Ugly Bunny
Power User
I know you can use Input blocks and Output blocks, but then if you only need a mono loop, then working with more complex routing in order to pan stuff just-so. The only benefit of it being the way it is is that you can go Output 3 Right to Input 2 Left (or whatever; there's lots of versatility).
A single-block FX Loop would be great - within the block you could choose whatever configuration was still available; that is, In/Out 3 stereo, In/Out 4 Right Mono, etc.
Blocks could be called "FX Loop Mono" or "FX Loop Stereo" in order to differentiate.
I freely admit that I don't know off-hand the best way to implement it - but basically the way Helix does it is intuitive: Choose FX Loop, Choose mono/stereo (and WHICH exact ones). In any case, i think FAS could make it simple and elegant.
As it stands, having to use two different blocks is a bit cumbersome, and if you just need two mono loops in different places in your chain, you could easily use "FX Loop 3L" for one and "FX Loop 3R" for another one; two blocks for two FX loops. Then, obviously, the Input 3 and Output 3 would be grayed out.
Finally, I'm not suggesting anything would change in the way things currently work, but rather an additional feature that would simplify if desired.
A single-block FX Loop would be great - within the block you could choose whatever configuration was still available; that is, In/Out 3 stereo, In/Out 4 Right Mono, etc.
Blocks could be called "FX Loop Mono" or "FX Loop Stereo" in order to differentiate.
I freely admit that I don't know off-hand the best way to implement it - but basically the way Helix does it is intuitive: Choose FX Loop, Choose mono/stereo (and WHICH exact ones). In any case, i think FAS could make it simple and elegant.
As it stands, having to use two different blocks is a bit cumbersome, and if you just need two mono loops in different places in your chain, you could easily use "FX Loop 3L" for one and "FX Loop 3R" for another one; two blocks for two FX loops. Then, obviously, the Input 3 and Output 3 would be grayed out.
Finally, I'm not suggesting anything would change in the way things currently work, but rather an additional feature that would simplify if desired.
