Microphone into monitor?

[mrfrench]

Q: Can I plug a microphone directly into monitor speakers ?
OK.. so newbie question here - trying to discover and understand amplified sound and recording.
I just got a microphone (Shure 58) and a pair of studio monitors (Mackie MR5s) and want to know whether I can plug the mic directly into the monitors just so we can hear the singer's voice over the other instruments while practising, without recording.
I suspect the answer is no, but I don't know why and what will happen if I do anyway? will I blow/ruin anything ? The Mackie's have a mic compatible XLR connection.
The equipment is ostensibly for recording a youngster's group : guitar, keyboard, sax + voices to Cubase LE via a small Tascam 122L soundcard/audio-interface. Normally I would put the mic through the Tascam soundcard but that means turning on the computer and setting everything up which is not really wanted when simply practising.
Any explications about mics and monitors much appreciated.

 

[mattr]

There is no mic preamp in the monitors, so no, it wouldn't really work (unless the input level control has enough gain to get you to decent levels, but it wouldn't be very clean). You would also only have it out of one monitor.

You could invest in a little mixer (one of the little Behringer ones?) to plug mic(s) into and then go from the main outs of that into the monitors.

Also, remember these are studio monitors and not PA speakers, and live sound can be very 'dynamic'. One tap/drop of a high-gained mic could be the end of them. Perhaps run a limiter to prevent any peaks.

 

[mrfrench]

You could invest in a little mixer (one of the little Behringer ones?) to plug mic(s) into and then go from the main outs of that into the monitors.

Hey Mattr, prompt reply. Thanks.
So, I guess no mic to monitor.
Which brings me to the next problem – not sure if this is the place to discuss it, though ?
A mixer. Your suggestion of a small mixer has already been debated chez nous (my son’s a bit younger than you but already getting pretty hot on guitars : blues.. etc) and it’s he who’s trying to figure it all out.
The problem with a small mixer (Behringer or even Mackie) is that they seem to be analogue and don’t usually connect up to the computer other than by ONE channel.
Cubase is designed to take as many channels as you care to input (1 for guitar, 1 for keyboard, 1 for sax, 2 for voices, etc).
So it seems to me we really need a multiple input mixer that is also a multiple output device (via firewire, or even USB) for the computer.
Most mixers seem to have only one output and therefore only one channel, presumably meaning that the mixing takes place only on the mixer and cannot subsequently be mixed with Cubase on the computer.
Of course you can get digital mixers (Motu make them, Traveller Mk III, etc) but we are talking about house prices and a mortgage AND they don’t have mixer buttons that you can physically touch AND for a mic can you simply use them as an interface direct to the Monitors?
I’m kinda lost here. If you or anyone else has any suggestions…? Or do I post elsewhere ?
Cheers.

 

[mattr]

If I were you I would save money for now and get a little mixer ( http://www.dv247.com/invt/32396/ ?) just to solve the original problem of running a mic straight into the monitors, then think about upgrading the interface further down the line. It sounds like the Tascam is doing a good job for you at the moment, so there's no point rushing out and changing it.




What you're asking next is quite a broad topic . There are sooo many different ways to get multi-channel audio from mics to your computer. I suggest you take a look through these pages (note there are 6 pages of 'rigs')...
http://www.tweakheadz.com/rigs.htm

Ignore all the things like mics, software, computers, etc, in each rig. Just look at the mixer and/or interface in each one to see the kind of setups you can have. Your current setup is pretty much like rig #1. Rigs #2 and #7 sound like what you're after (note in #2 the Mackie mixer has the firewire card addon, which turns it into a multi-channel interface). My personal choice would be #4 (nearly there, although I'm doing it PC based rather than Mac ).

Lots of the interfaces have onboard mixing (as opposed to mixing in the computer, which adds latency) so you can set up a good live mix to send to the monitors - the Motu's can be used for this standalone without a computer; for some of them need you to set the mix up on a computer first, while the newer ones like the Traveller mk3 have buttons and dials you can use to set up without a computer.

Unfortunately none of this stuff comes cheap

Note: if you're careful then ebay is verrryyy good for getting this stuff cheaply, and with Christmas tomorrow there's bound to be a flood of unwanted presents I got my perfect-condition Motu 896' for around £300 on ebay, so don't be put off by all the huges RRPs for this gear. If you hunt around and accept some comprimises then more-often-than-not you can find a setup which fits your needs *and* your budget.

 

[dgatwood]

Unfortunately, the USB and FireWire mixers tend to be compromises in terms of the interface quality. The Mackie ones are all DICE II interfaces, which can be problematic (except the old analog boards with FireWire upgrade cards, which were BeBoB). The USB ones mostly only output the mixer's mixed stereo output. There are a few that try to shove 8+ channels across USB, though I'd be a little wary. The only mixers whose interfaces seem reasonable, IMHO, are the Phonic Helix series, which are BeBoB unless they have changed recently. I have not used one, though, so I have no idea if the sound quality is decent.

I would stick with an analog mixer, personally, and use a separate FW interface. That way, your mixing capacity is not limited to what can practically be recorded at once, and the two units can be upgraded separately as your needs grow in either area. Remember that if you want to use a mixer's pres independently, you can always patch into the channel inserts (assuming your mixer has channel inserts---most do).

 

[mrfrench]

mics or mixers..?

From mics to mixers..to...?
Jeez, how long does it take to get a handle on all of this stuff...? Seems like one answer is worth a thousand questions - not to mention dollars.
I used to sail. They said that hobby was like standing under a shower tearing up $100 bills. Seems like there are similarities here.. Instead of getting drenched, here you get soaked. But back to the point...
First, thanks guys (mattr, dgatwood) and to the forum for your answers. Sorry for the delay – been away for xmas (and btw off again tomorrow).
For this newbie, I found your info both useful and helpful and soaked up (no pun intended) your links with interest. Apparently, I now need a condenser mic!
Still, I really appreciate the time you took to post the links and explain. Sympa.
Inevitably, the answers lead to all sorts of other questions (like, for starters, what’s DICE II and Bebob..? - not in the forum's tech lexi).
Mixers: My ignorance (but read also interest) essentially concerns the role of mixers and the difference (compatibility & complementarity) between analogue and digital mixing formats. Guess I need to learn and read up more about this.
It seems to me Mattr that a temporary solution like a cheap small 1-2 channel mixer to get by is simply postponing an investment that I will inevitably have to make sooner or later anyway (ideally with 4 or 6 or even 8 mic inputs - we already use 3-4 mics at present).
A more relevant question perhaps - if I am going to get into this - is: am I eventually going to need both a traditional analogue mixer and (later on) a more sophisticated digital mixer-interface (like the Motu, you mention Mattr)? Or even as dgatwood hints, an analogue mixer with a Firewire option (Mackie Onyx? - ouch!). And are such beasts good at both jobs?
Our recording route at present is on a computer (PC with Win XP) and it's true our little Tascam US122L interface will have to do for the time being - especially seeing our banker's face . However, the Tascam means layering channels as there aren't enough inputs to do it all at once.
I guess a hard top mixing board would also serve for small live gigs (amateur level bien sûr), parties (or is that sacrilege?) and, as first mentioned, simply practicing.
It would also avoid having to re-plug the monitors every 2 minutes (we use them for a Roland FP4 stage piano, too).
If so I seems I might as well invest in a proper mixer (but which? Mackie? or other? – “Behringer” - and even "Tapco?" - seem to be a dirty words in these forums?!?). But meanwhile I clearly need to learn more.

So… if you have any idiot’s-guide-to sites or tutorials or forum suggestions to help out with the basics of mixing and the analogue-digital options in equipment purchase/acquisition - I’m game.
Seasons greetings to all
mrfrench (in France)

 

[dgatwood]

99% of FireWire audio interfaces are built using one of about five chips.

• DICE II/Jr/Mini: Built by TC. Lots of driver problem reports, compatibility problems. Does not conform to any standard.
• Oxford OXFW970: Conforms to AVC standard.
• TI tsb43cb43a (rare): Conforms to AVC standard.
• BridgeCo BeBoB: Conforms to AVC standard (with stock Firmware; some device vendors like M-Audio use non-AVC firmware)
• Philips PDI1394L40: Mainly used by MOTU. Not AVC compliant.

There are a few interfaces (e.g. the custom silicon used by RME devices) that don't fall into these categories, but otherwise, pretty much every interface you can buy is probably using one of those... unless I'm forgetting one or two. The vast majority on the market use either BeBoB or DICE II.

Oh, right, and then there's mLAN, which rightfully should go away, but seems to keep coming back like a chronic disease....

BTW, the current Mackie FireWire-capable mixers (400F, 1200F) are all DICE II, AFAIK. The more reliable BeBoB-based devices are earlier models with an added FireWire option card.