Hi Nareto,
I was discussing the pre/post Fader with Rui when I made the first implementation of the AUX send. There are use-cases for both routing schemes. When using effects - eg. a master reverb to simulate the concert hall, it is easier to do this post fading. If you need a second, third.. mix for monitoring purposes - and you know, there are a lot of difference between the monitor prefences of a guitar player and singer e.g. - a post fader send would make no sense at all.
As Rui described in his answer, having an effect before the fader and using it after the fader is some kind of absurd - on the one hand - on the other hand it has been implemented that way on any hardware mixer I ever had seen...
But I'm convinced - It would be great if we had another effect section behind the fader - or as a consequence - if the fader would be a 'volume plugin' in a row of plugins and you can decide where to put which. (Could be a funny mixer design...)
Let's see what time will bring..
Hi Nareto,
I was discussing the pre/post Fader with Rui when I made the first implementation of the AUX send. There are use-cases for both routing schemes. When using effects - eg. a master reverb to simulate the concert hall, it is easier to do this post fading. If you need a second, third.. mix for monitoring purposes - and you know, there are a lot of difference between the monitor prefences of a guitar player and singer e.g. - a post fader send would make no sense at all.
As Rui described in his answer, having an effect before the fader and using it after the fader is some kind of absurd - on the one hand - on the other hand it has been implemented that way on any hardware mixer I ever had seen...
But I'm convinced - It would be great if we had another effect section behind the fader - or as a consequence - if the fader would be a 'volume plugin' in a row of plugins and you can decide where to put which. (Could be a funny mixer design...)
Let's see what time will bring..
Holger