ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Down

Author Topic: aux fed subs  (Read 10354 times)

Jay Barracato

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1901
  • Solomons, MD
Re: aux fed subs
« Reply #30 on: February 05, 2014, 07:55:25 am »

"Flat" is not the same as "linear."  Scovi also spends some time driving home that concept.  That the terms have been incorrectly used as synonyms makes that a task of re-education.

I guess I first stuck in "flat" when I meant "linear" but my mental picture includes a line that is higher at lower frequencies but with no hump as "flat", but honestly, just like with the post trying to define "Sub" as the lowest octave which may have worked when it was 50-100, but is different now that 30-60 is more common, I am more concerned with what a system does rather than what someone calls it.
Logged
Jay Barracato

Per Sovik

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 171
  • Sogn, Norway, Europe
Re: aux fed subs
« Reply #31 on: February 06, 2014, 06:14:28 am »

When I'm able to, I run "aux fed subs" for one reason only; to keep some microphones totally disconnected from the subs. What I run is more what one would call group fed subs, I send the channels that needs subs to a group, and feed the subs from that group.
Anything that goes to the subs will be as aligned (or not) as the system is, so there are no issues there.
The vocals and other non-sub instruments will go straight to the full range tops, so there is no lack of fullness if that's required.
I do crossover between subs and tops quite high when using "single hang" (no I don't have two line arrays, so most of the time it is single or double tops) mode, this to avoid working the tops hard in the lower register when they are to reproduce vocals.
It seems to work, only problem really is that most mixers I've seen doesn't let the Master fader control the 5-6 channels of separated output streams that my setup produces.
Logged

Jean-Pierre Coetzee

  • Classic LAB
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 688
  • Gauteng, South Africa
Re: aux fed subs
« Reply #32 on: February 06, 2014, 09:02:45 am »

When I'm able to, I run "aux fed subs" for one reason only; to keep some microphones totally disconnected from the subs. What I run is more what one would call group fed subs, I send the channels that needs subs to a group, and feed the subs from that group.
Anything that goes to the subs will be as aligned (or not) as the system is, so there are no issues there.
The vocals and other non-sub instruments will go straight to the full range tops, so there is no lack of fullness if that's required.
I do crossover between subs and tops quite high when using "single hang" (no I don't have two line arrays, so most of the time it is single or double tops) mode, this to avoid working the tops hard in the lower register when they are to reproduce vocals.
It seems to work, only problem really is that most mixers I've seen doesn't let the Master fader control the 5-6 channels of separated output streams that my setup produces.
Do something similar to this on the SC48 and I suppose most digital consoles. Mains on L+R and then Subs on mono... Assign what you need on the subs to mono and then everything else as well as that to L+R...

We crossover subs pretty low as well so that it just gives us punch and nothing more.
Logged
Audio Technician
Word & Life Church

"If you want "loud", then run a piece of sheet metal through a table saw------

If you want "watts"-then plug in a toaster"
- Ivan Beaver
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Up
 


Page created in 0.144 seconds with 21 queries.