2 Channel Pre At The End Of Mix

  • Thread starter Thread starter dzara 4
  • Start date Start date
I do it.

Sonic A is right too.

Sometimes it works, other times it dosent. Nothing wrong with the experimentation though, knock yourself out.

I will say that i used to fire my mixes though mid level pre-amps.
Now i fire it though a couple of Api pres........the APi sounded good. The others, not so much.
 
Id probably rather let the mastering engineer worry about that as its the stage after the mixing has finished. :)

Eck
 
So with a preamp like the Focusrite ISA 428, which has four instrument inputs AND line in's (not that the lines even enter the mic pre part of the circuit)...

Couldn't you "match" to the hi-z from the line out (where the mix is coming from)? Use two of them and have a dual mono (essentially stereo) mix...

Hmm..

ISA 428
Inputs

* Transformer-based ISA design
* Gain range: Line = +/- 18dB, Mic = 0 to 60dB (both in 6dB steps), Inst = +10 to +40 dB variable
* Input impedance: Line = 10k ohm, Mic = Variable - 600, 2k4 and 6k8 ohm + original ISA 110 settings, Inst = >1M ohm


Analogue Performance

* Noise: Line = -96dB, Mic = -128dB (EIN with 150 ohm input resistance at 60dB of gain)
* THD: Line = 0.003% with 0dBu, 1kHz input and 20Hz to 22kHz band-pass filter, Mic = 0.003%


Analogue Input and Output connectors (balanced)

* D.I inputs: 1/4 inch Jack (unbalanced)
* Mic inputs: XLR (balanced)
* Line: TRS Jack (balanced)
* Insert Sends and Returns: TRS Jack (balanced)
* Additional ADC inputs: XLR (balanced) Line level
* Analogue Outputs: XLR (balanced)


Digital Output Option

* AES/EBU and S/PDIF dual 9-pin D-types
* Optical - ADAT Lightpipe
* Bit depths 16-, 20- or 24-bit
* Frequency options 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4 and 192kHz
* Clock options Standard or ?256 x?
* Meter - 0 dBFS = +22dBu
* Digital Performance
* SNR - 120dB A-weighted


=====

P.S.. I've heard of re'amping, now I'm thinking re-pre'ing sounds interesting...

We've got a Chameleon Labs 7602, that's a Neve 1073 clone.. :D .. Fat to fatter?

http://www.chameleonlabs.com/product1.htm
 
peritus said:
So with a preamp like the Focusrite ISA 428, which has four instrument inputs AND line in's (not that the lines even enter the mic pre part of the circuit)...

Couldn't you "match" to the hi-z from the line out (where the mix is coming from)? Use two of them and have a dual mono (essentially stereo) mix...

Hmm..

ISA 428
Inputs

* Transformer-based ISA design
* Gain range: Line = +/- 18dB, Mic = 0 to 60dB (both in 6dB steps), Inst = +10 to +40 dB variable
* Input impedance: Line = 10k ohm, Mic = Variable - 600, 2k4 and 6k8 ohm + original ISA 110 settings, Inst = >1M ohm


Analogue Performance

* Noise: Line = -96dB, Mic = -128dB (EIN with 150 ohm input resistance at 60dB of gain)
* THD: Line = 0.003% with 0dBu, 1kHz input and 20Hz to 22kHz band-pass filter, Mic = 0.003%


Analogue Input and Output connectors (balanced)

* D.I inputs: 1/4 inch Jack (unbalanced)
* Mic inputs: XLR (balanced)
* Line: TRS Jack (balanced)
* Insert Sends and Returns: TRS Jack (balanced)
* Additional ADC inputs: XLR (balanced) Line level
* Analogue Outputs: XLR (balanced)


Digital Output Option

* AES/EBU and S/PDIF dual 9-pin D-types
* Optical - ADAT Lightpipe
* Bit depths 16-, 20- or 24-bit
* Frequency options 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4 and 192kHz
* Clock options Standard or ?256 x?
* Meter - 0 dBFS = +22dBu
* Digital Performance
* SNR - 120dB A-weighted


=====

P.S.. I've heard of re'amping, now I'm thinking re-pre'ing sounds interesting...

We've got a Chameleon Labs 7602, that's a Neve 1073 clone.. :D .. Fat to fatter?

http://www.chameleonlabs.com/product1.htm
Click to expand...

If you want to hear a bunch of re-preamping on some keyboards:

http://www.phoenixlightandsound.com/Audio/Porterhouse/

They were recorded via a ART Dual MP, and ran back through the ART at mix time to fatten them up! It made the client happy, and I am ok with it too. I think I would have chosen a cleaner approach to the whole production, but for what he was after in the bands sound, we pulled it off. He hired me to mix two nationally released CD's for him!
 
I should add, it was mostly the Rhodes that was ran back through the preamps at mix time. But any synth you hear usually was too. The B3/Rhodes never was. Some of the Clav was too!
 
Ford Van said:
I should add, it was mostly the Rhodes that was ran back through the preamps at mix time. But any synth you hear usually was too. The B3/Rhodes never was. Some of the Clav was too!
Click to expand...

I can dig the re-preamping of a synth and clav.... I usually feel that modern digital recording details those soo much that it hurts my ears (see the textbook term "fatigues" ;) )... I'll take some 1970's moog please.. Wakeman style...

Anyway, style is style... Technique is technique...
 
I can hear a smoothness to some of the key tracks. And the sax sounds real nice.

Some things are a tad muddy, but nothing to worry about.
INteresting double pre amping.

Eck
 
ecktronic said:
I can hear a smoothness to some of the key tracks. And the sax sounds real nice.

Some things are a tad muddy, but nothing to worry about.
INteresting double pre amping.

Eck
Click to expand...

No doubt about it. This guy (the keyboard player who runs the band and produced the CD's) likes a muddier sound than I do.
 
I was thinking of the idea after looking at the folcrom. People seem to

like that box because of the different flavors of pre-amps you can use as

oppossed to dangerous 2-bus or a sumthang. I wonder how much difference

there would be if someone did an a/b test with and without the folcrom.

The folcrom is suppossed to be a passive , transparent box. Maybe people

are just enjoying the pre and thinking the folcrom is adding something as well.
 
Ford Van said:
Some people SEEK to mangle their audio and are very happy when they do!
Click to expand...

Guilty as charged! :D Ever ran a mix through the square root module in Reaktor? I have... What a distorted mess it is! Sounds great as punctuation! :p
 
"Warming up tracks - The TG2's warm, natural sound can be used to spice up already recorded tracks or even entire mixes. Just run them through the mic inputs on the rear panel, set the input to minimum(+5db), and back off the output slightly to make unity gain. You may even want to run the gain at higher settings to add extra coloration (this can be fun)."

http://www.mercenary.com/chtg2preamp.html

:cool:
 
Ford Van said:
I should add, it was mostly the Rhodes that was ran back through the preamps at mix time. But any synth you hear usually was too. The B3/Rhodes never was. Some of the Clav was too!
Click to expand...

I think the double preamping works great on the Rhodes--puts a little extra meat on the bones. I don't find the production too muddy at all, it has rounded edges maybe but certainly not muddy in my opinion. Works well for the music.
 
SonicAlbert said:
I think the double preamping works great on the Rhodes--puts a little extra meat on the bones. I don't find the production too muddy at all, it has rounded edges maybe but certainly not muddy in my opinion. Works well for the music.
Click to expand...


All I know is Fender Rhodes + Vox AC30CC = :D
 
somone mentioned the folcrom (sp?) a post or two back, and i was interested in it based on some reviews and some reading, i understand that its passive and therefore your gonna lose some volume, but it sounds like this re-preing idea might (somewhere in all this mess) have a solution, could somone please explain the signal chain to me in real slow dum-dum terms.

I use two presonus firepod daisychaind at the moment as an interface straight into the computer through firewire, no ohther external processing if that helps someone explain it for my senerio.so i guess i would need a suggestion for the pre also!!

basically i just (three days ago) discovered summing boxes and im on the hunt, i think getting one (the right one) now tops my list of junk id like to get because it just makes sense, it doesnt have the voo-doo of "fixing" anyting attached to it, its just a common sense thing, keep that signal as anolog a possible cuz (at least to me, and most people) digital is just missing somehting.
 
By the way, as a new guy, i must come to glens defense, but preface it with a statement at his exspense, He can come of like a real jack ass, but i think the written word (no face to look at, no tone in the voice) can be very easily missunderstood, and i belive he has good intentions, mabye a bit pretentious, but well intended
 
I tried this once with my Chandler TG2. It sounded okay but wasn't what I was looking for for that particular project at that moment. I also tried clipping my converters along with going through the pre. It sounded "cleaner" with more "separation" than the mastering chain I had up, but the bass didn't sound as powerful. In retrospect I think I like the track going through the TG2 with clipped converters better than the track I used. I'm going to try this again on some future mixes. It could definitely work on a per track level.
 
chris, the intention with the folcrom is that you have to use a pre
for the make up gain. That made it passive so you can pick and chose
your own pre for its certain color. I believe the x-sum also has this ability
by purchasing one of their add on devices :)
 
also chris i drew out a very simple signal chain on the last thread you

posted about summing mixer. not very good but it should give you the idea
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top