inserts as direct outs

P

pappy999

New member
Hello,
I have been reading about tapping inserts on mixers for routing into a DAW. Does this give the option of using the channels' eq and fader to control the insert signal?
I want to record a live band into my digi001. I have done this before but I cannot add any volume or eq to the signal going into the non-pre channels of the digi 001. This results in monitoring that is very quiet on some channels. I would like to get a mackie 1604 or sr 24 and patch the inserts into my digi 001 and a behringer ada8000 with volume and eq if possible. Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.
 
probably won't get eq, inserts are usually in the line before the eq.
but you don't need to eq to tape any way. :)

1/2 jack inserts for outs
 
Inserts are pre EQ/Fader so only the gain pot will have any affect on the signal but I view that as a good thing.
 
mandocaster said:
I do it all the time. The inserts come out before the effects, eq, etc. which is the way to go.
Click to expand...

+1 here.

i do this all the time on my Mackie SR 24*4. it allows me to use to preamps of the board but bypass all of the eq, summing and other assorted nasties typically associated with the mackie boards.

IMO, it actually makes the mackie somewhat useful for recording (as long as you don't push the preamps, etc).


cheers,
wade
 
Yep. Ditto.

Plug 'em in only one click and they will not interrupt the signal through the board, yet will tap the discrete channel signal right after the preamp gain stage. For recording, that gives you a good raw signal and you can play with EQ and effects on it later. You can also get all your board's EQ by pulling signal from the subs, the aux or the mains into separate tracks.
 
Just a thought on this when recording live. I've done it a couple of times where I pull a signal off the insert jack, but it always pulls some of the signal away from what is sent to the rest of the board. I never had time to play more with the gain structures, but to have the gain on the mixer low enough to keep from clipping my DAW, we had to have some of the faders basically maxed on the board to try and get a balanced sound. Go figure.
 
the only good solution is to pick up some mic splits. I don't like the insert method because you can't be sure that the guy at FOH will not adjust the trim during the set. By splitting the signal you get a nice raw feed that is separate from FOH. EWI makes a 4 channel split for $100 or my favorite, Proco 4 channel for $175. If you have the cash buy a dedicated split snake. A 24 channel snake can be had for around $600 to 800. Most have ground lifts for each channel. Remember to give the FOH the isolated side of the signal :)
.. just another opinion
 
venuesystem said:
Remember to give the FOH the isolated side of the signal :)
Click to expand...

I would use the isolated side for recording and let the FOH the direct feed.
Let the FOH supply phantom power if needed for di boxes or mics.
 
pappy999 said:
Hello,
I have been reading about tapping inserts on mixers for routing into a DAW. Does this give the option of using the channels' eq and fader to control the insert signal?
I want to record a live band into my digi001. I have done this before but I cannot add any volume or eq to the signal going into the non-pre channels of the digi 001. This results in monitoring that is very quiet on some channels. I would like to get a mackie 1604 or sr 24 and patch the inserts into my digi 001 and a behringer ada8000 with volume and eq if possible. Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Well if you do get a Mackie 1604, it has direct outs on the first 8 channels anyway, and they are all post fader, post eq. Though if you need the FOH to be mixed without messing your levels, this won't work.
 
The insert by its very nature is unbalanced. It's configured on a stereo or balanced type plug but the shield is common ground, sleeve is send and the tip is return. With an unbalanced cable plugged into the insert jack only to the first "click", you're tapping off signal from the mic preamp. If you fully insert the plug, you'll still be grabbing signal, actually all of it and it couldn't make it the rest of the way through the channel strip.
 
So if I insert the trs plug all the way into the insert I will still receive the signal post trim/pre eq and fader. Tapping inserts would be if I wanted to receive the signal through the mains or busses AND the insert, right?
 
just for the record, I use the same technique in my studio but with my 20 year old Tascam M-224 24 channel 4 bus mixer, which only has inserts and not direct outs, the insert is post eq but pre fader. I know it's also pre bus, but I haven't bothered to check if it's pre or post fx sends and foldback.

Anyway, so I actually find that very useful for my work since there are odd times when I do eq to track, although most of the time the eqs are flat (they're not defeatable in my board but they sound great and have effective center detents so it's not a problem for me, I expect part of the good warm sound of this board is from that design choice).

Also, mackies have that half-click trick but many other boards don't. I haven't tried it with mine but I know of other non-mackie boards where the send and receive are opposite to the mackie so half plugging in your send plug will only give you the input to the fader, not the output from the pre, and is therefore useless. So in case anyone is thinking that the mackie trick is a fix all for every mixer out there, it's not. Find out about your board first or experiment to see if yours works the same way. I was actually pleasantly surprised to find my inserts coming after my eqs on my Tascam when I bought it...

Cheers,
Don
 
The insert trick doe snot work in certain baords because those consoles are tip return and sleeve send. Also, there really is no way for the direct signal or half inserted signal to be pre or post bus, fx sends, foldback etc...
 
xstatic said:
The insert trick doe snot work in certain baords because those consoles are tip return and sleeve send.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what I was trying to get across in my post above, just a different way of putting it (I mentioned send and receive being reversed). Thanks for explaining it more clearly for readers. :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top