Mixer Stereo Channels

[Peter Chivers]

Hi,

just to add my ha-pennorth (half penny-worth, for those not old enough :) ) depending what desk I am using, I always return sources such as FX returns through proper channels so that I have the option of being able to also route them into monitor sends. If the desk has suitable stereo channels I will usually use those, so as to leave mono channels available for other feeds. The aux return 'channels' often don't get used, unless it is for the house music.

 

In terms of your other question about what desks I use.... the simple answer is most! Two of the shows I tour with, use house PA systems wherever possible, so over the last two years I have used most of the desks on the market (including some which I didn't think existed outside a museum any longer :) ).

[dbuckley]

I think theres some confusion coming in here, between stereo channels, which are like mono channels in all respects (except limited EQ) but are stereo, and returns, which usually have next-to-no facilities, and have very limited usability, and as far as I can tell are primarily used to increase the apparent number of channels a desk has for marketing purposes.

[Ben Langfeld]

So I gather that the general consensus is that if a stereo input (as in a propper one as David mentioned) had all the same EQ and aux facilities as the mono channels, then most people wouldn't have a need to use mono channels to split stereo sources (excepting routing issues with theatre sound effects)? Why is it, then, that many stereo inputs have limited EQ?

[Bobbsy]

Easy. It's assumed that your source will have the correct sound without the need for EQ tweaks at the desk.

 

I must admit that I don't miss the extra EQ on stereo channels. I'm pedantic enough to want to make any necessary adjustments (again I'm talking theatre effects or music here) on the original wave file and leave the EQ on a stereo input flat anyway. Since I'm playing back my effects from a PC these days anyway, this is easy to achieve since I have a good audio editor installed on the same computer.

 

Bob

[Ben Langfeld]

That makes sense for playback, but not really for effects returns. Or do people not tend to have a problem with fitting effects into the mix (meaning live effects, not playback of effects)?

[timtheenchanteruk]

I use a Yamaha MG32/14FX for live theatre, and use the 4 stereos for CD playback, MD(SFX) playback, and a midiverb return, leaving one usually free.

 

I have had the need to separate stereo to two monos for voice-overs with music, using the MD unit as a simple 2 track, ie background music/FX on one channel, the actual V/O on the other, used this not long ago in one flew over the cuckoos nest, for the Chief Bromden "thoughts" and the producer wanted it all pre-recorded with strange noises/music in the background.

 

the desk doesn't even bother with EQ on the aux returns

[Rob_Beech]

First, a quote.

 

That's precisely what I was thinking. The same thing would apply to fx returns.

 

I am not sure I totally agree, usually with fx units there is some type of eq facility on the unit itself, that coupled with a more limited channel eq SHOULD be all you need.

 

 

Secondly, the routing. Whilst I understand it can be different for varying types of show, the stuff I usually deal with, people do not need reverb in the monitors, however when they do, the desk I use most often (Gl2800-832) has the ability to send the 2 stereo channels to each of the 10 aux.

 

 

Next, I use the stereo returns for fx returns and sometimes a DJ etc. If it is merely for background music or similar I shall also use a stereo channel for a CD or MD playback. However, this is where things do tend to differ. As Tim mentions above, sometimes with a 2 channel source such as a MD there is totally different content on each channel, it is of course designed to be played at the same time, but it may need to be adjusted separately, furthermore you may need different routing options on each channel. the prime example for this is a band playing to (or having included within the mix) a 2 channel click track on MD. the track will be played on one channel, and the click on the other, you will need the track playing to FOH (and whoever else may want it in monitor sends), plus any other outputs necessary, and the click routed different to whoever needs to hear it (usually drummers and keyboard players) often using IEM or headphones. Using a stereo input for this is of course not possible.

 

When a separate monitor board is involved things can get a little complicated, particularly with the above example.

 

Rob

[Dmills]

Why is it, then, that many stereo inputs have limited EQ?

 

Consider a standard swept mid of the sort found on most desks, it is typically implemented as a state variable filter, which typically needs two ganged variable resistors per channel for centre frequency control, two gang pots are standard, 4 gang are not!

I suspect that this is a large part of the reason, and probably dates from the days when a 6 channel 'WEM' was state of the art.

 

Obviously there is no longer an issue here with everything going digital, but this reason could still be the driver for the rather lacking stereo tone controls on the small analogue desks.

 

Regards, Dan.