Summing - Nuts and Bolts

[ChrisW]

I'm aware of the concept and process etc, but a little shakey on the logistics.
So I have 8 outs on my Aurora. I would create 8 group channels (auxiliaries in Logic) and send them to the 8 ins on a Summing box. Then my two summing outputs go to 2 x mic/pres. Then where?...... into 2 inputs on my Aurora?
And where would they appear in my DAW? And would I then just 'bounce' to create a master stereo mix?
I can't figure out how it all connects up etc..

[lonearranger]

You would have 8 mono groups 4 stereo groups, or some combination of both. Going into mixer.

From there, yes take the output of your summing mixer back into a stereo in of Aurora, map this back to a new stereo track in logic (best to disconnect it from any outputs or groups or disable input monitoring). Record enable this track and hit record. This would then record everything coming back off the summing mixer.

You can then solo/bounce the captured track, or grab it straight out of the audio pool folder.

Cheers

[Alistair]

If you've got the spare outputs etc, it's best to actually monitor the stereo track you're printing to in the DAW. That way you can hear the track post sum, preamp gain if needed and ADC. I've gotten into the habit of setting that up first when I sit down to mix, and just listening off that the whole time. On my summing mixer I've got a handy little button that flicks between monitoring straight off the summing mixer, and monitoring a stereo AUX feed from the DAW- I've just set up the AUX feed to be what I'm recording off the summing mixer.

[ChrisW]

Ahhhh thanks.
I sort of never thought it would be a real time recording.
Makes more sense now.

Last question.
Do you have your DAW outputs going to the summing mixer all the time?
I kind of prefer to compose record without enhancements, so I work harder to get the best sounds, then set up a mix chain when I think I've finished the track.
I think this method would mean unplugging the Aurora from the summing box and back into my basic patchbay?

[Alistair]

Personally I run Outputs of DAC into patchbay, half normalled into inputs of summing mixer.
That way, if I don't want to touch them, they route straight into the sum, if I want to add outboard (with no latency/F@#$ing around- the reason I got a summing mixer!) I can patch it in, and then continue into the summing mixer, and if I want to print outboard on tracks, I run out outputs->outboard->inputs of my converters (on another patchbay). I can also run a Y-cable from the outboard into both the input of the converters and of the summing mixer if I want to print both- for example print the mix, and also print all the individuals parts if I think it will need changes later. You need a lot of Y-cables though!


Did that make sense? it looks like a dense paragraph.

[Alistair]

And for your question just before- just run all your tracks into the summing mixer, and you can leave them going down one stereo pair/or branch them out etc- that way there is no 'effect', you're just monitoring them through the summing mixer.
If you're worried about make up gain/preamps affecting things- wire things up to a patchbay so you can quickly flip around.

[ChrisW]

Thanks.

[DwaneHollands]

Personally I run Outputs of DAC into patchbay, half normalled into inputs of summing mixer.
That way, if I don't want to touch them, they route straight into the sum, if I want to add outboard (with no latency/F@#$ing around- the reason I got a summing mixer!) I can patch it in, and then continue into the summing mixer, and if I want to print outboard on tracks, I run out outputs->outboard->inputs of my converters (on another patchbay). I can also run a Y-cable from the outboard into both the input of the converters and of the summing mixer if I want to print both- for example print the mix, and also print all the individuals parts if I think it will need changes later. You need a lot of Y-cables though!


Did that make sense? it looks like a dense paragraph.

Hey Alistair!

thanks for this post - yes it was a dense paragraph - so I carefully read it to make sure I understood it well. That's a great setup! I only have 6 outs, so not ideal for summing, but I have my 8 outs (2 for monitors) patched into patch bay. Then i patch to wherever.

I think Im ready (being a little grasshopper) to move onto more advanced stuff with the patchbay! When you do the half-normalled setup that takes one input and makes two outputs right? so you can do a poor mans parrallel processing if you have more inputs on your summing mixer than outputs on your interface.

send 2 out of interface>patchbay half normal>

> one set to passive mix (Pan L & R)
> second set to comp>passive mix (pan L & R)

use output gain on comp to blend dry|wet.

It's time I upgrade my I/O so I'm saving for a Lynx Aurora 16/USB-Lt etc.

that'll give me 14 outs to work with (2 for monitoring again).

Did I make any sense?

Ok, actually if the above is true I have a question.

Q. when you use half-normal does it split the signal strength in half? Or give you two signals at the same strength as if it were simply directly connected to one device.

[ChrisW]

I've got to admit I only have a cheap DBX patchbay.
It came half normalled, but I was having so many issues figuring it all out, exacerbated by the odd dodgy loom and malfunctioning hardware unit, I stripped it out and de-normalled the whole thing. It's been working a treat ever since.
I'll look through the advice above repeatedly however.

So what summing units are people using/liking?

[DwaneHollands]

Well, you will probably find more than one fan here of Rob's Passive Mix.

http://www.broadcastproaudio.com/passive_mix.htm

I believe Rick and Chris Townsend were saying its really big sounding. I bought mine because it was really the best value. I have a TRS 16 channel. But there are DSUB versions now.

[tunetown]

I run the API DSM24 http://www.apiaudio.com/dsm.html . It gives me 24 channels and has the API2500 comp on the master bus. I re-record back into Nuendo or Protools via the patchbay but also bounce to Korg DSD MR1000.

It's a sweet system.

[The Tasmanian]

I could not recommend them any higher.
Pure signal path, built like a tank - they will outlast you and your grandchildren

[ChrisW]

^^API or Proharmonic Chris? ^^

How much is the Proharmonic (Rob's)?
No price on his site or Front End/Mixmasters.

[Alistair]

Hey Dwayne-

Yeah, you're sorta correct. I don't think of half-normalling as setting up two outputs, but you can use it like that. All it means is that the signal from a top jack is automatically connected to the jack beneath it, unless you plug something into the bottom jack, which will override it. This does mean you can split a signal by just patching out of the top jack, and then leaving the bottom jack open. You can definitely do parallel stuff like this, but you might find it a total pain to adjust levels- every time you turn down or up the 'dry' channel, you're going to have a big effect on the wet.

I'm using an Audient Sumo summing mixer at the moment. It's ok, and does a hell of a lot for the price (rudimentary monitoring control, 16 channels, SSL style buss comp, AD conversion), but it's got a few areas I wouldn't mind improving (namely the AD conversion). I also find the lack of pan controls pretty frustrating, but that seems to be common across a lot of units.

[The Tasmanian]

Not the API
They have dodgy panning/bleed stuff going on - pan a sound hard left and there is bleed into right, all sorts of panning stereo image problems - I'm sure they would sound great, but this is a real problem for some who have bought them.

Robs box is as simple a signal path that you can get - no chips, no garbage to affect your audio.
Once you add a pan control, there is a sonic compromise.
Made in Australia.

[Alistair]

Once you add a pan control, there is a sonic compromise.

I know, I've heard you mention this before and read up on it. I like panning though!

Oh and Dwayne- as it was explained to me, sending the signal to more than one place will have very little effect on it. I think certain types of signals would be affected, but a line level, balanced signal is pretty robust and you'd have to send it a lot of places before there was a noticeable difference in level/quality.

[tunetown]

I've never experienced that problem Chris. In fact this is the first time i've even heard of it. Where have you heard this and can you point me there?? I might be able to help if it's a configuration thing. Was this with the full DSM system or just the 8200 summing amps?

Cheers

[ChrisW]

Made in Australia.

Definitely good to support local industries and entrepreneurs.
I was looking at the Nicerizer (I'm a UK national ).
The one extra benefit it has is monitoring options, like a headphone out.
I presume it's a $thousand or two more expensive than Rob's.

[The Tasmanian]

With both the summing box 8200A and the 1608. (not sure if the issue exists on the 8200 - non A)
I have read a quite a few posts about this in the past - tried to find all the posts, but all I could find was this info on the summing box:
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much- ... mixer.html

But I did also read from somewhere else that a few mixers in mix sessions were having the same problem with the 1608 - the panning was vague for a start, and then there is the crosstalk issue, It created huge issues that were eventually sorted by mixing on another console as the artist, producer and engineers all thought that when panning in between LCR - the image was really vague.

Don't get me wrong - I am a HUGE API fan.
Its just on these particular pieces of gear there is serious panning/crosstalk problems.
Robs box (and the Folcrom) have switched panning - nothing can bleed as its basically pure wire
Passive summing is the way to go - using 2 pre's for makeup gain and you would never encounter these problems.

I'm sure there are other great summing boxes that are not passive.

[Alistair]

Wow, strange thread. Paul Wolf is a dick! Still, I'm sure the unit sounds great- very jealous Pete.

[The Tasmanian]

Another set-up to consider:
Passive mix bus and a passive Coleman monitor switcher.
The Coleman will give you 3 speaker selectors, proper mono (IE mono on one side) & great headphone amp.
You will get a great clean passive set-up for under $2k AU.

[tunetown]

It must be an 8200A thing. I use 3 x 8200's and all are connected to the 7800 master section. Absolutely no crosstalk or panning issues. I also have 2 x 7600 channel strips connected to the same master. I recon it's an awesome setup but I would say that.

[rick]

every pan pot that works outside digital realm is a compromise to some degree
always has been - you cannot fight the reality of it

robs hard left right switch is the best no compromise way

that said some console manufactuers get the normal pan pot pretty damn right - some dont

the chandler mixer i tried once was a piece of shit in that regard

no idea about the api mixer stuff i never tried one
it looks great though

[NathS101]

what's everyone using for make up gain with their passive summing mixers?
I've been using a pair of vintech X73i pres but considering a pair of JLM dual99v pres instead...
nath

[DwaneHollands]

Hey Alistair!

Thanks for that! I'll have to start experimenting with that. Good news about the robustness of the balanced signal too. I didn't realise that!

I'm thinking one application could be using the API 512 as a DI for guitar and sending one output into DAW for recording the dry guitar signal for later re-amping and then use the other for putting into the front of an amp for fold back while tracking.

(EDIT: I'd have to use the re-amp interface inbetween the DI and the guitar amp of course)

[rob]

i just fell over this discussion. Thanks for the thumbs up for the Broadcast Passive Mix. I've been having some email communication with Chris about this unit and incorporating it into a workflow setup. This raises the concept that I've been thinking about for a while now but keep getting distracted from by the daily thrust and parry in the workshop.
That is a Passive Mix with built in passive monitor control, metering and headphone amp. Once the lid gets lifted on this concept then its easy to get carried away with all sorts of bells and whistles. In built makeup gain amps, insert points, mid side processing blah blah. But having been inside the Nicerizer and the Chandler and having run my probes over them I wonder if things like this have missed the point. To me the point seems to be a totally passive, short, straight wire path, leaving the euphonics outside the box in the hands of the operator. So i return to the expanded Passive Mixer with monitoring with the simple all passive concept intact.
Here's a question, if such a box was a rack mount 2U case how annoying would it be if the monitor volume control was on the front of this box? If the unit is mounted in your rack, you'd have to reach over to adjust the listening volume...or would you work around this? I know what Cranesong have done, but we are talking an entirely different price point here that doesn't allow for remote control.
Hell, I might just have to build one and see what happens.... who wants the prototype?

[The Tasmanian]

Rob - I think that your unit already needs to be close to the mix position for panning tweeks - so to me, having it all in one with a good price point is a winner.
I was going to get a Colman passive monitor selector with headphone amp which are pretty popular overseas. (and Ive used them here)
Again - this box needs to be close by - and is rack mounted, so I think your idea is a goer.
But it would have to have 3 speaker selectors and a mono switch + headphone amp to kill all the competition!
I could be a guinea pig?

[The Tasmanian]

AND - if you could keep your link cable feature so that one could add a passive mix to the new version, one could have 32 channels of mix bus (and I could patch/add my existing 16 unit to the new one!)

[Barney Loveland]

What about a summing box with auxes 1 or 2? I have a summing box but am thinking of adding a passive summing box for drums but would like auxes.

Or I suppose you could mult it from the patchbay, but auxes would be preferable. Any thoughts?

[The Tasmanian]

Barney - I really think the whole point is this after the auxes - otherwise it starts to become a mixer, and then you need gain/pots for the auxes, etc - then the price rises way up