Ah yes. You are very correct in your assumption in what I was thinking; i.e., I was thinking post-fader. After comparing your notes with the diagram, I understand the functionality with greater clarity.
To summarize, if I want to work only with the processed signal using an aux bus:
* Create the bus with the effects
* On the track, insert an aux send to this bus
* Lower the track gain all the way down
* Utilize the send gain in the aux send for mixing
However, since this essentially negates the use of the track gain for mixing, I should (as you've suggested):
* Create the bus with the effects
* On the track, route the output directly to the bus
* Utilize the track gain for mixing
The direct-to-bus solution definitely produces the desired outcome. So then, to confirm, when I'm doing my final export, I should choose both the Master and Effects Bus so both outputs are mixed into the final audio? Somehow, I was thinking that everything should be routed to a single bus for the final audio export.
Ah yes. You are very correct in your assumption in what I was thinking; i.e., I was thinking post-fader. After comparing your notes with the diagram, I understand the functionality with greater clarity.
To summarize, if I want to work only with the processed signal using an aux bus:
* Create the bus with the effects
* On the track, insert an aux send to this bus
* Lower the track gain all the way down
* Utilize the send gain in the aux send for mixing
However, since this essentially negates the use of the track gain for mixing, I should (as you've suggested):
* Create the bus with the effects
* On the track, route the output directly to the bus
* Utilize the track gain for mixing
The direct-to-bus solution definitely produces the desired outcome. So then, to confirm, when I'm doing my final export, I should choose both the Master and Effects Bus so both outputs are mixed into the final audio? Somehow, I was thinking that everything should be routed to a single bus for the final audio export.
With much appreciation,
H.