I found its automatic circuitry to work quite well with only a single weakness. If a person wearing a wireless stood in front of the pulpit or Lectern and forgot to turn off their wireless the IRP would activate both channels and then reduce the master gain.
It seems your time should be worth more than you paid for some of those mixers.
This doesn't quite add up. With two mics picking up the same signal (roughly coherent ), the AM algorithm would have to turn down the master gain approximately 6 dB to get back to unity, so to perceive a drop in level seems unexpected. The more common complaint with wireless and lectern mics is comb filtering from slight arrival time differences. Is it possible that one of those two mics was inverted polarity? That could cause a more significant drop in level, when both mics are active.
I looked at both of those Lectrosonic patents and couldn't tell much from the claims. They seem overly focussed on detecting ambient room noise. I didn't realize AM were so cheap these days.
This was a project with some of the youth group kids, my time was well spent. I didn't say I heard a drop in level it just sounded less intelligible with both mics on and the master level reduced, undoubtedly due to comb filtering.
I am interested to know how Shure's unit which is otherwise pretty mediocre does this so well. it was able to gate on only a single unit for any single source every time.
Except the Shures. Why the market is putting a premium on those units over the totally superior Lectrosonics units makes no sense. I may repeat the experiment in the fall perhaps with an Ivie, an IED, and an EV. I know where there is a real Dugan perhaps I can borrow it for a test.
Dugan's original patent has expired to become public domain and free for all to use for more than a decade. So there are more "Dugan" algorithm mixers out there than just his namesake products. He is proud of his and they will cost more than your $200 budget, even used. JR
I prefer to use automixers to augment my existing mixing console, not replace it. I own and use a Shure SCM810 and find it much better to patch each mic normally into the console (leave them unassigned from any busses), then take the direct outputs into the automixer. Feed the automixer's main output back into the console, and you're almost done. I set my dip switches as follows:1 - Auto (unless I'm ringing out the mics)2 - Last Mic Lock ON3 - 0.4 seconds Hold Time4 - -15dB Off Attenuation Level5, 6 - Limiter OFF/BYPASSED7 - LocalFor SR, I have no problem with the unit…when recording, however, the gating and opening is much more noticeable. Fortunately, with my method of routing, I can choose to take the record feed from the automixed return or the individual mics as necessary. Plus, all my inserts are still usable…If you didn't try it that way, I think the SCM810 deserves another look, er…listen from you. Try it and let us know what you think.
...i fed the 48 channels of auto mix from a 48 channel Yamaha PM3500…
Page created in 0.196 seconds with 23 queries.