Sound Art Film Posted April 5, 2014 Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 Hey all, I have a potential gig coming up and I was thinking to incorporate my Mackie Onyx 1620 to provide a mix track to the 788. Here is how I have the routing in my head for now: 788 Inputs 1-6 -> ISO -> 788 Outputs 1-6 -> Mackie inputs 1-6 -> Mackie main mix Outputs -> 788 Inputs 7-8, routed to Mix tracks. I am curious if there will be any noticeable delay between the ISO tracks and the Mix tracks on the 788 due to D/A - A/D conversion. If anyone that has done this workflow can chime in that would be great. It'll save me some time setting it all up for now. Thanks! Paul, SAF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted April 5, 2014 Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 workflow test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sound Art Film Posted April 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 workflow test. Indeed Mike, as I would never go to a gig without trying something new first beforehand. Before I set everything up though,perhaps someone has done this before and can chime in on any noticeable delay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 I have recorded this way from an external mixer and had no noticeable delay. I'd say at best, it'll be a couple of milliseconds. As long as the final mix does not combine the mix track and the isos at the same time (which would make no sense anyway), there should be no issue. My opinion, BTW, is that the mix track should just be Channel 1 (mono) and the other tracks should all be isos. That's pretty typical for the film/TV business, but I would talk to the post crew and in particular the editor and ask what they prefer. I've never, ever had anybody like or want tracks 7 or 8 for the mix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 Why not have your sources go to the Mackie, send mix to 788T input one and direct outs from Mackie go to remainining inputs on the 788T. That's typically how it's done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean ONeil Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 Why not have your sources go to the Mackie, send mix to 788T input one and direct outs from Mackie go to remainining inputs on the 788T. That's typically how it's done. + 1 And it avoids your initial delay query / conundrum. Cheers, Sean O'Neil Brooklyn NYC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundtrane Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 Why not have your sources go to the Mackie, send mix to 788T input one and direct outs from Mackie go to remainining inputs on the 788T. That's typically how it's done. maybe because the 788T pres are better than the Mackie? just a thought... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 I'm guessing his six inputs are line level from wireless. I doubt mic pres will have any impact here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sound Art Film Posted April 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 Thanks for all your valuable advice. I had the routing setup like that because the pres on the 788 are generally better than the Mackie's. However, Robert does bring up a good point that most of the inputs will be wireless and have a line level output. There will be 1 boom in play too. If I had a single pre amp such as a MM1, then I'd use that for the boom op and go with the Mackie as the front end outputting to the 788. Do you guys think it's worth renting a separate preamp for the boom, compared to just going with the irregular, but functional routing setup? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundtrane Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 I'm guessing his six inputs are line level from wireless. I doubt mic pres will have any impact here. well, then... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundtrane Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 Do you guys think it's worth renting a separate preamp for the boom, compared to just going with the irregular, but functional routing setup? imho - guess not, unless you are recording Perlman in a studio... guess you are going to be out in the big bad world... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 I think you'll find the pres on the 1620 to be just fine. But if you expect the boom to be your primary source of material, and you expect the performances to be "unpredictable", then use the mm1 or 302 as a quality pre with great limiters (which the 1620 doesn't have and the 788T has but lacks in quality). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sound Art Film Posted April 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 Great. I haven't listened to the Mackie pres in a while (years) so maybe I have an inaccurate recollection of how they sound. I'll set it all up later and give it whirl. Thanks once again for all the good advice! Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 If you're going line in, use the 1/4" inputs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sound Art Film Posted April 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 Yep, exactly Robert. It sucks I can't use the xlr inputs and just enable line in with a button. Other than using the direct (insert outs) it looks like I can use the DB25 1-8 output and avoid making up a bunch if cables. I'd be loosing out on the low cut using this option though whereas direct out gives me that option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 Hmmm... I think the Mackie pre-fade outputs (either "1 click" direct outputs or DB25) are post low cut and pre fader/EQ. Check the diagrams. The 1/4" inputs do not bypass the pres, if I recall. They simply attenuate the input somewhat so you can have better control over the gain by keeping it nearer unity. If you go in XLR, you can attenuate your receivers to the same effect. I have 8x 3ft 1/4" TS to XLR(m) as Mackie direct out cables, if you're interested. Neutrik connectors and Canare cable. I used them when I was on a Mackie 1642. I also have a four short XLR(f) to TA3 Sound Devices input cables for 788T. If you're still interested in the B22 HM, perhaps we can make a deal on the bunch. Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sound Art Film Posted April 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 Thanks for the offer Robert. I decided to go with the first version, 788t outputting to Mackie, then back to 788 for mix track. A few things swayed me back to that method: 1. I don't trust the insert (direct) outs of the mackie. The fact that I have a 1/4 plug only 1 click in is not much faith for ensuring I get my iso recorded. I noticed I had to fuddle around with the 1/4 because sometimes I would just loose the feed if slightly nudged or jarred. I think the DB25 would be the best way to go if I wanted the mackie to be the front end of the recorder. 2. The mackie does not have limiters. Although the 788 limiters are definitely not the greatest, at least it's something. 3. For what it's worth, the pre amps on the 788 are a little more transparent than the mackie's. Not a deal breaker, but to these ears, I do hear a slight difference. Marc was just about right on when it comes to the delay. Imported into Pro Tools, I see 3ms delay between the ISO and Mix track. No problem at all with sync. Thanks for all your help! Best, Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomBoisseau Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 Thanks for the offer Robert. I decided to go with the first version, 788t outputting to Mackie, then back to 788 for mix track. A few things swayed me back to that method: 1. I don't trust the insert (direct) outs of the mackie. The fact that I have a 1/4 plug only 1 click in is not much faith for ensuring I get my iso recorded. I noticed I had to fuddle around with the 1/4 because sometimes I would just loose the feed if slightly nudged or jarred. I think the DB25 would be the best way to go if I wanted the mackie to be the front end of the recorder. 2. The mackie does not have limiters. Although the 788 limiters are definitely not the greatest, at least it's something. 3. For what it's worth, the pre amps on the 788 are a little more transparent than the mackie's. Not a deal breaker, but to these ears, I do hear a slight difference. Marc was just about right on when it comes to the delay. Imported into Pro Tools, I see 3ms delay between the ISO and Mix track. No problem at all with sync. Thanks for all your help! Best, Paul Paul, I'm not challenging your conclusion, but do you realize that you can build a custom snake to make use of the inserts that you can push ALL the way in to get direct outs? You probably already know this, but all you need to is connect the tip and the ring together on a 1/4" plug and that will give you your direct out, if you push it all the way in, without interrupting the insert on the Mackie. Then just tap the signal "+" from the tip/ring and the signal "ground" from the sleeve. Of course it will still be unbalanced, but its line level, and you're probably only sending it a few feet anyway so it really would not likely be a problem. Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 I did a movie dragging my cart around the villages and refugee camps of the Republic of Georgia. And several other films too on location. Never lost an ISO with 1/2 click in place. But I get that some people are nervous about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sound Art Film Posted April 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 That's great information to know Tom. I ask though, wouldn't it be more time/cost efficient to just buy a DB25 - XLRM? I looked at the diagram again and the only thing that is missing would be the low cut compared to the insert outs. Am I missing anything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomBoisseau Posted April 9, 2014 Report Share Posted April 9, 2014 I'm not very familiar with the Mackie Onyx 1620, however I agree the DB25's make so much sense, not only because they are balanced, but also the fact that that is what they are designed for (true direct outs) and that it is a quick disconnect! Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 SAF: "Do you guys think it's worth renting a... " that is difficult to say, and it depends on your subjective opinion. " I'll set it all up later and give it whirl. " that would be a workflow test.. " It sucks " get used to it... " avoid making up a bunch if cables " give me a break... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.279748a58a2b862b7aa5f3b84126e232.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.