wiring for "pro" preamps

Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:50 pm

I am considering moving up from my average preamps to some more professionally acceptible models (starting with Solo 610 maybe).
The problem is All of the good preamps I am looking at only have 1 xlr out per channel.
How do I hook this up so that I can send a signal to my monitor mixer and to the recording interface at the same time? You kind of need to hear what you are doing, don't you?
I was considering using a mic splitter, but have serious reservations as to what this would do to the sound.

I know you can monitor through Protools (I am using 002) But even the shortest delay is still annoying. I have been accustomed to using the Twintrack pro (biggest disappointment in my recording career!) which has separate monitor sends.

Please be nice even though I know this question is exposing me as a complete rank amatuer!

Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 8:09 pm

You'll want to route the mic pre out into your interface, then monitor though that. You really don't need a splitter as long as your signal routing is correct, the 002 shouldn't have any delay.

Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 1:38 am

there is always some latency

many of those good pre-amps probably have the grunt to run the line input of both the 002 and your monitor mixer

which mixer are you using ?

these days most inputs are of high impedance
... some call this a bridging input

from the web site
Maximum Output Level into 600 ohms +14 dBu, 1% THD+N Ratio
Maximum Output Level into 100k ohms +18 dBu, 1.0% THD+N Ratio

a simple y cord could do the trick
some trickery with ground and ground lift may be needed to solve a possible ground loop

1 x XLF and 2 XLM and some wire
it's worth a try

Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 6:55 am

Have you played around with the buffer size in PT? If you make it smaller this will reduce latency. As Kev says, there is always some latency, but you may be able to make it acceptable to you and keep your signal chain clean. Of course, you then may want to increase the buffer size when you mix and are using plug-ins. But it is a simple housekeep task that you can get used to pretty quickly.

Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 7:18 am

The delay at the 64 sample setting is not a problem but I quickly get to the point where the 1024 setting is a must (like after 20 tracks and 3 reverbs and an amplitube and some midi strings)

I have monitored through protools acouple of times out of necessity, but another problem, which is actually more of a nuisance than the latency, is that when you take the channel out of record mode then the mic is shut off. So if the band wants to just practice for bit then the whole rig has to be in record mode
Am I being too picky, or is this the way it is normaly done?

Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 7:40 am

MarkG wrote:

The delay at the 64 sample setting is not a problem but I quickly get to the point where the 1024 setting is a must (like after 20 tracks and 3 reverbs and an amplitube and some midi strings)

I have monitored through protools a couple of times out of necessity, but another problem, which is actually more of a nuisance than the latency, is that when you take the channel out of record mode then the mic is shut off. So if the band wants to just practice for bit then the whole rig has to be in record mode
Am I being too picky, or is this the way it is normaly done?

Makes sense. Some suggestions: (1) Track without the reverbs. (2) Cut down on the number of reverbs by using a reverb bus. (3) Bounce down to a stereo tracking mix. This doesn't have to be used in the final mix if you want to change things. It's just a reference for your overdubs. Use as many plug ins as you want. Increase the buffer size and bounce to a single stereo track. Then you can use a minimal buffer size and reference your additional tracks to a single dry stereo track.

On the other issue, it has never bothered me to leave the track in record mode when rehearsing. I think I had an old tape machine that worked that way back in the day, so it never seemed unusual.

Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 9:27 am

You should be just fine with a Y-cable wired as XLR(F) to 2x TRS jack plugs, assuming your monitoring mixer has balanced line inputs on TRS jack sockets.

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:45 am

This is a useful thread...!

I am also in a similar predicament - I have a MOTU 828 MkII soundcard, Soundtracs Topaz 32:8 analogue mixer and I've just bought my first decent preamp, an A-Designs MP2 (MMmmm...!).

I have wired the MP2 directly into the 828 via XLR->TRS balanced jacks and it works fine but monitoring is tricky - would I be better with a Y-cable so I can send one input to the mixer for monitoring..?

Are there other ways of monitoring the MP2 output..?

Many thanks

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:43 pm

a google search on A-Designs MP2
found a web page
http://www.soundpure.com/showProduct.do?id=355

in the spec we have
*Balanced Output: dual XLR

you may not need a Y-cord
just a XLR->TRS and an XLR to your mixer

Shocked

no wait
it's a dual mic-pre
so the dual output may just be a single XLR for each channel ... d'oh

Rolling Eyes

go the Y cord to suit your system ... watch for ground issues

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 7:42 pm

Thanks Kev - it is a dual channel pre...!

Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:37 am

Fortunately ground problems are fairly easy to hear and correct.
I was curious more about sound quality and the performance of the amp.
Does it work anything like a guitar, where if you put different loads on the pickups it will change the sound of the guitar? or is ground loops the only thing that needs to be worried about.

MarkG

Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:28 pm

MarkG wrote:

Fortunately ground problems are fairly easy to hear and correct.
I was curious more about sound quality and the performance of the amp.
Does it work anything like a guitar, where if you put different loads on the pickups it will change the sound of the guitar? or is ground loops the only thing that needs to be worried about.

MarkG

No, it's not like a guitar. The pre-amp output will drive two separate inputs without a problem or a performance degrade. Use a Y-cable, but keep your cable lengths as short as is reasonably practical and you will be good to go.

Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 3:39 pm

MarkG wrote:

... I was curious more about sound quality and the performance of the amp..... or is ground loops the only thing that needs to be worried about....

as Boswell said, it's not like a guitar
directly
however some of the principles do happen
it's all a matter of degrees

any input will load an output
the effects can be dramatic as per the Sender single coil type of situation
to
a ballsy line output capable of driving a small Auratone Speaker at 8 ohms
... these outputs can do well even into 3 or 4 600 ohm inputs without obvious loss in sound quality

the average 600 ohm output these days is not the same beast ... except those found on some of the boutique stuff that is emulating the units of the past . so you may find that the average CAN NOT drive two 600 ohm inputs

however
generally today most inputs are what is called 'bridging' and so have a much higher impedance than 600 and can be around 10K ohms or more,
so as a load are much easier to drive.
Two 10Ks will feel like 5K
so a 600 ohm ready output should be fine

obviously an inspection of the schematic would be needed to get specific and there can be subtle situations of cable choice and cable length coupled with a specific set of components that might do the unpredictable
but
...
it will work

This topic sponsored by: