Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

matrix mixer

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 10:45:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I have an 8 member band that uses 12 instruments. We want to move up to "in
ear monitoring" with each member having their own personalized (stereo) mix.

My board only has 2 aux prefader sends - which doens't help at all.

Looked at several systems by Hear Back, Aviom, Auxpander (shure), etc.
Expensive or won't really do the intended job.

Does anyone know of 16 X 8 (stereo) matrix mixer or have some plans for
building one? I've looked at some chips but my electronics is limited and
I'm not quite shure what I'm doing especially regarding panning left and
right. I have the time and with a schematic I know I could turn something
out.

Chip I was looking at was a fairchild 7000D

TIA,

Andy

More about : matrix mixer

Anonymous
August 20, 2004 2:05:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <y6hVc.289692$%_6.187565@attbi_s01>,
Andrew P. Follett <apfoll@comcast.net> wrote:
>I have an 8 member band that uses 12 instruments. We want to move up to "in
>ear monitoring" with each member having their own personalized (stereo) mix.
>
>My board only has 2 aux prefader sends - which doens't help at all.
>
>Looked at several systems by Hear Back, Aviom, Auxpander (shure), etc.
>Expensive or won't really do the intended job.
>
>Does anyone know of 16 X 8 (stereo) matrix mixer or have some plans for
>building one? I've looked at some chips but my electronics is limited and
>I'm not quite shure what I'm doing especially regarding panning left and
>right. I have the time and with a schematic I know I could turn something
>out.

The Q-Mix is a cheap one. And Crest makes one that is expensive, but probably
not as expensive as the stuff you have seen. It is modular and comes with
individual 1U channel strips.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 4:12:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Andrew P. Follett wrote:

> I have an 8 member band that uses 12 instruments. We want to move up to "in
> ear monitoring" with each member having their own personalized (stereo) mix.
>
> My board only has 2 aux prefader sends - which doens't help at all.

If you have a monitor guy (or want to manage the mix from stageside while your FOH guy does his thing out front,) you might look into the Crest XRM <http://www.crestaudio.com/products/xrackseries/xrm.cfm&...;

If you want to replace your console, you might look at the new (not quite shipping yet) Mackie Onyx 1640, which has six aux sends. <http://mackie.com/products/onyx1640/&gt;
Related resources
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 6:41:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Andrew P. Follett" <apfoll@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:y6hVc.289692$%_6.187565@attbi_s01...
> Does anyone know of 16 X 8 (stereo) matrix mixer or have some plans for
> building one? I've looked at some chips but my electronics is limited and
> I'm not quite shure what I'm doing especially regarding panning left and
> right. I have the time and with a schematic I know I could turn something
> out.

First, I think that 8 members with their own individual stereo mix is a
little overkill for live work. Better to have a couple of basic stereo
mixes that fit most of the bill and then a couple of extra mixes that
"spotlight" someone, but that's up to you. Personally a general stereo mix
with the bass/drums having a little more me is reasonable, although if the
desire means inexpensive, it could also mean that the more me is mono left
or mono right, depending on how you arrange it and that can be confusing.

Mike mentioned the Oz Audio, and it's pretty nice with a stereo general mix
and 6 individual (4 "more me" inputs per headphone output) controls, which
could easily feed wireless in ear monitoring. I've even worked with Akai
wireless headphones that have adjustable reception ranges that have enough
space for three full mixes to any number of headsets tuned to the
"in-between" broadcast frequencies.. I assume this wouldn't freak any
wireless systems assuming one can set specifics for each IEM set.

Besides, as a band, it seems to me that listening to highly individualized
monitor mixes with IE monitoring can somewhat isolate the specific
individual from the sound of the band. They might play great but not notice
the nuance of band interaction. I found in one of my last setups to try to
use multiple individualized mix monitoring that most of the band simply
ignored the cans and went with the live stage sound. Unless you have maybe
about $5000 it might be best to cut your requirements to the basics.
Bass/Drums with a general stereo mix (more me for bass and drums),
guitar/keys with a general bass/drum stereo mix (more me for guitar/keys),
and a couple of 'more me' mixes for vocalists, all which could be done with
a couple of Oz Audio Q-Mix units for about $239 each. How you can arrange
it with what you currently have is beyond me, and you didn't mention dollars
involved, but just having the functional capabilities of getting in-ear
monitoring with the matrixing you want doesn't discuss the absolute
necessity of providing guaranteed feedback control on your systems. Believe
me, you don't want to be sticking monitors in someone's ears and then have
98 dB of 1 kHz feedback being pumped to them.

Personally, I don't think you're there yet unless you are looking at
expanding your current system to provide the means to output the matrix in
the first place. Getting that matrix output to the IEMs is easy. OR, if
you have inserts on your inputs, and don't use them for effects or
compression, et al, then you could have your matrix from that with what I've
described above. But someone responsible for the volume won't be able to
see the ears bleeding!

--
-----------

Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio



> I have an 8 member band that uses 12 instruments. We want to move up to
"in
> ear monitoring" with each member having their own personalized (stereo)
mix.
>
> My board only has 2 aux prefader sends - which doens't help at all.
>
> Looked at several systems by Hear Back, Aviom, Auxpander (shure), etc.
> Expensive or won't really do the intended job.
>
>
> Chip I was looking at was a fairchild 7000D
>
> TIA,
>
> Andy
>
>
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 9:15:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Andrew P. Follett" <apfoll@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:y6hVc.289692$%_6.187565@attbi_s01...
> I have an 8 member band that uses 12 instruments. We want to move up to
"in
> ear monitoring" with each member having their own personalized (stereo)
mix.
>
> My board only has 2 aux prefader sends - which doens't help at all.
>
> Looked at several systems by Hear Back, Aviom, Auxpander (shure), etc.
> Expensive or won't really do the intended job.
>
> Does anyone know of 16 X 8 (stereo) matrix mixer or have some plans for
> building one? I've looked at some chips but my electronics is limited and
> I'm not quite shure what I'm doing especially regarding panning left and
> right. I have the time and with a schematic I know I could turn something
> out.
>
> Chip I was looking at was a fairchild 7000D
>
> TIA,

How keen were you ? I have a kit Matrix system under development It was
intended as a standard Matrix and is therefore x channels in (depends on the
number of modules) to multiples of 4 (again depends on number of modules)
out. iow it has mono outputs so you could use two outputs per band member.

I could probably do a Stereo version but that would take some time ....

Regards
Richard Freeman
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 9:15:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Richard Freeman" <Nospam@diespammerscum.com> wrote in message
news:2olmmjFbtq81U1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> "Andrew P. Follett" <apfoll@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:y6hVc.289692$%_6.187565@attbi_s01...
> > I have an 8 member band that uses 12 instruments. We want to move up to
> "in
> > ear monitoring" with each member having their own personalized (stereo)
> mix.
> >
> > My board only has 2 aux prefader sends - which doens't help at all.
> >
> > Looked at several systems by Hear Back, Aviom, Auxpander (shure), etc.
> > Expensive or won't really do the intended job.
> >
> > Does anyone know of 16 X 8 (stereo) matrix mixer or have some plans for
> > building one? I've looked at some chips but my electronics is limited
and
> > I'm not quite shure what I'm doing especially regarding panning left and
> > right. I have the time and with a schematic I know I could turn
something
> > out.
> >
> > Chip I was looking at was a fairchild 7000D
> >
> > TIA,
>
> How keen were you ? I have a kit Matrix system under development It was
> intended as a standard Matrix and is therefore x channels in (depends on
the
> number of modules) to multiples of 4 (again depends on number of modules)
> out. iow it has mono outputs so you could use two outputs per band member.
>
> I could probably do a Stereo version but that would take some time ....
>
> Regards
> Richard Freeman
>
>
>
>
We are ready to go on this project. Would like it by November if possible.
What did you have in mind costwise?

Andy Follett
Anonymous
August 21, 2004 7:00:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Roger W. Norman" <Roger@SirMusicStudio.com> wrote in message
news:412645be$0$21737$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> "Andrew P. Follett" <apfoll@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:y6hVc.289692$%_6.187565@attbi_s01...
> > Does anyone know of 16 X 8 (stereo) matrix mixer or have some plans for
> > building one? I've looked at some chips but my electronics is limited
and
> > I'm not quite shure what I'm doing especially regarding panning left and
> > right. I have the time and with a schematic I know I could turn
something
> > out.
>
> First, I think that 8 members with their own individual stereo mix is a
> little overkill for live work. Better to have a couple of basic stereo
> mixes that fit most of the bill and then a couple of extra mixes that
> "spotlight" someone, but that's up to you. Personally a general stereo
mix
> with the bass/drums having a little more me is reasonable, although if the
> desire means inexpensive, it could also mean that the more me is mono left
> or mono right, depending on how you arrange it and that can be confusing.
>
> Mike mentioned the Oz Audio, and it's pretty nice with a stereo general
mix
> and 6 individual (4 "more me" inputs per headphone output) controls,
which
> could easily feed wireless in ear monitoring. I've even worked with Akai
> wireless headphones that have adjustable reception ranges that have enough
> space for three full mixes to any number of headsets tuned to the
> "in-between" broadcast frequencies.. I assume this wouldn't freak any
> wireless systems assuming one can set specifics for each IEM set.
>
> Besides, as a band, it seems to me that listening to highly individualized
> monitor mixes with IE monitoring can somewhat isolate the specific
> individual from the sound of the band. They might play great but not
notice
> the nuance of band interaction. I found in one of my last setups to try
to
> use multiple individualized mix monitoring that most of the band simply
> ignored the cans and went with the live stage sound. Unless you have
maybe
> about $5000 it might be best to cut your requirements to the basics.
> Bass/Drums with a general stereo mix (more me for bass and drums),
> guitar/keys with a general bass/drum stereo mix (more me for guitar/keys),
> and a couple of 'more me' mixes for vocalists, all which could be done
with
> a couple of Oz Audio Q-Mix units for about $239 each. How you can arrange
> it with what you currently have is beyond me, and you didn't mention
dollars
> involved, but just having the functional capabilities of getting in-ear
> monitoring with the matrixing you want doesn't discuss the absolute
> necessity of providing guaranteed feedback control on your systems.
Believe
> me, you don't want to be sticking monitors in someone's ears and then have
> 98 dB of 1 kHz feedback being pumped to them.
>
> Personally, I don't think you're there yet unless you are looking at
> expanding your current system to provide the means to output the matrix in
> the first place. Getting that matrix output to the IEMs is easy. OR, if
> you have inserts on your inputs, and don't use them for effects or
> compression, et al, then you could have your matrix from that with what
I've
> described above. But someone responsible for the volume won't be able to
> see the ears bleeding!
>
> --
> -----------
>
> Roger W. Norman
> SirMusic Studio
>
>
>
> > I have an 8 member band that uses 12 instruments. We want to move up to
> "in
> > ear monitoring" with each member having their own personalized (stereo)
> mix.
> >
> > My board only has 2 aux prefader sends - which doens't help at all.
> >
> > Looked at several systems by Hear Back, Aviom, Auxpander (shure), etc.
> > Expensive or won't really do the intended job.
> >
> >
> > Chip I was looking at was a fairchild 7000D
> >
> > TIA,
> >
> > Andy
> >
> >
>
>
Right now we just have two floor monitors sitting in front of the band.
They work OK but there's not enough coverage for 8 people. Instead of
buying more floor monitors (to haul around and power) we want to go with the
IEMs.

We had "resigned" ourselves to spending $4000 or go really cheap with a
couple of Samson 4 channel headphone monitors, one generic mix, and some
rolls PM350 "more me and more my instrument" boxes.

I think that's where we will end up.

I really wanted to go stereo for the sound and because you can turn down the
total volume as your brain does a better job of "hearing" separated
channels.

Thanks for all the input.

Andy
Anonymous
August 21, 2004 12:17:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:45:50 GMT, "Andrew P. Follett"
<apfoll@comcast.net> wrote:

>I have an 8 member band that uses 12 instruments. We want to move up to "in
>ear monitoring" with each member having their own personalized (stereo) mix.

Do you have a top-class sound crew who can keep this sort of
complexity working? What happens when one band member's receiver goes
down?

CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
"Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect
Anonymous
August 21, 2004 10:47:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Well, you can control volume better to the ear, but it's not just a matter
of music to the ear. It's a situation that can be seriously dangerous
unless you have all the components correct and someone watching out for you.
IEMs can be dangerous even with 5 seconds of serious feedback blasts,
particularly if the FOH position doesn't ring out the room properly. A 400
Hz howl isn't too bad to listen to, but it's a lot of sound pressure to your
ear channel. A 2kHz can fry some hairs on your cochlear, and anything
higher can actually cause disorientation, along with the rest of the
problems.

It's not worth the perceivable problems if you don't have someone sitting at
the FOH position to control the setup, at the least. Any good IEM situation
actually will have someone at a stage monitoring position and it's their job
to safeguard your hearing. Plus, properly fitted IEMs are something like
$2k per person, not to mention the radio transmitters, etc. By the time you
get properly outfitted and have a reasonably working system you could easily
be talking about 3 to 4 times as much of the afore mentioned $5k. I
neglected to mention that it could be that much per person, but more like
about $3.5k.

--
-----------

Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio


"Andrew P. Follett" <apfoll@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:uVyVc.288351$a24.285902@attbi_s03...
>
> "Roger W. Norman" <Roger@SirMusicStudio.com> wrote in message
> news:412645be$0$21737$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> > "Andrew P. Follett" <apfoll@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:y6hVc.289692$%_6.187565@attbi_s01...
> > > Does anyone know of 16 X 8 (stereo) matrix mixer or have some plans
for
> > > building one? I've looked at some chips but my electronics is limited
> and
> > > I'm not quite shure what I'm doing especially regarding panning left
and
> > > right. I have the time and with a schematic I know I could turn
> something
> > > out.
> >
> > First, I think that 8 members with their own individual stereo mix is a
> > little overkill for live work. Better to have a couple of basic stereo
> > mixes that fit most of the bill and then a couple of extra mixes that
> > "spotlight" someone, but that's up to you. Personally a general stereo
> mix
> > with the bass/drums having a little more me is reasonable, although if
the
> > desire means inexpensive, it could also mean that the more me is mono
left
> > or mono right, depending on how you arrange it and that can be
confusing.
> >
> > Mike mentioned the Oz Audio, and it's pretty nice with a stereo general
> mix
> > and 6 individual (4 "more me" inputs per headphone output) controls,
> which
> > could easily feed wireless in ear monitoring. I've even worked with
Akai
> > wireless headphones that have adjustable reception ranges that have
enough
> > space for three full mixes to any number of headsets tuned to the
> > "in-between" broadcast frequencies.. I assume this wouldn't freak any
> > wireless systems assuming one can set specifics for each IEM set.
> >
> > Besides, as a band, it seems to me that listening to highly
individualized
> > monitor mixes with IE monitoring can somewhat isolate the specific
> > individual from the sound of the band. They might play great but not
> notice
> > the nuance of band interaction. I found in one of my last setups to try
> to
> > use multiple individualized mix monitoring that most of the band simply
> > ignored the cans and went with the live stage sound. Unless you have
> maybe
> > about $5000 it might be best to cut your requirements to the basics.
> > Bass/Drums with a general stereo mix (more me for bass and drums),
> > guitar/keys with a general bass/drum stereo mix (more me for
guitar/keys),
> > and a couple of 'more me' mixes for vocalists, all which could be done
> with
> > a couple of Oz Audio Q-Mix units for about $239 each. How you can
arrange
> > it with what you currently have is beyond me, and you didn't mention
> dollars
> > involved, but just having the functional capabilities of getting in-ear
> > monitoring with the matrixing you want doesn't discuss the absolute
> > necessity of providing guaranteed feedback control on your systems.
> Believe
> > me, you don't want to be sticking monitors in someone's ears and then
have
> > 98 dB of 1 kHz feedback being pumped to them.
> >
> > Personally, I don't think you're there yet unless you are looking at
> > expanding your current system to provide the means to output the matrix
in
> > the first place. Getting that matrix output to the IEMs is easy. OR,
if
> > you have inserts on your inputs, and don't use them for effects or
> > compression, et al, then you could have your matrix from that with what
> I've
> > described above. But someone responsible for the volume won't be able
to
> > see the ears bleeding!
> >
> > --
> > -----------
> >
> > Roger W. Norman
> > SirMusic Studio
> >
> >
> >
> > > I have an 8 member band that uses 12 instruments. We want to move up
to
> > "in
> > > ear monitoring" with each member having their own personalized
(stereo)
> > mix.
> > >
> > > My board only has 2 aux prefader sends - which doens't help at all.
> > >
> > > Looked at several systems by Hear Back, Aviom, Auxpander (shure), etc.
> > > Expensive or won't really do the intended job.
> > >
> > >
> > > Chip I was looking at was a fairchild 7000D
> > >
> > > TIA,
> > >
> > > Andy
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> Right now we just have two floor monitors sitting in front of the band.
> They work OK but there's not enough coverage for 8 people. Instead of
> buying more floor monitors (to haul around and power) we want to go with
the
> IEMs.
>
> We had "resigned" ourselves to spending $4000 or go really cheap with a
> couple of Samson 4 channel headphone monitors, one generic mix, and some
> rolls PM350 "more me and more my instrument" boxes.
>
> I think that's where we will end up.
>
> I really wanted to go stereo for the sound and because you can turn down
the
> total volume as your brain does a better job of "hearing" separated
> channels.
>
> Thanks for all the input.
>
> Andy
>
>
Anonymous
August 24, 2004 12:30:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Roger W. Norman <Roger@sirmusicstudio.com> wrote:

> Mike mentioned the Oz Audio, and it's pretty nice with a stereo general mix
> and 6 individual (4 "more me" inputs per headphone output) controls, which
> could easily feed wireless in ear monitoring. I've even worked with Akai

Actually it really gives you 4 mono plus one stereo inputs since it also
has an effects inject. These units really are a fabulous deal.
One of the best ways to configure it for use is feed the "injects" from
auxes on the board. For instance, the effects inject can be a stereo
drum mix, A can be bass, B guitar 1, C guitar 2, and D can be a mix of
lead and backing vocals.

When I do remote multitrack recordings of pop music, I have one mixer
feed from the digital outputs of my DA88s for my monitor/control room
mix. I feed the -10 dBV outputs to a Mackie board and route the various
submixes by auxes to the injects on the Oz Audio QMix. If you add the
mix on the Mackie board to the ones on the QMix that gives me 7 different
mixes with minimal fuss. I can make the musicians happy really fast.
And it is a very inexpensive set up.

The one thing that drives me nuts is the inverted polarity stereo outs
of the old Mackie CR1604. When you start using the injects instead of
adding, you end up subtracting from the mix.

The way around this is that I will feed the outputs of the CR1604 into
the unbalanced inputs of an Aphex -10/+4 box, invert the polarity in
the balanced domain, and feed it back the other way.

How ridiculous!

Rob R.
!