Need some feedback: Could be a bug?

[Will.]

I have one Mono vocal track that I've recorded for testing, (Mic check, 1;2) as I'm always trying to improve my workflow and such. 

Here's the deal, creating my own balancing 2-in-1 Stereo/Width Track, without having to duplicate and nudge one channel slightly by 5 Ticks -- is a huge deal for me to improve my sound and quality. There's great plugins for this out there, even the Channel Tool that comes with CbB ain't that bad. 

Steps for this: 

1: Take an Audio File and load it up in a track. Pan it Hard Left.

2: Go to the output of the track and route it as a patch point. 

3: Create a second Audio Track next to it, Now route the Input of the second audio track to the patch point. 

4: Pan it Hard Right and Balance the track out as seen in the Picture above  

@msmcleod I know you'll be able to help with this. After setting this up, why does the output come out as a Mono Channel as seen above with the Master track? Shouldn't this be a true Stereo Track? As a copy was send to the second track to create that field? You can hear that it's leaning more towards the right channel than the left. 

PS: Those Output and Input names are the Patch Points Renamed. 

Edited November 3, 2020 by Will_Kaydo

[scook]

The image above shows

• Track 1 routed to Vocal
• Track 2 routed to Master
• Master shows a signal on the right side only (Track 2 only?)

Vocal, the target of Track 1 is not shown in the image. Where is it?

 

[scook]

Seems like one would get the same result by setting the track interleave to stereo, add Channel Tools to the FX Bin and delay one of the channels; avoiding the extra routing.

[Will.]

12 minutes ago, scook said:

The image above shows

• Track 1 routed to Vocal
• Track 2 routed to Master
• Master shows a signal on the right side only (Track 2 only?)

Vocal, the target of Track 1 is not shown in the image. Where is it?

 

Didn't bother to route it, as it does'nt make any different. 

Yes:

Track 1  is routed to Track 2  Via patch-point -- with the input of track 2 going into Track 1 (Vocal track.) This creates another copy of Track 1. So, I assumed that it would be possible to pan them individually on opposite stereo fields. 

[Will.]

23 minutes ago, scook said:

Seems like one would get the same result by setting the track interleave to stereo, add Channel Tools to the FX Bin and delay one of the channels; avoiding the extra routing.

Yeah, but wouldn't it be awesome if it can be done without the use of a plugin like the channel tool. Plugins sometimes adds the unwanted color or signal you don't really need for that specific use/project. 

I use the channel tools frequently with other plugins in it's category, but often always comes with limitations - like with automation and sound design. Not to mention having to duplicate the track then to achieve the idea you are after -- adding more strain to your CPU usage. 

The PLUS side of this is - you can then set the pan levels to a specific setting in the stereo field and use a Widening pluging to further enhance the stereo. I think you'll be able to achieve great things with it -- I know I do when I use duplicate tracks, but that comes with it's own phase issues. 

Oh! By the way! Those Output and Input names you see there are the patch point "Renamed."

Edited November 3, 2020 by Will_Kaydo

[scook]

AFAIK, channel tools does not color the signal.

 

To get the levels the same on both tracks in the OP make sure to pan the send either full left or right.

 

[Will.]

3 minutes ago, scook said:

To get the levels the same on both tracks in the OP make sure to pan the send either full left or right.

 

There's no send Inputs with that. 

[kc23]

38 minutes ago, scook said:

Vocal, the target of Track 1 is not shown in the image. Where is it?

 

 

19 minutes ago, Will_Kaydo said:

Didn't bother to route it, as it does'nt make any different. 

 

11 minutes ago, scook said:

To get the levels the same on both tracks in the OP make sure to pan the send either full left or right.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Will_Kaydo said:

There's no send Inputs with that. 

These answers suggest you don´t have a good grasp on how signal flow and/or the routing in CbB work.

The question and later suggestion are showing the error in your assumption. And the solution to the desired routing. Which will end up in a mono sounding track on the bus configured as Master, most likely raised in level by 3db.

Hence, it is not a bug.

[scook]

Just ran a test as described in the OP. Here is an image of the result

I use an extra bus after the Master but this does not matter.

I used MOscilator to generate a constant sine wave instead of an audio clip but the results were similar when using an audio clip.

Notice all the volume faders are at unity (the gains are too) and all the meters read the same.

 

Edit: added demo using a clip in track 1 instead of MOscillator

[Will.]

15 minutes ago, kc23 said:

These answers suggest you don´t have a good grasp on how signal flow and/or the routing in CbB work.

Seriously! You're gonna make silly assumptions like that?

Ever heard of exploring idea's and suggestions? 

Edited November 3, 2020 by Will_Kaydo

[scook]

8 minutes ago, Will_Kaydo said:

17 minutes ago, kc23 said:

These answers suggest you don´t have a good grasp on how signal flow and/or the routing in CbB work.

Seriously! You gonna make stupid assumptions like that.

Ever heard of exploring idea's, suggestions and creativity? Dude you seriously sit with one messed up issue and frankl, I'm tired of you insulting everyone in their threads. Seriously give it up!!! Grow a pair! If you're only here to insult everyone you engage with, than you don't belong here. 

I do not see how this helps

[Will.]

16 minutes ago, scook said:

Just ran a test as described in the OP. Here is an image of the result

I use an extra bus after the Master but this does not matter.

I used MOscilator to generate a constant sine wave instead of an audio clip but the results were similar when using an audio clip.

Notice all the volume faders are at unity (the gains are too) and all the meters read the same.

 

Edit: added demo using a clip in track 1 instead of MOscillator

One would think by sending a copy, it would create the stereo image in discussion. 

[scook]

There is no copy being made.

The signal flow in this case is Track 1 > Track 2 > Master

There is no Track 1 > Master routing.

[kc23]

35 minutes ago, Will_Kaydo said:

Seriously! You gonna make stupid assumptions like that.

No assumptions. The facts shown by your operation and your answers lead to this inevitable conclusion.

35 minutes ago, Will_Kaydo said:

Ever heard of exploring idea's, suggestions and creativity? 

Ideas, suggestions and creativity require to know the correct operation of whatever tool one wants to wield. Again, the facts shown by your operation expecting the desired result, and furthermore your answers to the questions asked and suggestions given, show you don´t know the way the tool works, or the reasoning behind it.

23 minutes ago, Will_Kaydo said:

One would think by sending a copy, it would create the stereo image in discussion. 

This answer further proves the point.

35 minutes ago, Will_Kaydo said:

Dude you seriously sit with one messed issue and frankly I'm tired of you insulting everyone in their threads.

Haven´t insulted anyone. In any of my posts, in any of the threads I have posted. I have addressed you directly in one other thread. If you are tired, get a rest. However, you do have insulted at least a couple of posters in other threads just this week, not counting your insult to me just now. You just don´t like being called on it, and then take it personal.

35 minutes ago, Will_Kaydo said:

Seriously give it up!!! Grow a pair! If you're only here to insult everyone you engage with, than you don't belong here. 

Nothing to give up here. My pair are well grown in to maturity, something your answers say otherwise about your own. Again, just because you don´t like an answer given to you, does not mean it is an insult.  I would think in order to "belong here", one would have to know what they are talking about, or at least be willing to learn about it, none of which seem to apply to you at the moment.

No more left to say on my part.

Edited November 4, 2020 by kc23

[scook]

Here is how to get both tracks to the master using a patch point

To control the level of Track 2 level independent of Track 1 the send should be pre-fader. The image above shows the send post fader. Click the Post button to change the send to pre-fader.

[Will.]

1 hour ago, scook said:

Here is how to get both tracks to the master using a patch point

To control the level of Track 2 level independent of Track 1 the send should be pre-fader. The image above shows the send post fader. Click the Post button to change the send to pre-fader.

Yeah, I figured it will go there. I was hoping to avoid that, as the discussing is not on how to execute a send or routing with a send -- "Hence" my so many other threads on this when it's done with instrument track as a direct Wet/Sidechain track. 

I'll keep exploring my way, maybe i'll across a way without having to rely on the "regular" send inserts. I always improve my workflow and the creative aspect of the mixing field everyday. 

Edited November 4, 2020 by Will_Kaydo

[scook]

6 hours ago, Will_Kaydo said:

Yeah, I figured it will go there. I was hoping to avoid that, as the discussing is not on how to execute a send or routing with a send -- "Hence" my so many other threads on this when it's done with instrument track as a direct Wet/Sidechain track. 

I like Simple Instrument Tracks and use them when all that is required is an audio+MIDI track pair.

The SIT implementation has improved considerably since it was introduced.

That said, SITs are still not as flexible as audio and MIDI tracks.

Fortunately SITs can be split into an audio+MIDI track pair.