Sorry for any inconvenience, but I didn’t understand, is this phaser especificaly that don’t work or there is no way to do it unless the plugin have a dry/wet control? If is possible only with the dry/wet control is there any work arround?
So there are a couple of ways to accomplish this, but short version a wet/dry control is better. These are off the top of my head and I haven’t tested them:
You could probably accomplish this using Pin connections in the track, routing a dry signal past the phaser, then mixing the output of the phase together with the dry signal using a mixer plugin.
or
You could route the track to a bus, put the phase on the bus, and then automate the volume fader on the track vs bus to get wet vs dry. This is standard way to handle reverbs etc. but typically I would use a phaser inline so this isn’t typical for me but depending on your needs should work. Would likely still need to automate the source volume some to avoid the dB increase from mixing the two outputs together.
Seablade
1 Like
to summarize replies above:
- no you cannot achieve same thing elegantly in Ardour. There is no control of dry/wet signal built-in Ardour, like in FL
you can:
- utilize audio bus (and compensate volume)
- use sort of container/plugin
- use another phaser which has dry/wet control and automate it
how to say no, but without saying no
1 Like
The architecture of FL Studio is completely different to Ardour (as well as most other DAWs). Ardour, like most other DAWs, does not offer “volume control” for FX plugins.
that’s totally fine. I’m throttled only by way how things are being explained/answered to new users
simple yes/no is straight answer - and most appreciated (explanation is handy tho). Many people respond like the explanation is more important than direct answer of yers/no…
If you mention ‘most other daws’ we cannot skip that, some other DAWs offer more flexible approach to these situations… for example container devices in Bitwig/Ableton Live. (+macros like found in DAWS further)
In Reason you can utilize macros in Reason Combinator - to map vol of fx against dry signal, and make single knob like present in FL - which is then way more powerful than found in FL Studio…
Renoise has ‘doofers’ which can achieve same thing as in Reason…
summary: in all mentioned DAWs you can achieve feature like in FL Studio - and way more flexible than desired…
…after all ‘other’ DAWs do offer more flexible approach… It’s about our perspective, and choice - for which DAW we look at, and how deep we are familiar with it…
If we’re going to play that game, let’s start writing out lists:
ProTools, Cubase, Nuendo, Digital Performer, Logic, Reaper, Live, Bitwig, Cakewalk (!), Pyramix, Reason, FL Studio, Studio One, Traktion, Mulab, Garageband, SAWstudio.
I think it is accurate to say that in most of those DAWs, you cannot elegantly or flexibly control the amount of audible processing of a plugin that has no wet/dry control.
Yes, there are some cool ways to do it in some DAWs, and maybe one day one or more of those ideas will show up in Ardour.
1 Like
Thank you very much! It helped me to understand Ardour a little more, I was getting hopeless already. I tested both and they worked, indeed a needs little of work (I’ll search some more plugins that may have the dry/wet control), but I hope ardour gets this functionality in the future, but I’m liking it so far. And again, Thank you very much.
This thread has become unintentionally hilarious.
Apologies FoxCheeze, I never made it to that lunch break investigation earlier. On looking now though, I reckon the GxPhaser (LV2, from Guitarix) would do the trick. Has dry/wet control than can be automated.
2 Likes
Thank you for de tip! As I’m a new user I don’t know many plugins yet, so it is always good to find new ones! But I also wanted to know if there was any way to do these automations for other plugins without that kind of controls, it is good for the community to have those discussions, so the beginners like me can get more knowledge about the softwere, mainly when Fl is so popular and a lot of people try to migrate from it to ardour. Also no need to worry if you didn’t have time before, just the will to help some stranger on internet makes me grateful!
2 Likes
In principle, yes, however, taking it far: Ardour could have a “dummy mode”, too. The clown in Micky Dees is there for a reason, I guess. Rowland, Rah-nald…
Somebody seems to know the good old guild of DAW-makers 
I’ve felt that FL and LMMS have a front-end bias, which would explain this feature.
“The problem with DAWs is this: no individual DAW user uses that many features, but every feature they use is critical to them, and every DAW user uses a different set of features. That means that if you want to have a lot of users, you have to have a really large number of features”.
- Ben Loftis @ Harrison Consoles
4 Likes
it solely depends on how dummy you want to go…
Yes, well said. Inherently, we are all potential geniuses, however, it’s much easier to play the dummy. Serving the middle road is good sense.
- huhtik. 2023 klo 11.54 kirjoitti no-reply@ardour.org:
Keep in mind that simply mixing a percentage of the dry signal with a percentage of the wet signal is rarely the correct way to fade effects in/out. In most cases this will likely produce a phasing effect or comb-filter and may also introduce other artifacts.
One of the few cases where mixing dry/wet is correct are reverbs.
The point is that only the plugin knows what the correct way to interpolate the signals is, and hence the plugin has to provide a dry/wet control if it is appropriate.
So would the “solution” to said DAW ‘problematics’ be to have virtually every feature a DAW could imaginatively have? That’s crazy, as in reaching for the moon with human hands.
Good luck and kudos in pleasing everyone. Has it ever worked for anyone, however?
- huhtik. 2023 klo 20.12 kirjoitti no-reply@ardour.org:
PS. One way to accomplish this is described:
This topic was automatically closed 91 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.