Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Geoff Doane" data-source="post: 121419" data-attributes="member: 1155">Re: Help with small rack cabling.Back when I owned some analog consoles, I ran into similar problems: some were tip send, other ring send, although I didn&#039;t have to worry about anything with balanced inserts.I wound up using individual pairs, one for each send and return, with TRS at the console end, and TS at the rack end.&nbsp; Sends and returns were grouped using nylon sleeving.&nbsp; I didn&#039;t have any devices that were XLR only, so if I used a console with the opposite send on the insert, I could just reverse everything at the rack end.&nbsp; That was a PITA, but better than carrying a whole lot of adapters.&nbsp; Unbalanced was never a problem with 5m or shorter cables.&nbsp; Individually jacketed cable was not as common back then as it is now, so using individual pairs meant I didn&#039;t have to use heatshrink or tubing on each pair.&nbsp; The cable bundles were a bit bulkier than snake cable, but more flexible, I think.If you do the math, I suspect it&#039;s cheaper to build a whole new set of cables rather than build a bunch of adapters that you will rarely need anyway.&nbsp; Female inline TRS jacks are hideously expensive.&nbsp; Your original plan would require two for each adapter.&nbsp; Even adapting unbalanced cables to a balanced console will require a lot of hardware, that will leave a lot of weight hanging off the back.&nbsp; You might be able to find some female TRS to 2x TS molded adapters that would make this more practical than rolling your own.For EQs, I preferred to insert them wherever possible, and use the XLR on the console as the ultimate send point to the snake and eventually stage.&nbsp; That gives me the console fader as the master output, and the console metering also still means something.&nbsp; There are differing opinions on this, but that&#039;s mine.For FX sends and returns, I just did TS on both ends of each pair, wired unbalanced of course.&nbsp; At the lengths I was using, there were no problems.I think the racks I had back then were 16&quot; deep, not including the covers (another 2&quot;).&nbsp; There was always enough room to coil up the cable bundles in the back.&nbsp; Putting the front cover on first, then tipping the rack onto its front, before coiling the cables, made this pretty easy.GTD</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Geoff Doane, post: 121419, member: 1155"] Re: Help with small rack cabling. Back when I owned some analog consoles, I ran into similar problems: some were tip send, other ring send, although I didn't have to worry about anything with balanced inserts. I wound up using individual pairs, one for each send and return, with TRS at the console end, and TS at the rack end. Sends and returns were grouped using nylon sleeving. I didn't have any devices that were XLR only, so if I used a console with the opposite send on the insert, I could just reverse everything at the rack end. That was a PITA, but better than carrying a whole lot of adapters. Unbalanced was never a problem with 5m or shorter cables. Individually jacketed cable was not as common back then as it is now, so using individual pairs meant I didn't have to use heatshrink or tubing on each pair. The cable bundles were a bit bulkier than snake cable, but more flexible, I think. If you do the math, I suspect it's cheaper to build a whole new set of cables rather than build a bunch of adapters that you will rarely need anyway. Female inline TRS jacks are hideously expensive. Your original plan would require two for each adapter. Even adapting unbalanced cables to a balanced console will require a lot of hardware, that will leave a lot of weight hanging off the back. You might be able to find some female TRS to 2x TS molded adapters that would make this more practical than rolling your own. For EQs, I preferred to insert them wherever possible, and use the XLR on the console as the ultimate send point to the snake and eventually stage. That gives me the console fader as the master output, and the console metering also still means something. There are differing opinions on this, but that's mine. For FX sends and returns, I just did TS on both ends of each pair, wired unbalanced of course. At the lengths I was using, there were no problems. I think the racks I had back then were 16" deep, not including the covers (another 2"). There was always enough room to coil up the cable bundles in the back. Putting the front cover on first, then tipping the rack onto its front, before coiling the cables, made this pretty easy. GTD [/QUOTE]

Verification