a totally 'waveshaping' way.
It is well worth reading the section of the manual on routing though. We may have misunderstood.