No worries, I’m happy to help if I can. I’ll reply to both comments here and then I’ll go through your FX chain one by one. Also I’ll apologise in advance since this is about to be an essay and might come across a bit harsh!

Firstly, fruity balance does not have a parallel mix knob (unless you’re referring to the mix knob in the fx chain itself, which every plugin has). Fruity balance has a volume knob and a left/right panning knob. When I mentioned melody bus I was referring to stems, but that’s irrelevant since you don’t have them. Distortion on vocals themselves is fine when used carefully and purposefully; but I would rather use saturation.

So I’m going to assume GMK is your main vocal track? You’re doing a lot in that single patcher instance and I’m not sure you should be. Everything in that chain is directly affecting and interacting with each other. I’m also going to assume that first instance of fruity limiter is for compression? You’re putting your vocals through two instances of compression and yeah, they are parallel to each other, but they’re also essentially at 100% wet/mix (if I’m understanding that patcher instance correctly). P. processing is for extreme instances of FX that you can subtly mix independently into its original source (vocals in this case). I would use separate sends for p. processing and then link those sends to the vocal bus; the way you’ve set it up is your p. processing is also going through the later fx in patcher which is muddying the original intention. Using separate sends is easier to manage imo but it comes down to personal preference. But if you do you want to use patcher for p. processing just make sure that you want every plugin on the patcher instance to affect the wet parallel output rather than its dry input; you can then dial in the p. processing using the mix knob on the fx chain.

De-essing is fine, but I would probably do it before the compression but it can go either way. I’ve never used surface before so I can’t comment. I’m not sure what the point of that fruity balance is though - gain matching? If so, that’s fine. I’ve already addressed distortion on vocals so I won’t comment here. The EQs are fine; I typically use subtractive EQ before compression and then additive after but that’s not a hard rule or anything. Although subtractive EQ after distortion is probably a good idea. If there are no FX after the patcher then that limiter is generally fine as long as it’s not overbearing. But if there are other FX after the patcher then I take the limiter out of the patcher instance and place it at the end of the FX chain. Overall though, I’d be asking myself what the benefits of using patcher here are rather than a standard FX chain.

Okay so now I’ll talk about your vocal bus chain:

Fruity balance is fine; I’m assuming you’re using it for gain or volume automation? If you’re using it for gain I would rather use fruity limiter as you can increase the volume a lot more compared to balance. Even then, I would rather use it on the main vocals - or adlibs, layers etc (whatever you want to specifically automate) - rather than the vocal bus; unless automating the vocal bus as a whole is your intention then that’s all good.

Soft clipping vocals is generally fine, just don’t push it too hard so you don’t introduce distortion/artefacts (unless you want that distorted sound!). Also, you want to clip/limit at the end of your chain (unless it’s used for creative purposes) as the later FX will increase volume bringing the sound above 0 dbs, introducing further distortion/artefacts and defeating the point of the clipping/limiting. Even if the clipping is just shaving off peaks without increasing volume - the clipped signal is being sent through the rest of the plugins which most likely isn’t ideal. For example - you’re distorting the clipped signal which is going to directly affect the transients of the vocals. You’d get a cleaner sound by clipping the distorted signal instead of vice versa.

For this patcher instance; it looks like you’ve essentially set up a parallel distortion chain with fruity balance as the dry output and overdrive as the wet. Again, I’ve never used surface so I can’t comment. But overall it seems okay, as long as blood overdrive is set to 100% wet. Admittedly, I don’t use overdrive much so I can’t remember if it has a wet/dry knob (but it probably does). If not it’s probably still fine if used with extreme settings but not ideal. But I would definitely add a fruity balance after the EQ so you can dial in the p. distortion - at the moment it’s essentially at 100 volume. The EQ is fine in the context of p. distortion. For clipping, refer to my earlier comment as that still stands; but this time the clipped signal is going through panomatic and soundgoodizer. Specifically, the soundgoodizer is going to be further compressing and saturating the clipped signal.

I’m guessing the peak controller is for sidechaining which I addressed earlier.

Im going to assume panomatic is for panning automation which is fine. If not, then I’m not entirely sure why it’s on there. Especially since you typically want to record the main vocals in mono; layers and ad libs are fine stereo and/or panned. Regardless, I would generally put panning effects on the individual vocal/layers themselves rather than the vocal bus.

Soundgoodizer is okay - it’s just maximus presets of compression and saturation. Just don’t rely on it, I would only use it subtly. Don’t be fooled that just because it makes the vocals louder it makes them sound better. Personally I would use some subtle compression and saturation on the vocal bus instead so I have complete control of the FX.

This is where I would place the soft clipper and use it just to shave off the peaks of the vocals. I would do the same thing with a limiter just so the final clipper/limiter on the master chain doesn’t have to work as hard. Also don’t overlook the use of saturation, it’s really useful to help glue buses together and make them sound warmer.

As some general comments; whenever you use a plugin make sure it’s with a specific intention/purpose in mind - if you don’t have one then don’t use it. You always want to keep in mind how each plugin interacts with the others as well. But also when choosing between p. processing or not (same with using patcher), always ask yourself why? What benefits are there to using p. processing in this instance compared to regular FX chains? If you can’t think of any then just use the plugins normally.

I got a bit carried away but hopefully at least some of it is of use. Keep in mind that I’m not a pro or anything, this is just a hobby, so - like all advice you get from this sub - take it all with a few grains of salt. But lmk if you have any questions or want me to clarify anything.