Oh no! (Yep, another Insert question)

B

BillyFurnett

New member
On some boards (Maybe all..I don't know) when using the insert as a direct out the channels EQ is bypassed...

Should the abilty (Or inabilty) to track with EQ be a major deciding factor in selecting a *general purpose board OR is it actually better (Or standard) to not track with any EQ?

(By "General Purpose" I mean the typical vocals, miced & direct guitars and live drums would be tracked with it.)

Your thoughts are appreciated.


:)
 
Just my opinion but I see it as a big plus. I feel it's the straightest, cleanest path to tape (whatever). I don't like to EQ when tracking (for the most part) and try to get the sound at the source and by mic choice/placement. EQ as with any "effect" is easy to add later but if it's tracked, it's a sonofabitch to take off.
 
Thanks for your opinion on it Track Rat...

I like the somewhat imposed disipline of having to get it as "Right" and/or uneffected as possible straight to tape (Or medium of choice) as well.

Next part of the question:

Is the bypassed EQ something that varys from board to board?
The reason I ask is because I'm wondering if it (EQ) is also bypassed when using the same insert to add compression (For example) during mixdown?


:)
 
Last edited:
If the insert is "pre EQ", as would be the case in the scenario you have presented (EQ "bypassed" when using inserts as direct outs), the compressor would not be bypassed during mixdown, but would come before the EQ in the signal path. Remember that an insert is an in AND an out, or more propperly a SEND and RETURN that allows you to "insert" something into the signal flow. So with a compressor inserted in this situation, your signal path would be something like this...

Multitrack tape output -> Channel input -> Insert "Send" to Compressor input -> Compressor output to Insert "Return" -> Channel EQ -> Fader -> Master or Group Master fader (depending on your setup) -> Main or Group outputs


As far as your opinion question... IMHO, I don't think it's bad to have any option (IE EQ during tracking) available to you at any stage, so long as you can bypass it if you don't want/need it.


Hope this helps!

-Chris
 
Thanks for the info Chris.

I agree that flexibilty in the feature set is never a bad thing... I was just a bit wary of the lack of it.



BTW, welcome to the bbs.

:)
 
Billy,

If you are still considering the TASCAM M312 mixer, the chanel strips have both insert, (which is pre-eq) and direct out on each input channel. The direct out is effected by everything on the strip except the pan and buss assignment buttons.

Cheers! :)
 
Thanks for weighing in Ghost...

Eventually I'd really like to get an M-520 or an M-320 (Hell, I'd go with anything from an M-30 up- Adding outboard phantom power if I had to) because I know those boards are awesome, but the problem is I'm just not comfortable with Ebay as a buying medium and for the life of me I can't find any older Tascams in decent condition locally... I've looked like crazy and I'm at wit's end.

I'm glad you saw this thread because I was gonna ask your opinion on a few new small mixers which might not be the best, but that might not be the worst either (I just don't know).
I figure if I can buy new from somewhere that offers no sales tax and/or free shipping it would be that many more dollars toward the unit. (Which I'm not expecting a miracle from , but just a solid build with pre's at least a little better than my trashed Porta Two, some flexibility and something that will work well with my 38 even if I have to do some re-patching.)

I'll post links for the two price extremes I can work with if you (Or anyone here) would care to have a look and tell me what you think (It would be appreciated). There's no contest between the two, just both ends of the spectrum I can ALMOST afford.
(I got some doctors bills coming in that could kick Mike Tysons ass! LOL)

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/srs7...4002890502/g=rec/search/detail/base_id/101761

http://www.carvin.com/cgi-bin/Isearch.exe?PAGE=mdetail&CFG=2&P2=SM162&P1=MX

Thanks
:)
 
Last edited:
Billy,

I don't have any experience with Carvin stuff. I have heard good testimonials from other owners of their other products and the feedback all seems to be positive. This board though, looks kinna Mickey Mouse to me compared to the Sound-Craft board, which I have experience with their stuff.

In favor of the Soundcraft, in my opinion, is that, mixers are the main product that they do. It's only been in the past 10 years that they started to branch out into other product categories like monitor and microphones. I know their stuff to be very clean, well laid out, well built and great sounding in their pre's and eq sections.

Both boards are two buss, stereo boards only so there is some limitations to both in doing any serious tracking with multiple musicians in the room at the same time but, if your working alone or with one other player, two busses will suffice.

I'd still rather see you find an old M300 or 500 series board in decent shape as that would be a better and more flexible mixer for you to work with now and down the road if your needs and applications changed.

Cheers! :)
 
(As always) Thank you Ghost.

Maybe I'll just do a few 4 track tunes and get the jones out of my system while I keep looking.
I hear you on the Carvin, I just wanted to see what you thought of it because I've never seen them before... I played one of their Tele's once and really liked it. (You know, I never could get a handel on exactaly what it is that company specializes in.)

Since I dived off the ship of fools (band) I'll be jamming alone, but I DO want the ability to mix/track a band live, so as nice as that Soundcraft is it may be limiting in that capacity if I need it.

I really appreciate your honesty, educated thoughts and foresight on the matter...

Now I wonder if I have any blank tapes?
 
Billy, the M312B is a superior board to many contemporary mixers you'll find,...

and is a really great match to the 38.

I like to try to get most of the sound from the source, or multiple feeds of the source, but I'll also use the onboard EQ and print the EQ'd signal to tape, if it's appropriate to the sound I'm looking for.

BTW, what 4-tracker are you using? Which Portastudio?;)
 
Ahh yes.
My recent aquisition of the M312b has (For me) layed the routing concerns addressed in this thread to rest (Thank goodness.)

I like the idea of being able to track with or without EQ to tape and am glad I got to get some feed back from both sides of that coin here.

As far as my Porta, it's a Porta Two that is Soooooo trashed.
(The person or persons that owned it before may not have taken much care of it or somehow misused it because The Tape/ Mic-Line switches are at best intermittent. The effects return on one of the channels doesn't work. The "High" EQ one the first channel no longer works, so it doesn't make a very good 2 track deck and although I don't use it, the headphone amp is Ka Put too.
I just learned to work around the problems as best I could.
I imagine it was awesome when it was new and with the price of tape I'll continue to use it to sketch out song ideas before building them on my other machine.)




Go Cubs!
:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top