Yet another "Direct/Insert" jack issue

CraigG58

CraigG58

New member
Hi all!

"Direct/Insert" jacks... I know this subject has been beaten to death around the internet, but I'm still having problems making it work. So, please excuse me if I seem to be duplicating something already discussed, but I have a question that I cannot seem to find an answer for anywhere.

I have an older Carvin DX1642 mixer and I'd like to be able to feed each channel into individual recorder tracks (my recorder is a Tascam DP-32SD, and accepts both XLR and TRS inputs). While the mixer channels do not have direct outputs, they do have the much discussed "Direct/Insert" jacks. I've read in a lot of places that I should be able to simply plug a mono cable into the recorder input, then insert the other end halfway into the dir/ins jack and create a direct output to the recorder. The general opinion seems to be that this will work with any mixer.

I've tried this and it does work, until I then discovered that all controls for the mixer channel no longer functioned, with the exception of the trim/gain knob. I've also tried a stereo patch cable with the same results. Does anyone know if this is just something specific to my mixer model? If so, is there any way around the problem?

Thanks in advance!
 
CraigG58 said:
Hi all!

"Direct/Insert" jacks... I know this subject has been beaten to death around the internet, but I'm still having problems making it work. So, please excuse me if I seem to be duplicating something already discussed, but I have a question that I cannot seem to find an answer for anywhere.

I have an older Carvin DX1642 mixer and I'd like to be able to feed each channel into individual recorder tracks (my recorder is a Tascam DP-32SD, and accepts both XLR and TRS inputs). While the mixer channels do not have direct outputs, they do have the much discussed "Direct/Insert" jacks. I've read in a lot of places that I should be able to simply plug a mono cable into the recorder input, then insert the other end halfway into the dir/ins jack and create a direct output to the recorder. The general opinion seems to be that this will work with any mixer.

I've tried this and it does work, until I then discovered that all controls for the mixer channel no longer functioned, with the exception of the trim/gain knob. I've also tried a stereo patch cable with the same results. Does anyone know if this is just something specific to my mixer model? If so, is there any way around the problem?

Thanks in advance!
Click to expand...

It is not specific to your model. That's the way inserts and direct-outs work: they bypass everything except the gain.

It's maybe a nuisance, but not disastrous. Within the Tascam you should be able to apply EQ and other effects once you've captured the tracks.
 
There's the rub I was trying to get around.

While the Tascam is a great unit for the money with a ton of function, it's EQ capabilities are pretty pathetic, especially when using individual drum mics.

The mixer is far superior in that regard, which is why I was trying to marry them more closely somehow. If the mixer's individual channel controls and built-in master EQ are bypassed, the superior sound I get from it is rendered useless.

I think my only other choice is to simply record the entire drum kit from the stereo mixer outputs onto a single stereo recorder track, which of course would result in losing the ability to tweak anything during mixdown other than the overall level of the entire drum kit. Not a very good alternative.

Sounds like it's time to get a new mixer designed for recording, with dedicated outputs on each channel. I really wish I could make this work somehow though.
 
There are a couple things you can do. That mixer has 4 aux outputs. (2 mon, 2fx) Those outputs will be after the EQ.

I couldn't find any decent pictures of the board, but if it has any subgroup outputs, you can also send a track to each one by using the routing buttons and pan controls.

Same goes for the main out, as long as you can actually isolate what you send to it.

Either way, you can get at least 4 outputs wit the EQ and as many as you need without, by using the inserts. You could always do kick, snare and stereo toms using the aux sends, then just record the overheads using the inserts.

There are ways to do it with that mixer, you simply have to get creative with the outputs and the routing.
 
Thanks mucho Jay, I never even thought of those possibilities.

You're indeed correct, there are 2 monitor and effects output jacks each in the master connection area, and each channel has dedicated pots that control levels to each of those jacks. So, as you said, that's 4 right there.

And yes, this mixer also has sub-mix capabilities which can be enabled at each channel to be routed to sub-mix master sliders independently of the stereo masters. That would make 6.

As luck would have it, that leaves me one short as I've got 7 drums mics to deal with. But, while the Tascam recorder's EQ capabilities leave a lot to be desired, I really wasn't having much trouble getting decent sound from the overheads. I think I'll probably go back and just run those two mics directly into the recorder.

Although all of this might be a bit weird controls-wise, most if not all of it should indeed work.

BTW, if you'd like to have look at the mixer manual (only place I could find it):

Download CARVIN DXMIXER Operation Manual

Anyway, thank you for your creative ideas, I appreciate it. I'll definitely do some experimenting with them tomorrow and see what I can come up with.
 
Some mixers actually put the eq ahead of the insert, for example the Tascam M-2600 MkII that I frequently use. For my purposes, recording to a DAW, I'd rather they were pre eq but for your purposes it would be handy.
 
If you can route things to the sub groups without the sub groups getting routed to the master, the master will give you two more outputs. That's a total of 8.

Route 4 channels to nowhere. chnl 1 turn up monitor 1, chnl 2 turn up monitor 2, chnl 3 turn up FX 1, channel 4 turn up FX 2.

Route 2 channels to the sub groups, panning 1 to sub 1 and the other to sub 2. Don't route the sub group to the master

Route two more channels directly to the main output, panning them to isolate one on each side.
 
Hi again Jay...

Sorry, that manual link I included in my last post seems to be incomplete, so I put a good, complete copy into my Dropbox:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/9323980vi05jo9d/AADjHaiiaBHkV2djAjg9kIcsa

You should be able to access it, if not just let me know.

If you would be so kind as to look at page 12, item 5 it looks like I can flip the main/stereo switch in the master area and output the subs independently of the stereo mains, directly to the master. There are indeed dedicated output jacks for each sub-mix slider in the master output section. You'll notice there are also pan pots above the sub sliders, so I think I can get 4 more outputs there between the sub, stereo and master sliders. At the end of that section, it actually even states "This will leave the STEREO MASTERS L/3 and R/4 unaffected by the SUB 1 and SUB 2 mixes thus giving you true four out capabilities." So, what you suggest should work.

Page 3 item 3 covers the dir/ins jacks and curiously says, "To use the DIR/PATCH for a direct channel output, insert the plug only halfway into the jack." As I was saying earlier that works, but they make no mention that this will disable all channel controls except for the trim/gain knob, even though it also states there will be no signal interruption going that route. An important omission from the manual I guess, but that's what got my initial hopes up.

So, some experimentation is in order. I'll let you know how I make out.

Thanks for the great ideas!
 
Oh, speaking of the dir/ins jacks, there's something else I forgot to mention. Take a look at the bottom diagram on page 22. That makes it look like you can use those jacks to feed a multi-track recorder. I guess if you don't mind losing all control of the channels, anyway. Pretty ridiculous.
 
Inserts are nearly always before the eq. The signal flows is input- insert- eq- fader- aux buss- pan.

Most of the time, you would want to record the signal directly from the preamp. The less circuitry in the path, the less noise and signal degradation.

I'm on my phone atm, I will download it when I get to a computer.
 
CraigG58 said:
Oh, speaking of the dir/ins jacks, there's something else I forgot to mention. Take a look at the bottom diagram on page 22. That makes it look like you can use those jacks to feed a multi-track recorder. I guess if you don't mind losing all control of the channels, anyway. Pretty ridiculous.
Click to expand...

It's a general purpose/live sound mixer. That's how most of them work.

If you want true direct outs then you need a different board. You need something like my Soundcraft GB2R-16 that has balanced TRS direct outs on all 16 channels, and they're switchable pre/post eq+fader. I keep them set to pre because I mix in the computer where I can apply just about any sort of eq one can imagine. But for your purposes you could have them set to post so you can use the eq on the way to your recording device. The post setting also makes them post insert, so you could easily add compression as well.

I'm not sure how easy it would be to modify the Carvin, but perhaps you could move the insert to a point after the eq, or just convert the inserts to post-eq direct outs. It would take some expertise to do such a thing but it may be possible.
 
Last edited:
After looking it over, there is no way to get more than 6 outputs with EQ on them.

Send two channels to sub 1 and 2, panning one left and one right.

Send the next two channels to stereo left and right, panning them appropriately.

The fifth channel, turn the fader all the way down and turn up the mon 1 knob.

The sixth channel, turn the fader all the way down and turn up the mon 2 knob.

The reason you can use the fx sends is because they are post fader and, if you have a fader up, the channel has to be routed to either a sub or the stereo out.

Also note that the subs need to be routed to the main out.

There is no way to get a 7th output that doesn't mix the signal in with something else.

I'm assuming you have a mic for the kick snare, three toms and two overheads. If you take the three tom tracks, eq and pan them where you would in the mix and send them to the stereo outs, you will be down to the six outputs that you have. Summing the toms together like this can work very well, since they will all get the same sort of treatment at the mix stage.

Otherwise, I would just plug the overheads directly into the tascam and be done with it.
 
@bouldersoundguy:

Yes, as I said in a few posts back I realize that I really need to get a new mixer with dedicated outputs on each channel. That's ultimately the proper solution, thank you. Also thanks for suggesting a mixer, but that's out my price range at the moment, although I certainly realize that a decent one won't be cheap.

I suppose I could pop my mixer open and take a look at rewiring those jacks, or even adding new ones at the rear, but I don't think I'm going to take that on at this point. It is a good idea that I didn't consider before though!

BTW, I lived in and around Boulder for 32 years before retiring to Florida a few years back. ;^)

@Farview:

The bass drum mic has been my biggest problem, pretty "muddy" and "boxy". No matter how much tweaking I did using the channel EQ on the recorder, mic placement etc. I just couldn't dial that out.

The recorder EQ controls actually aren't end-of-the-world terrible. Each channel only has three bands, although all of them are sweepable as far as gain and frequency goes. So, I've decided I'm going to try using a sort of "hybrid" approach. I'll run only the kick drum and snare into the board and use the sub-mix outs to the recorder. As for the rest of the drum and overheads mics, I'm going back to running them straight into the recorder. They weren't giving me nearly the EQ problems as the kick drum, so that should be something I can live with for now. The snare seemed like a logical mic choice to add along with the kick drum to the board using the 2nd channel of the sub-mix, as those two drums are the most important thing for a solid "backbone" beat on any kit. We'll see how that works out.

Sincere thanks to everyone in this thread for all of the research, ideas and suggestions, I really appreciate it!
 
Try sucking out 800hz, like a lot of it. And adding high shelf at around 8k, see if that gets you in the ballpark.

It really depends on what the kick sounds like and the sound you are trying to get out of it.

If that sound is too wet and metal sounding, try sucking out 400hz and adding 1k for a more classic 70'style sound.

Hopefully you have a vent hole cut in the front head of the kick, otherwise it's going to sound like you are kicking a couch no matter what you do.
 
And of course with drums it all comes back to tuning.

If you pick up a 2-channel eq you could use it between a mixer output and a recorder input for even more control. I think the long term solution is to get a computer involved. You could transfer stuff via USB for processing and put it back in the Tascam if you prefer using it to mix.

Yeah, I was in Boulder but now I'm "around" Boulder. Still in the county, just not the city. It's too expensive and Google's moving in so it will get even more expensive. No doubt we know some of the same people.
 
Farview... When all of this started to become a concern, I did some research myself and tried pretty close if not right on those ranges/cuts with the mic directly into the recorder (think they're pretty standard for a BD), along with a host of others without much success. I'm really just trying to get a good chest busting "thump", without too much booming, boxing or mudiness. The overheads help, as they do pick up a bit of snap from the beater for a bit of top end.

The resonant BD head is a stock DW (made by Remo), and actually has 6 much smaller than usual vent holes, three vertically near the rim on each side. Without miking, the thing sounds like a cannon. I've got the mic placed slightly away from three of the holes, and can dial in great sound with no issues at all using the mixer EQ with settings much like you've described. I've done this in live situations as well with great success.

I've also been a drummer for a long, long time, and have found that you lose a lot of bottom by cutting a large hole in the resonant head. Something like a 6" or smaller hole is okay but, very important, cut it off-center to help avoid too much air escaping... That's where you'll lose some bottom. I thought the DW head had a pretty weird configuration regarding the holes when I first got the kit, but they seem to let the drum "breathe" without losing a lot or air, along with the bottom that goes with it.

Anyway, just my opinion. This stuff is so subjective, we could go back and forth about it all day long. ;^)

Thanks again for your insight!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top