388 User Leveling up to M3500

R

rorohello

Member
Just curious how many folks here have a setup based around an M3500 and tape?

I am completing reno of a garage studio and I'm a little freaked by the M3500 manual. I have only ever used compression via the send/returns on the back of the 388 and never really used hardware reverbs/delays patched to a console.

If anyone is interested, I'd love to post a bit more about my planned workflow, and what I'd like to have patched/available to build a mix.
 
Greetings!

Using send effects (as opposed to insert effects) like reverbs or delays on the M-3500 is conceptually no different than how you would use them on the 388 using the EFF buss.

So whatcha got going on? That’s an invitation to post more.
 
Excited and thankful that others are using it/interested.

So here is the hardware I'd like to set up and leave "plug n play" as it were. I have a DBX PB-48 that some of this stuff is already connected to in a rolling rack.

One thing I get confused about is when I read things like Michael Brauer say he sets up his compressors on a Bus. I always thought that if a compressor is a single channel unit, it has to be patched in directly. That you can't "send" things to it via a mixer.


--The Gear--
Roland/Boss RV-70
Lexicon PCM 90
Korg SD-3000
Fulltone Tape Echo
Chameleon Labs 7720
Revive Audio Modded LA-4A
Disstressor
Pair Warm Audio EQs

The only thing I've thought of as far as workflow is that I'd like the 7720/Warms on the stereo bus feeding the monitors, but perhaps with a way to toggle it on and off rather than reaching for bypasses on the units
 
First of all, the “compressors on a buss” assumes that the group output has an insert. So it’s no different than when you are using a compressor on an input.
 
For those of us that don’t know what all that gear in your list does, and are too lazy/don’t have the time to look it up, can you clarify what each of those bits of gear do? I know some of them are obvious secondary to the name of the unit, but others I’m not so sure. And then like with the EQ box if there are any of them where you have some idea of where/with what/how you want to use it, let us know what you are thinking. We can suggest alternatives if appropriate and/or how/where we would interface it with the console, but giving us a little more detail will help with a starting point. I’m sure others will chime in.
 
Totally, I'm sorry for not doing that before. I am re-reading the manual of the M3500 now as well. I appreciate the help and input.

To add more context so this thread may be helpful for others down the line, the project studio is a single room (multi purpose recording and mixing) 15x19 with a 9 foot a frame ceiling. The console is placed in the ideal mix position and proper acoustic absorption/diffusion has all been set. I’m waiting on a GRS PSU for the M3500 so I haven’t actually fired her up yet. The main repro device is a Tascam MSR 16S.

I write songs on guitar, and I’ll use a DAW for the freedom of arranging, but after a song is set to where I’m ready to really record, I switch to tape. My thinking (although I haven’t used all this gear in this scenario yet) is along these lines:

-Edrums (with real cymbals) to a scratch track from the DAW on my Tascam 388
-Bounce 6 tracks of drums to an Otari MX 5050 4 track and add bass and a scratch vocal there. I could use the M3500 at this point, but it’s not really necessary
-Take these 4 channels and put them to tape via the M3500/MSR16, leaving me with 12 open tracks to build
-I plan to use the Roland RV-70 for guitar reverbs and the Lexicon PCM 90 for drums at this point, so I’d like a “Bus or Group or Send” (I don’t know what you call it) for each. Both are stereo ins/outs
-The Korg SD-3000 is a stereo delay with input/output attn so it can connect to the console. I’d like to have this available to try for both drums and guitars
-The Fulltone Tape echo is really a guitar pedal, but people use them like space echos, and that is how I plan to. It is a single channel input. I have a Little Labs Redeye Reamp/Splitter/DI so I can put that in front of it for line level signals if people think it’s necessary (HERE IS AN AREA WHERE I CAN USE DIRECT ADVICE IF OTHER OWNERS READ)
-The LA-4A and Disstressor are well known single channel compressors. I’d like to have the freedom to have these available for any of the 16-channels
-Finally, as I said before, I think the 7720 (which is a stereo SSL bus compressor clone) and Warm Audio EQPA’s should live on the stereo out because they are basically my mastering chain

Let me know if I’m missing anything
 
So...adding to my confusion, I just found this on page 21 of the manual:

"Certain devices, notably graphic EQs and compressors/limiters, are designed for in-line or insert use, dedicated to one instrument at a time."

The 8 Group outputs do have inserts. The manual seems to want the user to use one of the 4 Effects Returns for reverb/delay, and the channel inserts for each channel for compression. Am I wrong there?
 
I found a thread on Gearslutz where they are discussing using the Fulltone Tape Echo with a mixer. Dude says

"aux send -> Reamp -> TTE -> DI -> mic in on console"

He's leaving out that it's a stereo output. So am I understanding correctly that if I want to use this as a delay/echo (and bearing in mind my 4 Effect Returns are all used up with the Roland/Lexi) I would be losing two channels on the console? I guess it's a good thing it's 24 channels!
 
So...adding to my confusion, I just found this on page 21 of the manual:

"Certain devices, notably graphic EQs and compressors/limiters, are designed for in-line or insert use, dedicated to one instrument at a time."

The 8 Group outputs do have inserts. The manual seems to want the user to use one of the 4 Effects Returns for reverb/delay, and the channel inserts for each channel for compression. Am I wrong there?
Click to expand...

No that's typically the way it works...EQs and compressors are often insert type effects and interface the signal using an insert patch point whether that's at the input on a channel strip or at the output on an output buss insert point.

Reverbs and delays are typically interfaced using a send and return buss rather than an insert because you typically are mixing the wet and dry signals, whereas with an insert effect you aren't mixing the dry unaffected signal in with the wet affected signal...its 100% wet. And also reverbs and delays more commonly are applied to groups of signals...think of a mix of drums, guitar and bass and a reverb...maybe you want to create an ambiance to portray the ensemble was in a concert hall, so you are sending typically most of those channels to varying degrees to the reverb box (kick drum and bass would normally not be sent to the reverb or only in minimal amounts because the bottom-heavy sources make the reverb muddy), and then that stereo 100% wet output from the reverb box is mixed with the dry drum and bass signals. If you try to do this with a compressor, the compressor is going to be ducking the amplitude of the signal every time there's a transient peak...that snare drum pop is going to duck the signal level every time it cracks and you'll hear that in the guitar melody if you try to use a single channel compressor across the sources of the ensemble...that might be cool as a special effect, but that's not typical use for a compressor. And mixing wet compressed signal to the dry source just doesn't make sense...you're applying compression to mitigate a dynamics issue, or to enhance a certain character of the source...why would you back-pedal and bring some of the problematic signal back in? So that's why a compressor, for instance, is typically used as an insert effect. Now, there's a whole 'nuther technique with compression called parallel compression where you DO mix wet and dry, but its splitting the signal and applying heavy compression to one of the two parallel signals and leaving the other dry...different story...and there you are still using teh compressor as an insert effect on a single channel, 100% wet...just blending it with a duplicate or parallel dry channel of the same thing. Anyway...don't know if that helps...
 
rorohello said:
I found a thread on Gearslutz where they are discussing using the Fulltone Tape Echo with a mixer. Dude says

"aux send -> Reamp -> TTE -> DI -> mic in on console"

He's leaving out that it's a stereo output. So am I understanding correctly that if I want to use this as a delay/echo (and bearing in mind my 4 Effect Returns are all used up with the Roland/Lexi) I would be losing two channels on the console? I guess it's a good thing it's 24 channels!
Click to expand...

Doesn't the M-3500 have effect returns in the master section? You certainly can always use full channels to return effects if you need additional send capability and EQ control of the return, but I thought the M-3500 had dedicated returns...

And don't get confused by the reamping. That's a specific workflow where you track an instrument direct, and then reproduce the dry track through and effect and through the amp and then mic the amp and track that. You then mix the dry DI track along with the reamped track to get the best of the dry clear direct signal along with the effected mic'ed amp signal.

And regarding your earlier post with your process overview...man I'm gonna have to stew on that for a bit and digest. If it was me I'd be greatly simplifying the process...I'm not clear why you are using both the 388 and the MSR-16S. With a DAW involved I'd be syncing the MSR-16S with the DAW, tracking to tape and dumping that to DAW to free up tape tracks. I don't know what you audio interface is, but you've got unlimited tape tracks that way in a sense, only limited by your DAW CPU and your max DAW track count, and no bouncing or collapsing tracks...and one less tape machine. Like I said I need to read and re-read your post to see if there are specific artistic reasons you are wanting the lower fidelity of the 388 and bouncing involved.
 
Yeah I don't think I'm up for the course on parallel compression. My whole approach is to keep things as simple as possible -- which is why I loved the 388

If anyone is running AUXs out of their M3500 (or equivelant Tascam boards) to outboard and bringing in back in on the actual channels, I'm interested in hearing about it.

It also seems like I'll need to set up my patchbay with the channel Sends/RCvs in order to move the compressors around, which sounds like a pain. Looks like I need to buy all new Y cables for that.

Always something else to buy...
 
As a rule compressors are used on inputs and effects are used on sends. If you plug a compressor into a channel insert it will work on that channel. If you plug a compressor into the buss insert it will work on everything sent to the buss. If you plug it into the main out insert it will effect the whole mix.

You could plug an EQ into a channel insert so it only works on that channel, but you could plug it into a buss to EQ everything on that Buss.

Alan.
 
rorohello said:
Yeah I don't think I'm up for the course on parallel compression. My whole approach is to keep things as simple as possible -- which is why I loved the 388

If anyone is running AUXs out of their M3500 (or equivelant Tascam boards) to outboard and bringing in back in on the actual channels, I'm interested in hearing about it.

It also seems like I'll need to set up my patchbay with the channel Sends/RCvs in order to move the compressors around, which sounds like a pain. Looks like I need to buy all new Y cables for that.

Always something else to buy...
Click to expand...

I don't mean to offend...genuinely curious...If you loved the simple workflow of the 388, why are you blowing the workflow up into a relatively complex process?

Regarding using channel strips as effects returns, my personal rules on that are to only use channels vs dedicated returns if I need the functionality of the channel strip for the effect return (i.e. my reverb return is too muddy and I want to apply EQ; the drummer wants a wet cue mix during overdubs so I need a monitor feed on the reverb return; I want to do some whacked out EQ effects to the reverb return ala dub-style during mixdown). If I don't need any of that stuff then keep it simple and use the basic dedicated return. Sometimes, depending on the effects processor, I can avoid using the channel strips for returns depending on the internal feature set of the effects processor...like some have internal EQ functionality, so I can make my tweaks there and remove some mud and then bring it back to the console via the dedicated returns. The other reason to use channel strips for effects returns is if the console doesn't have dedicated effect returns. A good reason to not use channel strips is if I don't have any available. This is how I decide what to use. There's no inherent benefit to using the channel strips as effect returns...its all about what you need to accomplish and/or what is available for returns.

Regarding the patchbay, consider how often you'll be actually needing to move the compressor around, and how accessible the backplane of the M-3500 is...if you can easily get to the back of the console, and the re-patching is periodic, save yourself the headache. On the other hand if the backplane is hard to get to, and you're having to move stuff around every time you do a track or for punches, that can be a headache. In a professional studio where the engineer is working with multiple acts every day with racks of processors, patchbays were essential to the workflow.
 
I always use channels as Effect returns, maybe it's from my Live mixing days when you had more control over the volume and tone, as Sweetbeats said. I don't think I have ever used my effect returns on the M3700.

Alan.
 
witzendoz said:
I always use channels as Effect returns, maybe it's from my Live mixing days when you had more control over the volume and tone, as Sweetbeats said. I don't think I have ever used my effect returns on the M3700.

Alan.
Click to expand...

And, yes...that is a different story...in a FOH scenario you need fingertip access to control/tweak those things on the fly...I can see that.
 
sweetbeats said:
And, yes...that is a different story...in a FOH scenario you need fingertip access to control/tweak those things on the fly...I can see that.
Click to expand...

I never think of it as a different scenario LOL. Having a decent volume control (fader) verses a fiddly volume control (small knob) is always better. Also as said before you can EQ the effect return. Another useful thing is to send reverb from an aux send to the headphone mix while tracking, singers often like a little reverb while singing to take the dryness out of the phones. This reverb is not being recorded.

Alan.
 
I need time to digest this, but thanks to both of you for contributing.
[MENTION=79692]sweetbeats[/MENTION] -- I'm not confused about Reamping, I need to use the Little Labs Redeye in order to take the signal down to a Hi-Z, I'm not sure you quite understand ;)

Regarding the tape machines in the workflow. Tape machines rule and computers suck. That's the facts as far as a general rule. Anytime software is involved with anything it ruins my day. Eating up time and distracting from the creative process (except with the ability to re-arrange without having to break out the razor blades as I stated earlier)

My workflow is well thought out as far as having the character I want from each machine (you can think of them as external processes in that respect) and natural compression that occurs as well as second and third order harmonics. The 388 is on castors and close to the edrums so that I can build the right rythym track to being with...the basis on song creation.

I've been doing this since 96 and I only listed about half of the gear I own. I'm trying to keep it simple to get observant and relevant info from folks like you here who may be more knowledgable in some areas.

The goal...and the reason I'm upgrading to the M3500/MSR-16S is that I want to walk into the room -- flip one or two switches and record. I'm getting older and I' sick and tired of being down on my hands and knees behind gear. I want everything set so the gear can fade into the background and just serve a purpose.
 
I own a MSR16S, actually 2 of them. One work of warning is that the MSR16S is getting old now and the dolby S cards start to play up, there are no spares now. They are very hard to fix so unless you are really sold on the dolby S I would buy a standard MSR16 with DBX. I know that the Dolby S does sound better but the DBX also sounds good. Having said that be prepared for maintenance of the Tape machine.

I do agree that computers and software drive you made, I spend a lot of time solving computer issues for myself and friends.

Alan.
 
That's super helpful info. Glad to know it.

I don't even know it the damn things works. I bought the board and the deck with remote and all snakes/cables in upstate NY about a year and half ago and they have been in storage while I get this new room/setup completed.

If it doesn't work or gives me problems in the long run, I am not getting emotional about getting rid of it. The Tascam stuff is cool because it can be found for cheap (at least use to) but people who think the 388 sounds great are delirious ;)

If I part ways with the MS3500/MSR I'll be left with my MX-5050 (freakin workhorse that give you back exactly why you put onto it) and my Toft Audio Fat Track as a front end -- and believe me that combo is all I need...I just want the ability to set and forget instruments/compressors and effects...and thats' what the MS3500 has the promise of doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top