How to feed microphone signal to both mixer and audio interface

G

gene12586

Member
Hi,
I want to sing through a microphone and have the signal go to two places:
1) To my mixer (which feeds into speakers)
2) Into my audio interface (which feeds into my computer and ultimately my DAW where I record what I'm singing)

So I want to record through the interface and listen live through the mixer. I of course know I can monitor through the interface via headphones or speakers plugged into the interface, but I don't want to do that for reasons which I won't go into to save time.

Two questions:
1) Is this possible without loss of signal/quality?
2) What kind of cable do I need to accomplish this?

Thanks!
 
You only need an XLR splitter like this:
41s7O0LEc-L._SY445_SX342_QL70_ML2_.jpg
 
We don't know the makes and models of microphone, mixer or interface but since you mention "an effect on signal level or quality" putting the extra load on the mic might have some effect but it is unlikely.

You might however already have the means to do this already in the 'gig bag'? A 1/4" jack plug cable.

Mic into mixer and feed the line input of the AI from an 'AUX' or 'FX' send from the mixer. All but the very meanest mixers have them.
When you link two devices like this there is always the possibility of a ground aka hum aka hum loop but we can tackle that problem if it arises.

Dave.
 
ecc83 said:
We don't know the makes and models of microphone, mixer or interface but since you mention "an effect on signal level or quality" putting the extra load on the mic might have some effect but it is unlikely.

You might however already have the means to do this already in the 'gig bag'? A 1/4" jack plug cable.

Mic into mixer and feed the line input of the AI from an 'AUX' or 'FX' send from the mixer. All but the very meanest mixers have them.
When you link two devices like this there is always the possibility of a ground aka hum aka hum loop but we can tackle that problem if it arises.

Dave.
Click to expand...
gianluca68 said:
You only need an XLR splitter like this:
41s7O0LEc-L._SY445_SX342_QL70_ML2_.jpg
Click to expand...
Thanks!
gianluca68 said:
You only need an XLR splitter like this:
41s7O0LEc-L._SY445_SX342_QL70_ML2_.jpg
Click to expand...
Thanks!
 
ecc83 said:
We don't know the makes and models of microphone, mixer or interface but since you mention "an effect on signal level or quality" putting the extra load on the mic might have some effect but it is unlikely.

You might however already have the means to do this already in the 'gig bag'? A 1/4" jack plug cable.

Mic into mixer and feed the line input of the AI from an 'AUX' or 'FX' send from the mixer. All but the very meanest mixers have them.
When you link two devices like this there is always the possibility of a ground aka hum aka hum loop but we can tackle that problem if it arises.

Dave.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your reply.
I have Sure SM7B mic. Mixer is Yamaha Stagepas 600i. Interface is Motu 896mk3 hybrid.
Good to know I likely won't lose any signal.
I think I have one of the 1/4 jack plug cables somewhere! Need to dig around.... But this is a different route than what I was envisioning: What I was thinking was splitting the mic signal to two separate destinations... Whereas what you're saying is go from mic to mixer and then mixer to interface, correct? Is there any benefit to doing this versus getting one of the XLR Splitters suggested by gianluca68 above? Or does it make no difference either way?
Thanks.
 
Last edited:
gene12586 said:
Thanks for your reply.
I have Sure SM7B mic. Mixer is Yamaha Stagepas 600i. Interface is Motu 896mk3 hybrid.
Good to know I likely won't lose any signal.
I think I have one of the 1/4 jack plug cables somewhere! Need to dig around.... But this is a different route than what I was envisioning: What I was thinking was splitting the mic signal to two separate destinations... Whereas what you're saying is go from mic to mixer and then mixer to interface, correct? Is there any benefit to doing this versus getting one of the XLR Splitters suggested by gianluca68 above? Or does it make no difference either way?
Thanks.
Click to expand...
As you were! Go with the splitter, that mixer does not have AUX or FX outs. It does have Monitor out which would do but will probably be affected by any onboard effects and the feedback suppression and you need a 'clean feed' to the AI.

Can I ask if you have tried the SM7b into that mixer/PA? The 7b is known for its low sensitivity and those sorts of mixers rarely have very high gain mic channels. You will also loose a tiny bit of level by the load effect of the interface.

I do not of course know the nature of your music but the SM7b is a rather odd choice (and 'king expensive!) for a 'knockabout' PA mic. I would also think it make acoustic feedback harder to control than the usual 'stick' SM58 types?

There is still the spectre of ground loops lurking so, FCS rig this lot up somewhere and check it out. One does not want to look a total tit on stage!

Dave.
 
One thing - are you using a preamp like a cloud lifter, to address Dave's mention of lower output than typical mics have - If so, a splitter could cause some issues with phantom powering the preamp? If you are not using a preamp - all should work fine - the splitters can be bought for not much more than the cost of making one - people like CPC - Farnell are where I buy mine.
 
rob aylestone said:
One thing - are you using a preamp like a cloud lifter, to address Dave's mention of lower output than typical mics have - If so, a splitter could cause some issues with phantom powering the preamp? If you are not using a preamp - all should work fine - the splitters can be bought for not much more than the cost of making one - people like CPC - Farnell are where I buy mine.
Click to expand...
VERY good point. If an inline pre amp is envisioned you could have a problem. Yes, the interface can supply the 48V but if that mixer does not itself provide phantom power its inputs will not be protected from it. As I said, check this lot out ASAP but if there isn't enough gain and the mixer does not supply 48V I would not use a 'pre-pre'.

In general, things that don't supply or use phantom power should never be connected to it (dynamic mics and modern ribbons are fine)

Dave.
 
I always used an actual “microphone splitter” box for situations like this, and never a Y cable. Splitters are designed to isolate one path (using a transformer) so you have only the direct line that can connect 48v to your mic (or phantom-powered preamp/gizmo). Much safer than other options. You can spend a little or a lot on them.

Like passive DIs, I never noticed a sonic difference, especially in live environments, but some, like Radial, are “built like tanks,” if you tend to drive trucks over your stuff. Here’s an inexpensive one:
www.zzounds.com

ART SPLITCom Pro Mic Splitter/Combiner

Use the SPLITCom Pro to Split or Combine balanced low impedance microphone signals.
www.zzounds.com www.zzounds.com
 
Unless you are using this for some live performance thing, why?? You'll have to deal with the problem of feedback from the speakers while recording too.
 
Very few people, me included, don't use a preamp. Sometimes I have had to use a Y-splitter where you can't turn off phantom on both devices and no harm was caused, although Soundcraft mixers object in a rather odd way - 48V coming into a mic input made the LED metering all light up.
 
Why? Splitters are so common now, and I would certainly not run a PA system from a typical audio interface controlled by the computer? So many do odd things when the USB drops out - clicks, changes in level and odd noises. Mac maybe, but never let windows be in charge of a live show. For years, we have had passive splits - I had a 24 way one for years, then transformer splits, then digital splits. Perfectly normal ways to do this? Phantom just needs planning for, that's it.

In fact, it's quite common for festival acts to use splits on all the mics to get the mics into their toured personal mixers - add a pasive Y split to each mic, pre-wired and you can be on stage, mix pre-done in a couple of minutes - the out front people can take the usual few songs to get up to speed, but the bands hear exactly what they need from song 1.
 

That transformer is better than the solid one because having the jack plug on a cable takes the strain off the amp's jack.

The slight 'ding-dong' about gain and noise is bit academic as it depends a great deal on the amplifier. Many guitar amps are hissy b'stds, some have a lot of gain, others not so much, suck it and see. The transformer performs another useful task in converting the balanced mic to unbalanced and that means the mic cable can be as long as you like with no loss or hum

Another thought here? The traffs are 30 quid'ish and that is a fair way towards a small mixer with two mic and two stereo line inputs. Might be more useful?

Those cheap transformers probably screw the response rotten especially since they are not terminated properly by a high Z amplifier but in the 'hammer and chisel' world of gitamps. not going to be a problem.

Dave.
 
My bad everyone, completely lost track of this thread because I ended up no longer needing to use this setup.
But thanks for all of the feedback; got the gist of it, though some of the jargon is a bit above my head...
 
ecc83 said:
As you were! Go with the splitter, that mixer does not have AUX or FX outs. It does have Monitor out which would do but will probably be affected by any onboard effects and the feedback suppression and you need a 'clean feed' to the AI.

Can I ask if you have tried the SM7b into that mixer/PA? The 7b is known for its low sensitivity and those sorts of mixers rarely have very high gain mic channels. You will also loose a tiny bit of level by the load effect of the interface.

I do not of course know the nature of your music but the SM7b is a rather odd choice (and 'king expensive!) for a 'knockabout' PA mic. I would also think it make acoustic feedback harder to control than the usual 'stick' SM58 types?

There is still the spectre of ground loops lurking so, FCS rig this lot up somewhere and check it out. One does not want to look a total tit on stage!

Dave.
Click to expand...
Hey Dave, thanks for this reply.
I use the SM7b into the mixer all the time... It sounds fine to me...But it's all I've ever used as I only started singing several years ago, and I'm still a newb with the technical stuff, and so I don't have a whole lot to compare it to. So would it be better just to use a SM58? (that's the only other mic I have).
With respect to using the Sm7b as a knockabout mic... I got it as a gift some years back and frankly never even thought to use something cheaper. Was frankly just using it to practice because I know it's a better quality mic and just went with that. I didn't know it would make acoustic feedback harder to control...
But ultimately I'm not doing any professional recordings for some time... . just getting some low quality recordings to see how my guitars and vocals sound together...

About you saying "FCS rig this lot up somewhere and check it out cuz one does not want to look a total tit on stage!".... Can you explain what you mean here in layman's terms... Not sure I understand.
Thanks!
 
"
About you saying "FCS rig this lot up somewhere and check it out cuz one does not want to look a total tit on stage!".... Can you explain what you mean here in layman's terms... Not sure I understand.
Thanks!"
Wilco! "For heaven's sake rig the 7b and the PA system in a room somewhere close to the room size where you might perform"

I say this so that you can test out the feedback properties of both the 7b and the 58. If you can get enough level*with the 7b, fine. I suspect you will not. It is a bit of a cliche on TV programmes that PA systems HAVE to ring and feedback but in the real world it is VERY unprofessional to let it happen.

*known 'in the trade' as 'Gain Before Ring' GBR. You will always get a bit more GBF once a room is filled with people.

Dave.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top