Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I was thinking about using a Mackie 1202 vlz pro as a mic preamp for drums.
I was wondering how many individual outputs I can get at once on this unit. Thanks |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
My concern after looking at the manual is that there is no way to control
the individual outputs. "Carlos Alden" wrote in message ... Sanbar from the land of wrote: I was thinking about using a Mackie 1202 vlz pro as a mic preamp for drums. I was wondering how many individual outputs I can get at once on this unit. Thanks I'm sure there is someone here who can give you an exact count, but the font of all wisdom, the seat of all things Mackie is located he http://www.mackie.com/support/downloads/manuals.html Carlos |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sanbar wrote:
My concern after looking at the manual is that there is no way to control the individual outputs. What do you mean? Are you intending on using the mike inputs and the insert outputs? If you do this, the trims are all the control you need. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Carlos Alden" wrote in message
Sanbar from the land of wrote: I was thinking about using a Mackie 1202 vlz pro as a mic preamp for drums. I was wondering how many individual outputs I can get at once on this unit. Thanks I'm sure there is someone here who can give you an exact count, but the font of all wisdom, the seat of all things Mackie is located he http://www.mackie.com/support/downloads/manuals.html Right, and that gets you to http://www.mackie.com/pdf/1202vlzpro_om.pdf . Page 9 shows that there are inserts on the first four input channels, which happily handle mics. Page 14 shows standard insert plug wiring for the 4 insert jacks which are TRS, tip out, ring in. My preference for tapping insert points is to use a special cable with a TRS plug on one end that has the tip and ring soldered together. Thus the signal from the mic preamp is available for recording, and it's also available for the normal use of the mixer. Anohter approach is to use a standard insert cable with the two 1/4 plugs inserted into a "Y" connector. If you set the channel trims for normal mixer operation, the insert points will have standardized signals on them. Those are your channel gain controls for the 4 mic inputs. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sanbar,
how many individual outputs Four. Also see "Using a Mixer with a DAW" from EQ magazine, first in the list on my Articles page: www.ethanwiner.com/articles.html It was written specifically for you! --Ethan |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sanbar wrote:
I was thinking about using a Mackie 1202 vlz pro as a mic preamp for drums. I was wondering how many individual outputs I can get at once on this unit. Thanks You tap the insert outputs by using the "only to the first click" insertion technique, and then you control the level to staorage with the mixer's input sensitivity ("gain") control. The signal still gets through teh bord for monitoring. This is @ Goole in the Group archives, covered well here many times. -- ha |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Arny Krueger wrote:
My preference for tapping insert points is to use a special cable with a TRS plug on one end that has the tip and ring soldered together. Thus the signal from the mic preamp is available for recording, and it's also available for the normal use of the mixer. Arny, If you think it through, you'll realize that inserting a patch cable only to the first click bridges the insert connection and accomplishes just what you want without a special cable. Work with TS or TRS cables. Try it. -- ha |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"hank alrich" wrote in message
Arny Krueger wrote: My preference for tapping insert points is to use a special cable with a TRS plug on one end that has the tip and ring soldered together. Thus the signal from the mic preamp is available for recording, and it's also available for the normal use of the mixer. Arny, If you think it through, you'll realize that inserting a patch cable only to the first click bridges the insert connection and accomplishes just what you want without a special cable. Work with TS or TRS cables. Try it. Been there done that, and loved it until the first time I moved something and the cable popped out. |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Arny Krueger wrote:
"hank alrich" wrote: Arny Krueger wrote: My preference for tapping insert points is to use a special cable with a TRS plug on one end that has the tip and ring soldered together. Thus the signal from the mic preamp is available for recording, and it's also available for the normal use of the mixer. Arny, If you think it through, you'll realize that inserting a patch cable only to the first click bridges the insert connection and accomplishes just what you want without a special cable. Work with TS or TRS cables. Try it. Been there done that, and loved it until the first time I moved something and the cable popped out. j Well, don't _do_ that! /j -- ha |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#12
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for all the feedback. I feel like an idiot for not fully
understanding what you all are saying. I think the bottom line here is that I can use 4 mics and get 4 individually controlled outputs by using insert cables and plugging them through to my DAW. Am I correct. Thanks again. "Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1105629081k@trad... In article writes: I was thinking about using a Mackie 1202 vlz pro as a mic preamp for drums. I was wondering how many individual outputs I can get at once on this unit. You really need only one per mic and you can get that from the Insert jack on each of the four mic channels. The limitation when using it as a mic preamp for drums is not how many outputs you can get, but how many mic inputs you have, which is four. If that's enough, you're in good shape. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Sanbar" wrote in message
Thanks for all the feedback. I feel like an idiot for not fully understanding what you all are saying. I think the bottom line here is that I can use 4 mics and get 4 individually controlled outputs by using insert cables and plugging them through to my DAW. Am I correct. Yes. You control the gain with the channel trims. |
#16
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#17
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
it has 4 preamps. the rest of the i/o's are line level in varying forms
and routing. |
#18
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 06:55:02 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: Thanks for all the feedback. I feel like an idiot for not fully understanding what you all are saying. I think the bottom line here is that I can use 4 mics and get 4 individually controlled outputs by using insert cables and plugging them through to my DAW. Am I correct. Yes. You control the gain with the channel trims. Sort of. Channel trims need to be set right, not used as volume controls really. You can turn them DOWN from the optimum level, but maybe at the expense of noise level. But then, as you'll normally be aiming to get optimum level onto the tracks and mix later, it doesn't really matter. CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect |
#19
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Laurence Payne" wrote in
message On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 06:55:02 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: Thanks for all the feedback. I feel like an idiot for not fully understanding what you all are saying. I think the bottom line here is that I can use 4 mics and get 4 individually controlled outputs by using insert cables and plugging them through to my DAW. Am I correct. Yes. You control the gain with the channel trims. Sort of. No, absolutely. Channel trims need to be set right, not used as volume controls really. Agreed. Why would one use trims as volume controls while recording? Why would one use *anything* as a volume control while recording? But then, as you'll normally be aiming to get optimum level onto the tracks and mix later, it doesn't really matter. Agreed. |
#21
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1105754401k@trad In article writes: You control the gain with the channel trims. But then, as you'll normally be aiming to get optimum level onto the tracks and mix later, it doesn't really matter. The problem is that the way most A/D converters are calibrated, if you try to get maximum level on the tracks, you'll tend to turn the trims up higher than they want to be, and will find that the preamps clip before reaching peak record level. Somehow I've never had that problem, given that I record with adeqite headroom. If the sound card can be set for -10 dBV nominal input, that will give you enough sensitivity so that you don't need to run the preamp gain too high. In fact when I did that with my church's Mackie SR32, I had problems with inadequate headroom. But if you're stuck at +4 dBu nominal level, you probably won't reach full scale before the preamp clips. According to http://www.mackie.com/pdf/sr24vlzpro_ss.pdf , the insert outs of a SR32 have low distortion at +14. IOW, they are not clipping. The least sensitive pro sound card I know of clips with an input of +12, and another with +10. |
#22
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#23
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#24
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Why
would one use *anything* as a volume control while recording? BRBR I believe it's part of the "Recording Engineer" job description. Scott Fraser |
#25
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chel van Gennip wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:11:33 +0100, Arny Krueger wrote: But if you're stuck at +4 dBu nominal level, you probably won't reach full scale before the preamp clips. According to http://www.mackie.com/pdf/sr24vlzpro_ss.pdf , the insert outs of a SR32 have low distortion at +14. IOW, they are not clipping. The least sensitive pro sound card I know of clips with an input of +12, and another with +10. The correct specification for the Mackie 1202 vlz pro is at http://www.mackie.com/pdf/1202vlzpro_ss.pdf They claim a 22db headroom above 0dBu. I always use a +4 dBu setting for my soundcards with my Mackie. I wouldn't believe the spec. The Mackie starts to sound funny, long before it actually reaches clipping. It can help a lot to run it with lower operating levels. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#26
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() In article writes: According to http://www.mackie.com/pdf/sr24vlzpro_ss.pdf , the insert outs of a SR32 have low distortion at +14. IOW, they are not clipping. The least sensitive pro sound card I know of clips with an input of +12, and another with +10. The Mackie recorder with analog I/O clips at +24 dBu. I was under the impression that most sound "professional" sound cards ran somewhere in the ballpark of +16 to +16 dBu for 0 dBFS. I would expect "consumer" and "-10" cards to reach full scale in the +10 to +12 dBV range. A lot of people are unhappy with recordings that rarely go above -6 dBFS because the waveform display looks so wimpy. You and I are not. I regularly run the Mackie recorder below -10 dBFS because that's where my console is comfortable. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
#27
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike Rivers wrote:
The Mackie recorder with analog I/O clips at +24 dBu. I was under the impression that most sound "professional" sound cards ran somewhere in the ballpark of +16 to +16 dBu for 0 dBFS. My RME ADI-8DS reaches 0 dBFS at either +13 dBu when set at +4 and at +19 dBu when set for 'hi gain' (which really means hi level.) I would expect "consumer" and "-10" cards to reach full scale in the +10 to +12 dBV range. The ADI-8DS reaches 0 dBFS at +2 dBV when set for -10. A lot of people are unhappy with recordings that rarely go above -6 dBFS because the waveform display looks so wimpy. You and I are not. I regularly run the Mackie recorder below -10 dBFS because that's where my console is comfortable. Of course, you understand the concept of properly setting system levels to maximize overall headroom. I fear that in these digital days, that is no longer being drilled into the heads of newbie engineers the way it was for many of us. I remember spending *days* doing this for postproduction studios, trying to eek out every last bit of dynamic range from the room. |
#28
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#29
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Chel van Gennip wrote: Using the bits you paid for to get some headroom is using these bits well. Hear, hear! Do you pre jocks know what the best (and the pretty darned good and the fair to middlin) SNR that can be obtained at 48 dB of gain? I'm curious how many real bits a "24 bit" A/D must have to be equivalent so as to eliminate the need for a pre. Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
#30
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Mike Rivers (that's me!) wrote: The Mackie recorder with analog I/O clips at +24 dBu. I was under the impression that most sound "professional" sound cards ran somewhere in the ballpark of +16 to +16 dBu for 0 dBFS. I would expect "consumer" and "-10" cards to reach full scale in the +10 to +12 dBV range. I must not have been fully awake when I wrote that. How about in the ballpark of +16 to +24 dBu for 0 dBFS for a "pro" level card and in the ballpark of +2 to +8 dBV for a "consumer card." Which is in the ballpark of Kurt's RME card. Of course, you understand the concept of properly setting system levels to maximize overall headroom. I fear that in these digital days, that is no longer being drilled into the heads of newbie engineers the way it was for many of us. People talk about headroom in a digital system, but there really is none - It's only what you make. And more often than not, you don't have all the knobs you need in order to get the headroom you want to have. Ideally you should use all the gain you can get at the mic preamp without clipping, so the input gain control on the mixer or preamp not only sets the minimum noise floor, but also sets the headroom at the front end. So you set the gain so that when the singer is bellowing as loud as he can, you're running at what you think is a safe margin below clipping of the preamp, say 6 dB. Now, if the preamp is putting out +18 dBu with that bellowing singer, it can put out +24 dBu before it clips. But if your sound card has no input adjustment but a +4/-10 switch, and IT reaches full scale at +19 dBu like your RME card does, you have only 1 dB of headroom. Ideally, you'd want to attenuate the input to the sound card a bit so the preamp can go its full range without the recorder clipping, but there's no knob for that. (remember when recorders used to have knobs or trimpots for record level?) So you do the next best thing and back off on the preamp gain to leave yourself some headroom on the digital side, but that possibly compromises the S/N ratio. In real life, you don't ponder these things, you do what works. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
#31
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Chel van Gennip" wrote in message
What is "too low a level"? Something that puts the noise floor of the source below or near the noise floor of the recorder. It is clear what is "too hig a level. Except with analog tape ;-) With 24 bits you get 20 bits or more, you have the room to keep it safe. Letsee, the room is someplace below or near 70 dB dynamic range, the mic might be as good as 80 dB, the console could be 90 dB, and just about every modern audio interface is up around 100 dB. Staying 6 or even 12 dB from the hard high limit will cost you 1 or 2 of these bits you payed for. Yes, but see my real-world dynamic range budget, above. Sometimes the best performances are a bit louder than expected in advance, so why throw those away and spend extra time for a second take. Agreed. Depending on where you want to set your margins, there is from 10 to 30 dB of dynamic range in the audio interface to umm, budget. Riding the gain during recording sessions normally is too late and even when you are in time it is not making things much better. Totally agreed. Riding gain is why God invented gain enveloping. Do it after the fact when you get as many chances as you need, and you are never surprised. Using the bits you paid for to get some headroom is using these bits well. Totally agreed. |
#32
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1105814702k@trad In article writes: What is "too low a level"? For me, it's when the meter never gets above -20 dBFS. But there are many people who believe that if it never hits 0 dBFS, and in fact ever drops below -10 dBFS unless the music stops, the "recording isn't hot enough." I think it's a product of looking at waveforms. I agree. It's a sad fact of life that with alot of displays, if you are looking at a bunch of tracks and you've got 10 dB or more of headroom, you are looking at what appear to be flat lines. -6 dB is half way to full scale on most waveform displays, so even a recording that peaks at -6 looks like it's not even close to filling the window. So many people are tempted to turn it up. It's like we need some kind of a logarithmic display for DAWs. It's a hard sell, though. Too many people either remember or read about 16-bit technology where you only had about 12 reliable bits to start with. There, it was more important to keep close to the peak level. Gladly those days are gone. The other thing is that people stick a CD in the drive on the computer, start it playing, and set the playback volume to that reference, then play one of their own recordings and it's much quieter. Of course they can't be bothered with turning up the playback volume so they assume they need to record at a higher level. As a practical matter, if your peaks don't get within a few dB or FS, someone is going to complain about "...having to turn the volume up to hear anything." |
#33
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Bob Cain" wrote in message
Chel van Gennip wrote: Using the bits you paid for to get some headroom is using these bits well. Hear, hear! Do you pre jocks know what the best (and the pretty darned good and the fair to middlin) SNR that can be obtained at 48 dB of gain? I'm curious how many real bits a "24 bit" A/D must have to be equivalent so as to eliminate the need for a pre. Usually I end up giving dyamic mics about 30 dB gain, and dynamics more like 20. 30 dB gain is like 5-6 bits and 20 is like 3-4. If you line up 14 bits ideally, you have pretty good audio. You need 10-20 dB headroom which is 3-4 bits. Therfore, a converter with 14+4+6 or 26 bits might work pretty well in general without a mic preamp. For reference purposes http://www.neumann.com/infopool/mics...dID=solution-d claims "The result is an internal digital 28-bit signal with a dynamic range of more than 130 dB (A-weighted, incl. microphone capsule)." |
#34
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1105805769k@trad In article writes: According to http://www.mackie.com/pdf/sr24vlzpro_ss.pdf , the insert outs of a SR32 have low distortion at +14. IOW, they are not clipping. The least sensitive pro sound card I know of clips with an input of +12, and another with +10. Brain fart time. Let me amend that to 10-12 dBu over +4 dBu for +14 +16 dBu for peak output. The Mackie recorder with analog I/O clips at +24 dBu. I was under the impression that most sound "professional" sound cards ran somewhere in the ballpark of +16 to +16 dBu for 0 dBFS. Your 16 dBu meets my 16 dBu I would expect "consumer" and "-10" cards to reach full scale in the +10 to +12 dBV range. True consumer sound cards put FS at 1 volt (AC97) or 2 volts (Creative Labs until lately) I would expect a -10 dBv card to have 10-12 dB headroom at most which puts FS at 0 to 2 dBv. There's about 2 dB between 0 dBu and 0 dBv, so that would be +2 to +4 dBu. A lot of people are unhappy with recordings that rarely go above -6 dBFS because the waveform display looks so wimpy. Agreed, we just covered that in another thread. You and I are not. Something about hatred of the sound of clipping. ;-) I regularly run the Mackie recorder below -10 dBFS because that's where my console is comfortable. I think that the levels through my church's SR32 are pretty close to standardized. In that context I record with Delta cards on the inserts, running in +4 mode. Most of my recordings come into editing with at least 10 dB worth of headroom unless someone gets *really* excited or things wander out of control, technically. It's been along time since I've seen any clipping. The noise floor of finished recordings is dominated by environmental acoustical noises. I think that is about as good as it gets in my recording context until I get the audience and musicians to stop breathing and pumping blood through their bodies! ;-) |
#35
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Arny Krueger wrote:
Why would one use *anything* as a volume control while recording? Well, if you have the chart in front of you and the singer on the other side of the glass, you can ride gain more intelligently than any compressor or limiter. The skill to get it right _on the way in_ is one not well understood by the casual recordist or anyone who has been relying on fixing it after the fact. But once upon a time that was a sign of serious recording chops. -- ha |
#36
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Scott Dorsey wrote:
Chel van Gennip wrote: Arny Krueger wrote: But if you're stuck at +4 dBu nominal level, you probably won't reach full scale before the preamp clips. According to http://www.mackie.com/pdf/sr24vlzpro_ss.pdf , the insert outs of a SR32 have low distortion at +14. IOW, they are not clipping. The least sensitive pro sound card I know of clips with an input of +12, and another with +10. The correct specification for the Mackie 1202 vlz pro is at http://www.mackie.com/pdf/1202vlzpro_ss.pdf They claim a 22db headroom above 0dBu. I always use a +4 dBu setting for my soundcards with my Mackie. I wouldn't believe the spec. The Mackie starts to sound funny, long before it actually reaches clipping. It can help a lot to run it with lower operating levels. One must keep in mind that Mackie's ")dB" is actually that instead of the oft used ) dB = + 4 dB. -- ha |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Mackie 1202 (non vlz) or Tapco 6306? | Pro Audio | |||
Mackie 1202 (non vlz) or Tapco 6306? | Pro Audio | |||
FS: Mackie 1202 mixer | Pro Audio | |||
Recording signal through Mackie 1202 vlz pro | Pro Audio | |||
Mackie 1202 Question | Pro Audio |