Jump to content

Merge Plug-in Inserts and Sends areas


Nogan

Recommended Posts

It seems much simpler and maybe dare I say better to place all sends in the same area where plugins are inserted.

 

 

--------------------

 

 

More logistics into this proposition:

 

Volume knob for sends stays as is, plugins gain a native wet / dry control at same location. Sends can optionally mirror the colors of the auxes they end at. The total number of inserts / sends becomes 30 rather than separate 15 and 12 maximum respectively.

 

What do I think this solves?

  • - Significantly simplifies complicated routing when trying to send audio between plugin inserts, which is beneficial when a minimal track count is desired but the send should receive different processing from the main track.
    • Example: Electric Guitar with some compression is sent to a reverb for a clean tail, then followed by distortion so the user has a crunchy tone with sparkling smooth tail. This is done by three "inserts": the compressor initially, the desired send, the distortion. Or perhaps maybe you want to compress a drum bus, but you want the reverb to which you're sending it to retain its dynamic range so the decay really "pops!"

 

- Net accessibility gain. Although arguably you may slightly lose some distinction / separation functionally from the sends, you gain some lost vertical space in the channel strip which may benefit users on small screens or with enlarged windows. The distinction may be repaired either by having the sends follow the color (or be assigned color) of the auxes which they represent, or just used at the end of the insert list if that is where the sends are desired. The current color scheming for sends could be replaced with a simple dot or bullet of that scheme just to the left side of the send to relay the function, or alternatively just be overridden in user preference.

 

- Increased total number of inserts or sends (or both). I've seen it suggested many times before where users wished they could insert just a couple more plugins or sends to their chains for various reasons (myself included when doing sound design-oriented projects). Replacing separate maximums of 15 or 12 to a new uniform maximum of 30 reduces the need to remember and adjust a project to either maximum, and provides a convenient solution to increasing the limit for both.

  • For all you bass music artists this is a special bonus for all those patches you want to save with a series of notches, compression, layers of distortion and modulation, you name it.

 

- Lack of native wet / dry processing on a per-plugin basis. Especially for stock logic plugins, I can't think of how many times I wished there was just an easy knob to dial back the amount of a plugin I was using, or even utilize it to creative extent (Ever try combining leslie + dry signal? Or making your own wacky phase distortion plugins. Try it out some time...). The fact that placing a wet dry knob would make uniform the horizontal appearance of sends and inserts offers a massive feature at the cost of making another better. This is something else many people I have spoken to have wanted for ages, and this would be a convenient opportunity.

 

 

Possible Counterarguments (to which I insist discussion for maturing the idea)

  • Plug-In name readability may be inhibited by the placement of a new wet / dry knob. However, I must say its sort of already not quite very good as I have many plugs which already exceed the current space for names. Not only this, but hovering over the plugin badge displays the full length of that plugin's name and any potentially significant latency. Therefore, this should be mostly a non issue.
     
    (to be continued)

 

 

 

 

Please understand that I know this is a feature request forum.

I am not looking for a solution to any of these as problems that I have, I know and use workarounds for everything listed. And I am content using Logic as it is.

 

However, I entertain these thoughts because I think that this could potentially have great consequences at the cost of what seems to me a not-so-intrusive design modification.

 

I apologize if this comes off as rude, and I am very welcome to any discussion about things I may have overlooked or additional implications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...