We Need A Native Dry/Wet Device

(charlylinch) #1

I saw in another topic that there were some +1’s for my idea for a native dry/wet device.
A few native plugins doesn’t have this button (filters, screamer and some vsts )
And if you still want the dry signal you have to make a workaround with the send tracks.

One extra Native device with one fader (dry/wet) and a destination drop-down menu like we have in the lfo device.

I assume this is a little “easy-to-make” feature and I know it will save me a lot of time and send tracks.

more people like this idea?

Edit- I changed my examples because those already have a dry/wet control ;)

Rebirth Rb-338 Emulator
Renoise is missing wet/dry slider for vst effects --> workaround
The Ignore List, Use It
The Ignore List, Use It
(charlylinch) #2

Wow I feel pretty stupid now…

(Johann) #3

no to you both, and instead dry/wet natively for ALL fx and ALL VST :P

(Johann) #4

no to “Get used to your plug ins before you scream for features.” because while this may hold true for the internal fx, it does NOT hold true for the wide arrange of free and weird (and crappy) VST fx out there.

no to a dedicated device for something any effect could have: wet/dry… with the option to send each to send tracks while you’re at it, which would make the send device unnecessary in many cases.

“no” as in “-1”.

what is that “amount” you’re referring to? send amount, right? so there’s your answer: no sends required.

I was refering to this: Wet/dry Control On Effects

(subskan) #5

not at all!! it’s not a stupid idea… i really think it can be usefull especially if you want a handier way FROM TIME TO TIME! (with native screamer or filter, or vst’s like waldorf d-pole, blood overdrive, camelcrusher, voxengo boogex etc for example!)
and you don’t want to spend hours creating sends and hydra devices then route, route and route again, to do the same result than just move a simple “dry/wet”" signal on the same track

renoise is the ultimate beast! but suggests don’t kill anybody! (even if you do mistakes in the topic explanation!, just edit it and say, filters, screamer and some vsts ;))

i think bitarts often confuse:
“requests/suggestions” with “dissatisfaction/lack of knowledge”
this is a good example


(subskan) #6

who knows :)

i don’t know what “professioanl” means … but i see 3 tracks here… no? :lol:

re-peace! :lol:

(subskan) #7

rythm tracks my dear… my eyes are opened

(Johann) #8

who’s screaming? ( ;) )

then what is “The better usability of an “amount”-slider when it’s called “dry/wet” may forever be your very own secret.” supposed to mean? condescending smileys don’t make up for substance.

(Johann) #9

I was talking about general (read: standardized… code once, use everywhere) dry/wet on ALL fx, and you replied to me. so your reply kinda kinda was supposed to make sense in that context. instead it just has a rolleyes smiley.

how do you supposed send tracks are realized? same thing engine wise, just hidden and unused until, uhh, used.

(subskan) #10

yep, i missed this answer!
for sure fl studio allready own this feature but beside each vst/native effect… like some kind of “attached knob” each time you open a new effect device…

so maybe this way should be more doable than the last suggestions?..

(dfast) #11

Slight note here though: this does indeed reduce the amount of flanger, but it only has the kind of a wanted impact on Rate and Amplitude parameters.

Or should I feel stupid as well? :)

(dfast) #12

Erm. I wasn’t referring to you saying anyone was stupid but what charlylinch said earlier about himself feeling stupid… No harm intended whatsoever! :) And yes indeed the sound isn’t really flanging in that sense when you turn down the amount, but personally that’s one of the plugins I’d love a complete wet/dry parameter, mostly for habit reasons though.

…so I’m a freak?

(Johann) #13

you split the streams (wet/dry) before the (VST) effect and mix them both after the (VST) effect. durr. this actually has been discussed before, and considered anything but “nonsense”. when I said “how send tracks work” I assumed a bit more imagination on your part.


I suggest a dry/wet interface for all fx, and you reply with “And for the VST a dry/wet plug in is just nonsense, because this would require a standard dry/wet interface”.

There is nothing to understand there. just :lol:

(Johann) #14

so? was I debating any of that? it’s just combersome when you DONT need these things. the whole idea of a common dry/wet controls on all fx is to give you a easily accessible, automatable thing, when you don’t NEED a dedicated send track.

as a bonus you could get rid of wet/dry on those fx that have them, and visualize it in a common way. something near the off/on checkbox… (note that I’m not saying this to you, but the general forum… you seem stuck already)

and I repeat, “something any effect could have: wet/dry… with the option to send each to send tracks while you’re at it, which would make the send device unnecessary in many cases.” you see, then every effect would have (potentially) an integrated send device. so what are you babbling about me now knowing how to use sends? oh, and I wasn’t the one going all expert here… so lol once again…

(Johann) #15

Dude, you’re iliterate, and all your “technical and musical skills” can’t make up for that. My first post still makes sense in here, you replied bs and I made the mistake to keep countering it. You just bring up new stuff and throw fits. “I’m really fed up with this now. Freaks… C ya” == empty promise?

LOL? where? quote please ^^

(charlylinch) #16

I know it’s not my job…
but bitarts and johann can you please be nice to each-other :)
…try to read a post like it is always positive. I found 3 topics already with discussions and I don’t wanna lose some of you guys on the board because every post you make gets critics.
You’re both a good complement on the board ;)

(Johann) #17

pretty hard to read that and other things positively though.

(kazakore) #18

BitArts: You have made some very useful posts in this forum but in this thread, and a few others, you have been very abrupt and rude, not to mention stubborn.

Why do you need to understand VST (or AU or LADSPA for that matter) archituecture to create a device that takes a signal, splits it in two, sends on through the effect and delays the other one by the processing time of the effect (using ADC where applicable, overriadable by user entry) then recombines through two gainer devices (either two sliders or with inverted control, -6dB of each in centre would do.)

No way impossible or requiring deep understanding of every device ever written. Removing the need for dozens of send tracks if you are wanting to do this many times within your song. Making flow and reading your DSP chains a lot easier.

And guess what. It would stop you from being able to do it your beloved way with Send tracks at all!

(kazakore) #19

After reading the newer entries in the Ren303 thread I see your egotism has spread even to there so the first part of the above isn’t really appropriate any more.

(kazakore) #20

Um Where? I offered to host if you had no objections.

Get your head out your arse mate!

And it’s egotistical to upload something, feel you’re not getting appreciated enough for it, throw a tantrum and in the process eject all your toys from your pram. If you can’t see this then that is your problem.