Configuring new board: Routing vocals

M

Mitch Miller

Sophomore
Oct 30, 2012
121
2
18
I've been a sound operator at our church for quite some time (iLive), but this is my first time actually configuring a new board (X32). I can say it's given me lots of things to look at next time I run sound at church!

So I've been playing around a lot with setting up my new X32. Kind of working on a setup that will work for my son's band (typical high school rock band, lead, bass, drum kit, keys and 2-3 vocals).

I have the vocals all feeding into a mix bus and am sending that bus into three onboard effects processors. I'm not quite sure what to do with the fx returns, though.

I'd like to be able to
- monitor the vocals w/o fx,
- mute all the fx at once,
- control how much fx is entering the FOH,
- control how much fx is going to each vocal monitor,
- monitor the vocals with fx.

First one seems easy enough; just solo the vocal bus.
Second one I accomplished with a mute group on the FX channels.
Number three seems like it could be done by sending each FX channel individually to the main mix.
Sending fx to monitors is simple as sending to each monitor mix bus.

But, I'm not quite sure how to get the last one. Soloing the effects individually doesn't really offer much (that means anything to me, anyway). If I'm sending them straight to the main mix, I'm not sure how to hear just them with the dry vocals.

Should I be sending the FX returns to another bus, as well as the vocal bus? My original thought was to send the FX returns to the vocal mix bus, but since the FX are being sourced from the same, wouldn't that create a feedback condition?

It just seems like overkill to use two mix buses for vocals; one to mix the dry, and the another for the dry/wet mix.

How do you experienced guys setup your mix groups for this kind of gig?

Thanks,
Mitch
 
Re: Configuring new board: Routing vocals

I'm not familiar with the way the X32 names things, so I hope this makes sense. If you're from the Ye Olde Skool of Analog it should...

It's more customary to use an AUX SEND for each effect. For this example we'll say AUX 1 is a Hall reverb, AUX 2 is a Plate reverb, and AUX 3 is a Delay. It is also customary to use the AUX SEND knob on the individual channel strips to control how much of each input is sent to the effect. Typically each effect is returned to an input channel (like any other source such as a microphone or DI) and that channel assigned to either L/R or an audio subgroup which is then assigned to L/R. So if you want the lead vocal to have the Plate reverb and a bit of delay for slapback echo, you'd simply turn up the AUX 2 and AUX 3 knobs on the that vocal channel. You could then send the background vocals to the Hall reverb with AUX 1. You have complete control over the level of the effects returns by returning them to input channels (and have full EQ and all other input features). Likewise, many mixers have dedicated FX RETURN inputs that provide level, routing and EQ control... some mixers have very basic RETURN features while others have the full complement of an input channel.

Using this method you can solo up individual vocals; if you assign vocals to their own subgroup (or "mix bus") you can solo the vocal blend; you can solo individual effects just as you would a vocal. You should be able to hear the amount of effects in the mix by listening to the PA, but you can always solo the L/R buses in your headphones for confirmation. Also, by returning the FX to either an input (guarantees full routing) or FX RETURN (feature-dependent) you can then send some FX back into the monitors (discouraged, typically, but whatever works for the band) the same way you'd send the singer's voice back to him/her.

This method also allows you to send the delay return to a reverb if you want less of a hard edge to the echo, for example.

HTH.
 
Re: Configuring new board: Routing vocals

Do not feed the vocal bus (group) into the FX. Feed the vocal channels into the FX via an Aux (bus). Then you can route the FX into the vocal bus. The added benefit is the ability to change the amount of FX on a per-channel basis. Sometimes you want a lot more on the lead than the backups, and sometimes you want a lot more on the backups.
 
Re: Configuring new board: Routing vocals

Tim Padrick said:
Do not feed the vocal bus (group) into the FX. Feed the vocal channels into the FX via an Aux (bus). Then you can route the FX into the vocal bus. The added benefit is the ability to change the amount of FX on a per-channel basis. Sometimes you want a lot more on the lead than the backups, and sometimes you want a lot more on the backups.
Click to expand...
If each vox is aux send to a fx and the vox is then sent to a subgroup that goes to main, would you then include the fx-return in that subgroup or what is the best practice here?
 
Re: Configuring new board: Routing vocals

Robert Lofgren said:
If each vox is aux send to a fx and the vox is then sent to a subgroup that goes to main, would you then include the fx-return in that subgroup or what is the best practice here?
Click to expand...

You only want to return the FX to one place, either the sub-group (control group) or the mains. If you return it to two different places there is always the chance that there will be latency issues which would smear the sound. It may hurt, it may not, but I would avoid it in the first place.
 
Top Bottom