Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those devices,
and then to the power amps.

TIA




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

"smeghead" wrote in message ...
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those devices,
and then to the power amps.

TIA


None.... in my humble opinion.


--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

"smeghead" wrote in message ...
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those devices,
and then to the power amps.

TIA


None.... in my humble opinion.


--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

In article U9W5d.7037$Cn.1162@trnddc04,
David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote:

"smeghead" wrote in message ...
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those devices,
and then to the power amps.

None.... in my humble opinion.

1. If you have unbalanced EQ and compression, you can use the insert and
still get a balanced line out to the amps

2. You can very easily bypass everything in the insert loop by popping two
cables if something goes wrong in the processing chain during a concert.

Neither one of these are really big advantages.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

In article U9W5d.7037$Cn.1162@trnddc04,
David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote:

"smeghead" wrote in message ...
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those devices,
and then to the power amps.

None.... in my humble opinion.

1. If you have unbalanced EQ and compression, you can use the insert and
still get a balanced line out to the amps

2. You can very easily bypass everything in the insert loop by popping two
cables if something goes wrong in the processing chain during a concert.

Neither one of these are really big advantages.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

1. If you have unbalanced EQ and compression, you can use the insert and
still get a balanced line out to the amps

2. You can very easily bypass everything in the insert loop by popping two
cables if something goes wrong in the processing chain during a concert.

Neither one of these are really big advantages.
--scott

Additionally, some people (not myself) like to be able to monitor the effect of
the room EQ on their phones. The major disadvantage is that, depending on the
internal architecture of the mixer, the mono sum out & matrix outputs MAY carry
the inserted signal, meaning your main L & R system EQ is also going to your
frontfills, delay clusters, etc. Some do, some don't. Also, I'd much rather
trust my main signal to a series of XLR to XLR connections, instead of a 1/4"
jack & plug.

Scott Fraser

1. If you have unbalanced EQ and compression, you can use the insert and
still get a balanced line out to the amps

2. You can very easily bypass everything in the insert loop by popping two
cables if something goes wrong in the processing chain during a concert.

Neither one of these are really big advantages.
--scott

Additionally, some people (not myself) like to be able to monitor the effect of
the room EQ on their phones. The major disadvantage is that, depending on the
internal architecture of the mixer, the mono sum out & matrix outputs MAY carry
the inserted signal, meaning your main L & R system EQ is also going to your
frontfills, delay clusters, etc. Some do, some don't. Also, I'd much rather
trust my main signal to a series of XLR to XLR connections, instead of a 1/4"
jack & plug.

Scott Fraser

"Scott Dorsey" wrote

"smeghead" wrote
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ
and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those
devices,
and then to the power amps.

1. If you have unbalanced EQ and compression, you can use the insert and
still get a balanced line out to the amps

2. You can very easily bypass everything in the insert loop by popping two
cables if something goes wrong in the processing chain during a
concert.

3. You don't have to ajust your compressor every time you move the master
fader.

4. You improve your level and thus your S/N ratio and distortion by keeping
the level thorugh EQ and compressor close to nominal level all the time.

I once used a 16 bit digital EQ between the master out and the amplifier.
At low levels in the rehersal room the EQ only used around 7-8 bits. That
did not sound very pleasant.... Plugging it into the insert instead fixed
that.

/Preben Friis

"Scott Dorsey" wrote

"smeghead" wrote
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ
and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those
devices,
and then to the power amps.

1. If you have unbalanced EQ and compression, you can use the insert and
still get a balanced line out to the amps

2. You can very easily bypass everything in the insert loop by popping two
cables if something goes wrong in the processing chain during a
concert.

3. You don't have to ajust your compressor every time you move the master
fader.

4. You improve your level and thus your S/N ratio and distortion by keeping
the level thorugh EQ and compressor close to nominal level all the time.

I once used a 16 bit digital EQ between the master out and the amplifier.
At low levels in the rehersal room the EQ only used around 7-8 bits. That
did not sound very pleasant.... Plugging it into the insert instead fixed
that.

/Preben Friis

smeghead wrote:

Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those devices,
and then to the power amps.

TIA

This is a somewhat frequently asked question. When it was asked in February
of 1997 I answered, "An advantage of using the inserts is that the console's
metering then includes the effects of the EQ [and compressor]."

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...r%3D%26hl%3Den

--
================================================== ======================
Michael Kesti | "And like, one and one don't make
| two, one and one make one."
| - The Who, Bargain

smeghead wrote:

Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those devices,
and then to the power amps.

TIA

This is a somewhat frequently asked question. When it was asked in February
of 1997 I answered, "An advantage of using the inserts is that the console's
metering then includes the effects of the EQ [and compressor]."

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...r%3D%26hl%3Den

--
================================================== ======================
Michael Kesti | "And like, one and one don't make
| two, one and one make one."
| - The Who, Bargain

in regards to the mackie
if you run all your input to "0" on the meter and no clip lights you are
still overloading the mix buss
on a mackie mix at around minus 10
George

in regards to the mackie
if you run all your input to "0" on the meter and no clip lights you are
still overloading the mix buss
on a mackie mix at around minus 10
George

Well, as a negative, it's possible to drive the inserted devices into
distortion and still keep the mains down enough to not notice the overdriven
situation on the console meters (yet it will sound like ****). You could be
inducing pumping with the compression and not necessarily hear it from the
FOH, or you could be incuring clipping and so are automatically required to
maintain an eye on both the console output meters AND the EQ and/or
compressor, which may not be easy to keep an eye on depending on where/how
the FOH is set up. The more streamlined a system is set up, the more easily
one is readily able to keep tabs on what's going on.

Now with a 1604, it's very possible to have everything in one rack, and so
perhaps you'll not find it an issue.

Preben brought up an ideally suited situation where the main inserts were
EXACTLY the place to put a digital EQ, but it doesn't necessarily follow
that one should also put the compressor there. So there are positives and
negatives to each situation and the idea is not to become married to one
setup continguency over another, but recognize where one situation applies
and another does not have the same solution. The reason consoles have the
abilities they do, even at the 1604 level, is that no live situation is
going to be the same, and sometimes what you have left to try is exactly the
right thing to do, or at the least, the only thing left. With more options,
one has more solutions.

So try using your EQ/compression on the inserts, but then you still have to
ask yourself whether the EQ should go first, only to be dulled down by the
compressor or be keying your compressor to react to selected EQ frequencies,
or should you go with the compressor first, and thereby have other things
like pumping become noticeable because the EQ isn't set right.

There's also the totally important point about maintaining a balanced
connection between the console outputs to the amplifier's inputs, so
unbalanced EQ/compression becomes a moot point when used on the inserts.

Hopefully this gives you an idea that the only idea behind the inputs is
that you MIGHT have to use them but it's not a suggestion that you should.
You, as a FOH engineer, has to know why and when to use them and what to
look out for if you do or if you don't.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"smeghead" wrote in message
...
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those
devices,
and then to the power amps.

TIA




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Well, as a negative, it's possible to drive the inserted devices into
distortion and still keep the mains down enough to not notice the overdriven
situation on the console meters (yet it will sound like ****). You could be
inducing pumping with the compression and not necessarily hear it from the
FOH, or you could be incuring clipping and so are automatically required to
maintain an eye on both the console output meters AND the EQ and/or
compressor, which may not be easy to keep an eye on depending on where/how
the FOH is set up. The more streamlined a system is set up, the more easily
one is readily able to keep tabs on what's going on.

Now with a 1604, it's very possible to have everything in one rack, and so
perhaps you'll not find it an issue.

Preben brought up an ideally suited situation where the main inserts were
EXACTLY the place to put a digital EQ, but it doesn't necessarily follow
that one should also put the compressor there. So there are positives and
negatives to each situation and the idea is not to become married to one
setup continguency over another, but recognize where one situation applies
and another does not have the same solution. The reason consoles have the
abilities they do, even at the 1604 level, is that no live situation is
going to be the same, and sometimes what you have left to try is exactly the
right thing to do, or at the least, the only thing left. With more options,
one has more solutions.

So try using your EQ/compression on the inserts, but then you still have to
ask yourself whether the EQ should go first, only to be dulled down by the
compressor or be keying your compressor to react to selected EQ frequencies,
or should you go with the compressor first, and thereby have other things
like pumping become noticeable because the EQ isn't set right.

There's also the totally important point about maintaining a balanced
connection between the console outputs to the amplifier's inputs, so
unbalanced EQ/compression becomes a moot point when used on the inserts.

Hopefully this gives you an idea that the only idea behind the inputs is
that you MIGHT have to use them but it's not a suggestion that you should.
You, as a FOH engineer, has to know why and when to use them and what to
look out for if you do or if you don't.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"smeghead" wrote in message
...
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those
devices,
and then to the power amps.

TIA




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

If even just a couple of people in my minimal experience can come up with
magic, both in live sound and on recordings, then all bets are off. I
assume, however, that they understand the defiencies of the system and
adjust accordingly.

MSI(maryland sound) supplied a mackie 24 for a one off I did in silver
Spring
It stands out as one of my finest mixes ever, but it was not fun or easy
Even the MSI guys complemented me(fronm the stage to the entire
audience) on the quality of that mix
George

If even just a couple of people in my minimal experience can come up with
magic, both in live sound and on recordings, then all bets are off. I
assume, however, that they understand the defiencies of the system and
adjust accordingly.

MSI(maryland sound) supplied a mackie 24 for a one off I did in silver
Spring
It stands out as one of my finest mixes ever, but it was not fun or easy
Even the MSI guys complemented me(fronm the stage to the entire
audience) on the quality of that mix
George

Yeah, but Mackies don't work like normal mixers, so it's better to slam the
mains up to max and use the method they describe rather than do the actual
gain staging one would normally work with.

We went through this on AAPLS and everybody seemed to think I was crazy for
actually worrying about where the mic sounds best on the pre and working
from there. But I've seen John Vengrouskie take the mains up and get great
response from a 1604 VLZ (not the Pro) without a problem. The last time I
went out with his blues group I ended up using the 1604 and got great tracks
and I wasn't doing the FOH, so I still don't know how it stacks up to my
Crest XR20, but I can't imagine that it comes anywhere close. Sorry, Mackie
owners, but life revolves around what you're used to, and I'm used to the
sound of the Crest and the Soundcraft and the Soundtracs (equipment I own,
not just have used) . I consciencely made the decision not to even consider
the Mackie route for my equipment, but I have seen it work very well. It
just doesn't follow the norm and I can't say that I've been in the presence
of anyone else other than John who can make a Mackie sound good on live
sound. However, again, I will say that Tonebarge (apparently no longer
posting here) made the best use of a Mackie 1604 and two ADATS I've ever
heard.

If even just a couple of people in my minimal experience can come up with
magic, both in live sound and on recordings, then all bets are off. I
assume, however, that they understand the defiencies of the system and
adjust accordingly.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"George" wrote in message
...
in regards to the mackie
if you run all your input to "0" on the meter and no clip lights you are
still overloading the mix buss
on a mackie mix at around minus 10
George

Yeah, but Mackies don't work like normal mixers, so it's better to slam the
mains up to max and use the method they describe rather than do the actual
gain staging one would normally work with.

We went through this on AAPLS and everybody seemed to think I was crazy for
actually worrying about where the mic sounds best on the pre and working
from there. But I've seen John Vengrouskie take the mains up and get great
response from a 1604 VLZ (not the Pro) without a problem. The last time I
went out with his blues group I ended up using the 1604 and got great tracks
and I wasn't doing the FOH, so I still don't know how it stacks up to my
Crest XR20, but I can't imagine that it comes anywhere close. Sorry, Mackie
owners, but life revolves around what you're used to, and I'm used to the
sound of the Crest and the Soundcraft and the Soundtracs (equipment I own,
not just have used) . I consciencely made the decision not to even consider
the Mackie route for my equipment, but I have seen it work very well. It
just doesn't follow the norm and I can't say that I've been in the presence
of anyone else other than John who can make a Mackie sound good on live
sound. However, again, I will say that Tonebarge (apparently no longer
posting here) made the best use of a Mackie 1604 and two ADATS I've ever
heard.

If even just a couple of people in my minimal experience can come up with
magic, both in live sound and on recordings, then all bets are off. I
assume, however, that they understand the defiencies of the system and
adjust accordingly.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"George" wrote in message
...
in regards to the mackie
if you run all your input to "0" on the meter and no clip lights you are
still overloading the mix buss
on a mackie mix at around minus 10
George

And there you go. When the chips are down and it's talent that makes the
difference, then talent makes the difference.

However, I still wouldn't BUY a Mackie mixer, although I still love the
SR1530s I bought.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"George" wrote in message
...


If even just a couple of people in my minimal experience can come up
with
magic, both in live sound and on recordings, then all bets are off. I
assume, however, that they understand the defiencies of the system and
adjust accordingly.

MSI(maryland sound) supplied a mackie 24 for a one off I did in silver
Spring
It stands out as one of my finest mixes ever, but it was not fun or easy
Even the MSI guys complemented me(fronm the stage to the entire
audience) on the quality of that mix
George

And there you go. When the chips are down and it's talent that makes the
difference, then talent makes the difference.

However, I still wouldn't BUY a Mackie mixer, although I still love the
SR1530s I bought.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"George" wrote in message
...


If even just a couple of people in my minimal experience can come up
with
magic, both in live sound and on recordings, then all bets are off. I
assume, however, that they understand the defiencies of the system and
adjust accordingly.

MSI(maryland sound) supplied a mackie 24 for a one off I did in silver
Spring
It stands out as one of my finest mixes ever, but it was not fun or easy
Even the MSI guys complemented me(fronm the stage to the entire
audience) on the quality of that mix
George

Your probably don't want the compressor to be affected by the man fader,
which would esentially be messing with the threshhold.
Leaving it in the insert point let's you set the threshhold for maximum
"fatness" or whatever, and then use the mains fader to set FOH volume.

The EQ probably doesn't matter, but the insert is as good a place as any,
and then you can easily hear it in your headphones.


My 2cents.

--
John Krieger


"smeghead" wrote in message
...
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those
devices,
and then to the power amps.

TIA




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Your probably don't want the compressor to be affected by the man fader,
which would esentially be messing with the threshhold.
Leaving it in the insert point let's you set the threshhold for maximum
"fatness" or whatever, and then use the mains fader to set FOH volume.

The EQ probably doesn't matter, but the insert is as good a place as any,
and then you can easily hear it in your headphones.


My 2cents.

--
John Krieger


"smeghead" wrote in message
...
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those
devices,
and then to the power amps.

TIA




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

The EQ probably doesn't matter, but the insert is as good a place as any,
and then you can easily hear it in your headphones.
BRBR

I've never understood why anybody would want to hear the system EQ on their
cans.

Scott Fraser

The EQ probably doesn't matter, but the insert is as good a place as any,
and then you can easily hear it in your headphones.
BRBR

I've never understood why anybody would want to hear the system EQ on their
cans.

Scott Fraser

In article in rec.audio.pro on Mon, 27
Sep 2004 07:52:49 -0700, smeghead says...
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those devices,
and then to the power amps.

If you want to maintain balancing on the outputs, and these devices are
unbalanced.

In article in rec.audio.pro on Mon, 27
Sep 2004 07:52:49 -0700, smeghead says...
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those devices,
and then to the power amps.

If you want to maintain balancing on the outputs, and these devices are
unbalanced.

Great discussion, thanks for all your input.

Other than keeping the mains level down, (headroom issue) any suggestions
for getting a good live mix using the Mackie board?

From what I've read, using the subgroups (1-4) can be problematic, any
suggestions for getting a decent mix using them? I'd like to run the drum
mics (4) to a subgroup, but don't want to sacrafice signal quality.

Thanks again!!

"smeghead" wrote in message
...
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those
devices,
and then to the power amps.

TIA




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Great discussion, thanks for all your input.

Other than keeping the mains level down, (headroom issue) any suggestions
for getting a good live mix using the Mackie board?

From what I've read, using the subgroups (1-4) can be problematic, any
suggestions for getting a decent mix using them? I'd like to run the drum
mics (4) to a subgroup, but don't want to sacrafice signal quality.

Thanks again!!

"smeghead" wrote in message
...
Just purchased a Mackie 1604VLZ Pro for live use, and was wondering if
anyone could explain the advantage of using the "Main Insert" for EQ and
compression, as opposed just running the main mix outputs to those
devices,
and then to the power amps.

TIA




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

smeghead wrote:
Great discussion, thanks for all your input.

Other than keeping the mains level down, (headroom issue) any suggestions
for getting a good live mix using the Mackie board?

Keep the levels down even more than people have said. -20dB seems like
about as high as I'd want it. Mute any unused channels. Don't try to use
the EQ. You can use it a little bit, but it gets pretty nasty if you have
to cut more than just a little or boost at all, so the more control you have
elsewhere in the chain, the better.

From what I've read, using the subgroups (1-4) can be problematic, any
suggestions for getting a decent mix using them? I'd like to run the drum
mics (4) to a subgroup, but don't want to sacrafice signal quality.

I don't know. On the 1604VLZ, I found that the subgroups all sounded
slightly different.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

smeghead wrote:
Great discussion, thanks for all your input.

Other than keeping the mains level down, (headroom issue) any suggestions
for getting a good live mix using the Mackie board?

Keep the levels down even more than people have said. -20dB seems like
about as high as I'd want it. Mute any unused channels. Don't try to use
the EQ. You can use it a little bit, but it gets pretty nasty if you have
to cut more than just a little or boost at all, so the more control you have
elsewhere in the chain, the better.

From what I've read, using the subgroups (1-4) can be problematic, any
suggestions for getting a decent mix using them? I'd like to run the drum
mics (4) to a subgroup, but don't want to sacrafice signal quality.

I don't know. On the 1604VLZ, I found that the subgroups all sounded
slightly different.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Roger W. Norman" wrote

And there you go. When the chips are down and it's talent that makes
the
difference, then talent makes the difference.


I work with a guy who can get good mixes out of a Mackie. They still
have the Mackie's sonic signature all over them (or should I say
footprint?), but he receives constant praise for the sound he achieves.

I, sadly, lack that ability. I still stop and weigh the options when
presented with the choice of mixing on a Mackie or driving nails into my
eyes with a Hilti. I dunno how those guys do it.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)

"Roger W. Norman" wrote

And there you go. When the chips are down and it's talent that makes
the
difference, then talent makes the difference.


I work with a guy who can get good mixes out of a Mackie. They still
have the Mackie's sonic signature all over them (or should I say
footprint?), but he receives constant praise for the sound he achieves.

I, sadly, lack that ability. I still stop and weigh the options when
presented with the choice of mixing on a Mackie or driving nails into my
eyes with a Hilti. I dunno how those guys do it.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)