Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
Agreed. I don't like those old, oh crap moments.
Digital layouts for analog guys
- Thread starter Jeff Hague
- Start date
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
I agree. There is no 'bad' experience gained by this as everything you learn about the actual sounds is useful. Every live show is live....doesn't mean multitrack foresight is gonna hurt you since if you are doing your job you have to listen and Kay attention anyway. Kinda like knowing your musical part before an actual rehearsal is never a negative.
I agree. There is no 'bad' experience gained by this as everything you learn about the actual sounds is useful. Every live show is live....doesn't mean multitrack foresight is gonna hurt you since if you are doing your job you have to listen and Kay attention anyway. Kinda like knowing your musical part before an actual rehearsal is never a negative.
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
Tim, There is no automatic latency compensation on the Vi series.
Tim, There is no automatic latency compensation on the Vi series.
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
Thanks for the confirmation, Steve. I will hunt down the person that had me convinced otherwise and flog him with Hosa mic cable.
Thanks for the confirmation, Steve. I will hunt down the person that had me convinced otherwise and flog him with Hosa mic cable.
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
One thing I do is set up my desk with a large band and allocate inputs for all that seem like I might run into then simply plug in on the stage box the right input.
For example I have drums on layer 2 though they are inputs 1-8. I have the scribble strips labeled. If the drum kit doesn't need a mic on the high hat I just leave in blank, mute it, and move on. I have places for a couple of keyboards a couple of guitars, some horns and some spares. Since I can set the color of the scribble strip, I set the ones I am not using to black. Same goes for vocals. I have 6 vocal inputs allocated and split for monitors. If I only have two vocals I black out the rest.
This means I can get used to where to find things from show to show and FX sends are in place as are gates and comps. Thresholds get set at sound check.
Of course this particular setup is for events of a similar type. Each is saved as a scene in a show file. Each type of event gets its own show file. There are lots of exceptions.
Sent from my iPad HD
One thing I do is set up my desk with a large band and allocate inputs for all that seem like I might run into then simply plug in on the stage box the right input.
For example I have drums on layer 2 though they are inputs 1-8. I have the scribble strips labeled. If the drum kit doesn't need a mic on the high hat I just leave in blank, mute it, and move on. I have places for a couple of keyboards a couple of guitars, some horns and some spares. Since I can set the color of the scribble strip, I set the ones I am not using to black. Same goes for vocals. I have 6 vocal inputs allocated and split for monitors. If I only have two vocals I black out the rest.
This means I can get used to where to find things from show to show and FX sends are in place as are gates and comps. Thresholds get set at sound check.
Of course this particular setup is for events of a similar type. Each is saved as a scene in a show file. Each type of event gets its own show file. There are lots of exceptions.
Sent from my iPad HD
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
I assume that my X32 doesn't provide this latency compensation either -- correct?
This is interesting as I've been sending all vocals both to main L/R directly and also to a subgroup, squashing the subgroup pretty good, and then routing that to L/R as well -- my version of parallel (New York?) compression. Given these are vocals and not rim shots I can't discern the added latency but from what is being said here I may be (am?) creating comb filtering (interference) in the overall vocal output? As an alternative if I were to route individual vocal inputs to two separate channels then squash only one of them and route both of those to L/R I would avoid this as both paths would be of equal length? I could then assign one DCA to control all of the squashed channels and thereby maintain a single fader for that action. Yes? Or am I off base as usual?
...dave
I assume that my X32 doesn't provide this latency compensation either -- correct?
This is interesting as I've been sending all vocals both to main L/R directly and also to a subgroup, squashing the subgroup pretty good, and then routing that to L/R as well -- my version of parallel (New York?) compression. Given these are vocals and not rim shots I can't discern the added latency but from what is being said here I may be (am?) creating comb filtering (interference) in the overall vocal output? As an alternative if I were to route individual vocal inputs to two separate channels then squash only one of them and route both of those to L/R I would avoid this as both paths would be of equal length? I could then assign one DCA to control all of the squashed channels and thereby maintain a single fader for that action. Yes? Or am I off base as usual?
...dave
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
The one band I mix regularly has two players on IEMs and one using a wedge. The two IEMs have been mixing their own for months and the guy on the wedge just started -- with ample warning from me about being careful. I do have a mute group at the ready -- but haven't needed it yet <wink>!
I also work a venue where I mix whomever is playing that night and I'd be VERY leery about providing that option to just anyone.
..dave
The one band I mix regularly has two players on IEMs and one using a wedge. The two IEMs have been mixing their own for months and the guy on the wedge just started -- with ample warning from me about being careful. I do have a mute group at the ready -- but haven't needed it yet <wink>!
I also work a venue where I mix whomever is playing that night and I'd be VERY leery about providing that option to just anyone.
..dave
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
Thats what Im thinking. What I have set up right now will handle pretty much any band I may come across. The Performer 3 has 30 faders on 4 layers with a cosmetic break between the 1st 16 and the last 14. On the 14 faders to the right on layers a, b and c I have VCAs for drums, cymbals, bass, guitar 1, guitar 2, keys, vocals and etc. Then I have 4 effects returns, playback and a talkback channel.
On layer A on the 1st 16 faders I have instruments and vocals, on those faders on layer B I have drums and on those faders on layer C I have space for horns or whatever. Layer D is all my mix, matrix and dmx masters. With that many channels I can leave 2 faders for kick, snare, bass, guitars and vocals in case I get someone who wants 2 mics, or I want to paralel process, or there are more than 2 guitars, etc. I can pretty easily handle those things without having to rearrange the whole setup.
Thats what Im thinking. What I have set up right now will handle pretty much any band I may come across. The Performer 3 has 30 faders on 4 layers with a cosmetic break between the 1st 16 and the last 14. On the 14 faders to the right on layers a, b and c I have VCAs for drums, cymbals, bass, guitar 1, guitar 2, keys, vocals and etc. Then I have 4 effects returns, playback and a talkback channel.
On layer A on the 1st 16 faders I have instruments and vocals, on those faders on layer B I have drums and on those faders on layer C I have space for horns or whatever. Layer D is all my mix, matrix and dmx masters. With that many channels I can leave 2 faders for kick, snare, bass, guitars and vocals in case I get someone who wants 2 mics, or I want to paralel process, or there are more than 2 guitars, etc. I can pretty easily handle those things without having to rearrange the whole setup.
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
If you want to use parallel compression on any digital desk, you can do it like this:
- Remove the L/R assignment on the desired channel(s) and send them to two subgroups.
- Assign the subgroups to L/R
- Insert identical compression on both subgroups.
- Raise the threshold on the first group to it's maximum value, well above your operating level.
- Adjust the threshold on the second group to obtain the desired level of compression.
You now have two paths to L/R with identical latency, one unprocessed and one processed. Blend to taste.
If you want to use parallel compression on any digital desk, you can do it like this:
- Remove the L/R assignment on the desired channel(s) and send them to two subgroups.
- Assign the subgroups to L/R
- Insert identical compression on both subgroups.
- Raise the threshold on the first group to it's maximum value, well above your operating level.
- Adjust the threshold on the second group to obtain the desired level of compression.
You now have two paths to L/R with identical latency, one unprocessed and one processed. Blend to taste.
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
"I assume that my X32 doesn't provide this latency compensation either -- correct?"
Dave -
The x32 is "phase coherent" through the mix busses, which means you can send a channel to LR and one or more busses, and there will be no phase issues at the LR output. If you insert anything from the FX rack, including graphics, on either signal path, you will add latency to that path and have phasing/comb filtering issues. The use of anything in channel channel path (gate, comp, eq, etc.) will not cause issues, as you have discerned.
Cheers,
-Tim T
"I assume that my X32 doesn't provide this latency compensation either -- correct?"
Dave -
The x32 is "phase coherent" through the mix busses, which means you can send a channel to LR and one or more busses, and there will be no phase issues at the LR output. If you insert anything from the FX rack, including graphics, on either signal path, you will add latency to that path and have phasing/comb filtering issues. The use of anything in channel channel path (gate, comp, eq, etc.) will not cause issues, as you have discerned.
Cheers,
-Tim T
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
The chances of having a graphic inserted on the main bus are pretty high, so there goes that idea...
The chances of having a graphic inserted on the main bus are pretty high, so there goes that idea...
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
For me one of the biggest time savers, especially for multi band shows on one desk, is having channel presets for most types of inputs. All my scribble labels, routing, start EQ, starting dynamics, and some monitor sends are all ready to go. Once you know your base input list, just select the channel and click the preset for that input type and you're ready to start.
For me one of the biggest time savers, especially for multi band shows on one desk, is having channel presets for most types of inputs. All my scribble labels, routing, start EQ, starting dynamics, and some monitor sends are all ready to go. Once you know your base input list, just select the channel and click the preset for that input type and you're ready to start.
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
Will that matter though? It's inserted on the LR bus, so the grouped and non grouped inputs have already been summed before they get to the GEQ so the extra latency shouldn't affect their interaction. It would be different if the group audio and direct-to-LR audio didn't meet until a matrix, and the GEQ was on LR.
Chris
Will that matter though? It's inserted on the LR bus, so the grouped and non grouped inputs have already been summed before they get to the GEQ so the extra latency shouldn't affect their interaction. It would be different if the group audio and direct-to-LR audio didn't meet until a matrix, and the GEQ was on LR.
Chris
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
I noticed a "combfiltering" artifact right away trying this in the basement. What you might try is using a "non comp" group and a comp group, and blending those two sources. If you check on YouTube , Dave rat explains how to do this,not specifically for vocals, but for a whole band mix. That way you can blend the sound of a non comp vocal, vs a comp vocal...
Dave you are absolutely creating an issue, You can only send your vocal from the group, or direct to l&r...
I noticed a "combfiltering" artifact right away trying this in the basement. What you might try is using a "non comp" group and a comp group, and blending those two sources. If you check on YouTube , Dave rat explains how to do this,not specifically for vocals, but for a whole band mix. That way you can blend the sound of a non comp vocal, vs a comp vocal...
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
Shane -
Dave B is using an X32, doing what he described does not cause issues as it did on my Yamaha digitals and my iLive digitals. Behringer has solved this issue in the x32/m32 mix busses, so no comb filtering.
-here is a synopsis of what I observed about this after some testing I did on the bench. Midas asserts the M32 has phase coherent mixbusses, and it was posited that the x32 was the same. Since I didn't see that anywhere in any of the x32 literature, I decided to find out for myself. They are the same, and comps have no effect on the signal integrity. I don't know of any other mixers in this price range with this performance feature.
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,152205.msg1397179.html#msg1397179
Cheers,
-Tim T
Shane -
Dave B is using an X32, doing what he described does not cause issues as it did on my Yamaha digitals and my iLive digitals. Behringer has solved this issue in the x32/m32 mix busses, so no comb filtering.
-here is a synopsis of what I observed about this after some testing I did on the bench. Midas asserts the M32 has phase coherent mixbusses, and it was posited that the x32 was the same. Since I didn't see that anywhere in any of the x32 literature, I decided to find out for myself. They are the same, and comps have no effect on the signal integrity. I don't know of any other mixers in this price range with this performance feature.
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,152205.msg1397179.html#msg1397179
Cheers,
-Tim T
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
..dave
Helge: Yea I've watched the Dave Rat video and basically knew I was taking the half-assed approach in my setup. I think I'll go the whole route to test things out -- I have plenty of subgroups available. Thanks for your help.
..dave
Re: Digital layouts for analog guys
Thanks to all!
..dave
Thanks Tim (and Shane as well!). I do understand the symmetry of routing to two separate subgroups as opposed to what I've been doing and, as noted in my reply to Helge above, intend to try it out just to explore the Dave Rat approach. I do also appreciate knowing the X32 is phase coherent. Another plus for the console.
Thanks to all!
..dave