Logic Pro - routing one input to multiple tracks?

[DirtDog]

Long story short - I'm trying to replicate a Mike Kerr (Royal Blood) setup using Logic.

I've been trying to route signal from one input from my interface to multiple tracks in Logic and monitor/record simultaneously.

I've gotten to the point that I've got the routing setup, the right effects that I want for each track. I can monitor the combined signal (software monitoring) simultaneously but I don't seem to be able to record a single input to separate tracks despite arming the tracks to do so. I AM able to monitor both tracks simultaneously - so I know the signals are behaving as I am intending them to - and the track level meters are responding as expected - but only one track records at a time despite arming and selecting both tracks.

I seem to have run into a limitation where only one track can record one input simultaneously. Is this a known limitation of Logic's architecture or am I not doing something correctly? Basically, can one input feed many tracks in Logic?

Anyone have suggestions beyond using a hardware line splitter before the interface and/or copying and pasting recorded audio track into an empty track?

 

[Tosh]

interesting.

When I attempt to record 4 stereo tracks from the same 2 audio inputs, I can only select 2 pairs at one time. Any combination, and the meters indicate the same levels for both stereo tracks. When I attempt to make an audio recording on those 2 stereo tracks, one track records audio and the other records MIDI (I was using a MIDI-and-audio-connected digital organ, into a MOTU 828es, Logic 10.6.1).

I have another test I'd like to run.....

 

[Tosh]

I created new tracks using busses for inputs. I was able to enable them for recording, but only the original input track actually has audio data in it. The send-bus tracks were blank.

hmmmm.

 

[Hummergeist]

I'm not mainly a Logic user but I think you have to use the Mixer to send audio from your incoming track to Output Bus 1. Then all your other tracks set Input to Bus 1 as well. If you arm all the other tracks at once that should work? EDIT...wow, can you not record from one input to multiple armed tracks? Wow. I do anything like that in Ableton Live, so I guess I thought it'd work the same way...

 

[Hummergeist]

I created new tracks using busses for inputs. I was able to enable them for recording, but only the original input track actually has audio data in it. The send-bus tracks were blank.

hmmmm.

Okay so you can do it like this: Track 1 the live input, set to monitor only. This is set to send to Bus 1. Track 2 is set to monitor only. Output is set to Bus 2. Track 3 is armed to record, set input to Bus 2. That way the signal passes through track 2 but is recorded in track 3. Repeat this method for as many tracks as you like. I just tried it and it worked.

 

[LBS-bass]

Maybe a silly suggestion but why not just copy the audio data from one track to the second?

 

[Tosh]

Maybe a silly suggestion but why not just copy the audio data from one track to the second?

that's how I usually do it.

I have another option that my interface provides: inputs 1 & 2 each have direct sends, which I run through an FX processor, and then feed the processed tracks into another set of line inputs. I get 2 mono tracks dry, and one stereo track wet.

If I want to expand on that, I can add a desktop mixer. Essentially my solution is to use hardware.

 

[Hummergeist]

that's how I usually do it.

I have another option that my interface provides: inputs 1 & 2 each have direct sends, which I run through an FX processor, and then feed the processed tracks into another set of line inputs. I get 2 mono tracks dry, and one stereo track wet.

If I want to expand on that, I can add a desktop mixer. Essentially my solution is to use hardware.

The method I described works and you can save it as a template

 

[DirtDog]

Maybe a silly suggestion but why not just copy the audio data from one track to the second?

Not silly - that was the first thing I did!

And it seemed to be the "handraulic" way to do it. Figured there would be a routing methodology I could use. One that's not quite intuitive to me right now. I will the try routing an output to a new buss/track and see what happens.

All that to say, it doesn't appear to be something straightforward on the surface.

 

[Hummergeist]

Not silly - that was the first thing I did!

And it seemed to be the "handraulic" way to do it. Figured there would be a routing methodology I could use. One that's not quite intuitive to me right now. I will the try routing an output to a new buss/track and see what happens.

All that to say, it doesn't appear to be something straightforward on the surface.

It is straightforward, use the Busses.

 

[LBS-bass]

Not silly - that was the first thing I did!

And it seemed to be the "handraulic" way to do it. Figured there would be a routing methodology I could use. One that's not quite intuitive to me right now. I will the try routing an output to a new buss/track and see what happens.

All that to say, it doesn't appear to be something straightforward on the surface.

There may be some sort of processing limitation that would be a reason to prevent too many tracks from being activated at once from one input, though you can certainly do it through multiple inputs, so I'm not sure why that would be. I have never tried to do it, though I have set up signal monitoring to work this way. Weird.

 

[DirtDog]

Okay so you can do it like this: Track 1 the live input, set to monitor only. This is set to send to Bus 1. Track 2 is set to monitor only. Output is set to Bus 2. Track 3 is armed to record, set input to Bus 2. That way the signal passes through track 2 but is recorded in track 3. Repeat this method for as many tracks as you like. I just tried it and it worked.

I'll give that a shot....thanks!

 

[Hummergeist]

@DirtDog shout out if that's not clear, I'm pretty sure that'll give you a repeatable setup.

 

[DirtDog]

View attachment 4209335 @DirtDog shout out if that's not clear, I'm pretty sure that'll give you a repeatable setup.

Would you mind screen grabbing the mixer view - so I can see what you've done with the busses?

 

[Hummergeist]

Would you mind screen grabbing the mixer view - so I can see what you've done with the busses?

Sorry, I should have done that. Here you go!

 

[Tosh]

Okay so you can do it like this: Track 1 the live input, set to monitor only. This is set to send to Bus 1. Track 2 is set to monitor only. Output is set to Bus 2. Track 3 is armed to record, set input to Bus 2. That way the signal passes through track 2 but is recorded in track 3. Repeat this method for as many tracks as you like. I just tried it and it worked.

Perhaps I didn't understand the instructions, but this didn't work for me:

input 3 (of eight) to track 3, no record, monitor enabled, destination bus 1
input 4 to track 4, no record, monitor enable, destination bus 2
bus 1 (aux 1) to track 5, record enable, destination output 1+2 (my normal output)
bus 2 (aux 2) to track 5, record enable, destination output 1+2

only silence is recorded.

If I enable recording on tracks 3 and 4 (the real inputs) then I get a mono recording on tracks 3 + 4, and dual-mono versions of those tracks on 5 + 6.

It's an interesting approach, but I don't see a practical application for me. Usually my takes need some fixin', so duplicating my playing into multiple tracks is probably not going to be helpful.

Nevertheless, thanks to Hummergeist for the tip!

addendum - I just noticed that I got some audible latency between the "direct" tracks and the "bussed" tracks. I guess this is to be expected. However, it prevents me from using this solution rather than my outboard hardware solution.

Still, it was fun!

 

[DirtDog]

Sorry, I should have done that. Here you go! View attachment 4209366

Thanks! That makes sense. I've never routed anything in this manner, but looking at it, it's clear.

 

[Hummergeist]

Thanks! That makes sense. I've never routed anything in this manner, but looking at it, it's clear.

Happy to help, I'll be interested to hear what you do with it. I have a vested interest as an Ableton Live teacher, but Live is fantastic for routings and parallel processing made easy. Try it sometime if you can

 

[silky smoove]

To my knowledge, Logic will not allow multiple tracks to be armed from the same input. Input monitoring works that way, but arming is a different process. It’s been touched on in this thread already, but if it’s me I would set it up on busses. There’s no need to duplicate the recorded part onto another track. Here’s how I would set it up:

Record bass onto an audio track as cleanly as possible, but if something is needed on both the wet and the dry channels (ie a specific compressor or EQ), then don’t be afraid to include them.

On the track where you’ve recorded your bass, set the output to ‘No Output.’ Use a pre-fader aux send set to 0db to buss 1, and another identical send to buss 2.

On buss 1 build your clean tone signal path. On buss 2 build your wet signal path. Rename the busses accordingly. You can then control the blend of the two using each of the buss faders, and since the source track has no assigned output you should minimize phase issues. There will still be phase “stuff” that happens, but that’s a big part of that style of tone.

You’ve got software monitoring on already, so you should be able to hear what’s happening in real time as you record. There may be some noticeable latency, so be sure and do a loopback test and set the recording offset in Logic preferences for the interface and the sample rate that you’re using for the session. A higher sample rate will give you lower latency but will increase other computing demands. Adjust your buffer as high as you can stand it to avoid crackly artifacts.

 

[ToneMonkey]

View attachment 4209335 @DirtDog shout out if that's not clear, I'm pretty sure that'll give you a repeatable setup.

I think you have to customize the track header to show the R button. Otherwise, Logic defaults to recording only on the selected track. Stupid implementation IMHO.