ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Another LS9 question  (Read 3434 times)

John Roll

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 207
Another LS9 question
« on: May 31, 2007, 09:31:06 am »

When I was working on my analog console, I would send the vocal channels to a subgroup and compress them there in order not to place compression on the individual channels and what is sent to the monitors. On the LS9 my assumption is that I will send the vox channels to a mix, compress there, then send to the main mix. Does anyone have a better way to do this?
Logged

Tim McCulloch

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 0
Re: Another LS9 question
« Reply #1 on: May 31, 2007, 10:31:10 am »

John Roll wrote on Thu, 31 May 2007 08:31

When I was working on my analog console, I would send the vocal channels to a subgroup and compress them there in order not to place compression on the individual channels and what is sent to the monitors. On the LS9 my assumption is that I will send the vox channels to a mix, compress there, then send to the main mix. Does anyone have a better way to do this?


You can assign the "input" of multiple channels to come from a single physical "port" and route the outputs of those channels any way you want.

A common way to avoid compressing the monitor send is to use inputs 33-64 for the monitors, taking their inputs from input ports 1-32.  The only control shared between them is the mic pre (head amp, in Yammy-speak).  You'll have independent dynamics and input strip EQ and even FX for the monitors if you desire.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
Logged
"Will you stand by me against the cold night, or are you afraid of the ice?" Crack The Sky

Rick Stansby

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2401
Re: Another LS9 question
« Reply #2 on: May 31, 2007, 01:15:29 pm »

As Tim says, double routing the inputs to the second layer is a great way to keep the FOH dynamics and eq out of the monitors.  It's almost like you get a free monitor board and splitter with each LS9.  

There is also another way which is simpler, but less powerful.  On the "mix bus setup" screen you can set pairs of mixes to be "Vari Pre-eq"   This will make the pre-fade source for those Aux sends come from just before the EQ, after the HPF.  This arrangement is similar to many internal jumpers in analog sound boards which allow you to change the source of the Pre-Fade aux sends.  This method might be better, depending on what you are used to, and how familiar you are with the LS9 and the use of layers.  Of course you will lose the ability to use channel eq and dynamics in the monitors.

When I first got the board I was all gung ho to use the dual layers for monitors.  I was OK with it, but not great.  I went back to the easier method while I got my head around using the board.  Now I have switched back to the dual layer scenario.  
Logged
Rick

John Roll

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 207
Re: Another LS9 question
« Reply #3 on: May 31, 2007, 04:48:34 pm »

I was hoping to use compression on all the vocals instead of individual channels, hence my "assigning to a mix" idea. I'm new to this board and until I get my head around it, I want the layout to mimic the analog console as closely as is possible/practical. I usually do multi act shows where having individual comps on vocals isn't practical. Most of the acts have a lead vocal and one to three backups, with no one but the lead, singing lead. I'm still exploring this new toy. Right now, it's sitting on my kitchen table with the manual next to it. Every chance I get, I sit down and play. I realize the test of fire will come in a live situation. I just want my first show with it not to be a horrible experience. Thanks for the input.
Logged

Jake Scudder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1395
    • http://www.jakescudder.com
Re: Another LS9 question
« Reply #4 on: May 31, 2007, 05:24:21 pm »

Yes John, you can treat a mix like an analog subgroup and then route it to a matrix or to stereo.
Logged
Website: http://www.jakescudder.com

480.262.7742

Tim Padrick

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5008
Re: Another LS9 question
« Reply #5 on: June 01, 2007, 12:06:05 am »

Take advantage of all those compressors.  Individual comps allow you to get the blend right.  When you comp them all together the loudest vocalist is the one that triggers the comp, which messes up the blend.

John Roll

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 207
Re: Another LS9 question
« Reply #6 on: June 01, 2007, 04:31:12 pm »

Good point, Tim. The mindset is a carryover from the analog rack limitations. I might have to re-think my strategy on this. Thanks.
Logged

George Gleason

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
Re: Another LS9 question
« Reply #7 on: June 04, 2007, 09:30:26 am »

Thanks Tim
This is my intent
dual layers ,one Foh, one monitors
then mix foh via wireless ethernet

I take delivery of my ls9-32 in a few hours and I am "very excited"
we there any"gottcha's" I should be aware of when setting this up?

Also is Studio Manager only fully functioning when its hooked to the desk?
I have been pokeing around in SM and it does not seem to respond the way i "expect"

Thanks
George
Logged

Dave Dermont

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2011
    • http://www.geocities.com/livesound101/
Re: Another LS9 question
« Reply #8 on: June 04, 2007, 11:14:46 am »

Tim Padrick wrote on Fri, 01 June 2007 00:06

Take advantage of all those compressors.  Individual comps allow you to get the blend right.  When you comp them all together the loudest vocalist is the one that triggers the comp, which messes up the blend.



Hmmm...

The overall signal level is what triggers the comp, but the entire signal is attenuated by the compressor.

How does this "mess up the blend"?

It would seem to me that compression of individual vocal channels would be more prone to do this by squashing the louder vocals more.

I don't have much problem compressing the vocals as a group, but I usually use parallel compression for vocals.

I find that when mixing, listening really helps.
Logged
Dave Dermont - Chief Lizard, LAB Lounge

WARNING: Dates In Calendar May Be Closer Than They Appear

Scott Helmke (Scodiddly)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1636
Re: Another LS9 question
« Reply #9 on: June 04, 2007, 06:27:53 pm »

George Gleason wrote on Mon, 04 June 2007 08:30


Also is Studio Manager only fully functioning when its hooked to the desk?
I have been pokeing around in SM and it does not seem to respond the way i "expect"


Studio Manager doesn't do absolutely every function of the LS9, whether or not connected.  One feature that it's missing is the ability to tweak the output port settings - delay, etc.
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 14 queries.