M7cl

[ashish.malaviya]

hie guys,

I have an m7cl 48 n planning to buy one more m7cl-48 ES for monitoring. now my Q is it possible to split the signal to both the consoles with putting some add on cards to normal 48 ch board.

 

 

 

 

Ashish

[SPTTRIAL]

Hi, I think what you need to do is to use the normal M7 onstage as the monitor mixer and stage inputs, get yourself a couple of ES cards, then use an m7cl-es as the FOH desk. then define a master desk to control gains, (monitor man usually has this control) then make the m7cl-es look at the inputs on the m7cl. I think that'll work.

[Wilflet]

surley you want to avoid sharing gains?

If your getting the ES you need t lay out for an ethersound stagebox anyway, why not have it made up with a multipin out s your existing multicore can take an analogue split and use the m7s own preamps, and the es takes the cat5 out. saves on getting expansion cards for the existing m7.

[SPTTRIAL]

Ah Wilflet, of course you are quite right, gain sharing is not ideal, so on m7 you can only have one desk allocated as a master gain control, however each M7 does have a digital trim available, so assuming that the monitor engineer keeps it clean, then FOH can use the digital trim as a suedo gain control to give or take 6db.

 

Also, by doing it this way you dont need to buy £8k's worth of stage box's or carry around heavy copper multiway and its splits, and im sure 2 ES cards and a bit of ether cable is much easier to carry around.

[mike7172]

as I think someone mentioned, with the m7cles you will need the sb168 digital line system,

if you are going to get the line system it would be wise to stick the ethersound card into your existing m7 and run the entire system on cat 5, although this will cost alot of money.

this way (already mentioned I think) you will be controlling gains from only one console which in most situations isnt ideal, and word clock syncing isnt particularly great with this setup, plus you have to set it up using yamaha's ethersound software which they aint made massively simple.

 

but it does save you the cost of a heavy and also expensive splitter system from someone like VDC.

 

hope this helps :huh:

[Simon Lewis]

The cost of the Ethersound cards for the monitor desk is quite significant. Having thought that an all Ethersound system must be the way to go, I am increasingly warming to the idea of a passive split, running monitors off one side, and sending the other side to the CAT5 multi. No problems with head amp gains etc....

[mike7172]

The cost of the Ethersound cards for the monitor desk is quite significant. Having thought that an all Ethersound system must be the way to go, I am increasingly warming to the idea of a passive split, running monitors off one side, and sending the other side to the CAT5 multi. No problems with head amp gains etc....

 

simon this is what we do currently, I think it works well however we are upgrading to a full cat5 system,

your right in saying though that headamp control is then limited to one console, if you have the same team of people constantly using the system you should be okay in doing it.

also the console which doesnt have headamp control is able to attenuate I believe.

[Shaggy]

The cost of the Ethersound cards for the monitor desk is quite significant. Having thought that an all Ethersound system must be the way to go, I am increasingly warming to the idea of a passive split, running monitors off one side, and sending the other side to the CAT5 multi. No problems with head amp gains etc....

 

simon this is what we do currently, I think it works well however we are upgrading to a full cat5 system,

your right in saying though that headamp control is then limited to one console, if you have the same team of people constantly using the system you should be okay in doing it.

also the console which doesnt have headamp control is able to attenuate I believe.

 

What are the benefits of this upgrade? Seems you just spend more money and end up with less functionality.

[mike7172]

shaggy I agree,

naturally the benefit we have as a hire company is that it frees up the splitter for other large format jobs,

and you need next to no cabling to run the system.

but your gain control is limited and also theres always the threat of IF something goes wrong in your network you need to edit the system using yamahas software mid-show.

also if your running monitors you are unable to run a redundant cat5 line which you can in ring mode with one console.

but all in all it works ok. training is definitely needed on the ether-sound software though, they have made it quite difficult.

[dougjm]

You can run ring mode with any number of devices on the network - in the past this has been an issue because like on my ES cards and my NX242-ES4s you only have 2 ES ethercons, so 1 in and 1 out. This means if you want to run ES monitor at the same time you can't as you set the system to ring mode, unplug the computer and plug in the last part of the ring - now you have redundancy but no ability to patch across the network or make adjustments to NX242s.

The M7CL-ES and newer ES enabled devices (like NX4x4-ES) have a 3rd ethernet socket to enable you to run ring mode and also run ES monitor at the same time.

I think I prefer the bidirectional mode but I'm considering an AuviTran AVRed-ES100 system to link FOH to stage.

Oh and I always take splits or a passive stage box to split FOH from monitors - I understand the theory of using the attenuation rather than HA control but I'd rather not.

[mike7172]

I understand the theory of using the attenuation rather than HA control but I'd rather not.

 

yeah its not ideal, plus on the digital system when you attenuate theres actually an audible stop, although very brief when you perform the attenuation!