Compact desktop line mixer?

[Brian Roth]

Which reminds me, the mixer will need some AUX returns. Are you sure one stereo return will be enough?

Cheers

Ian

Good point I had overlooked.

Bri

 

[OneRoomStudio]

I like the selector for multiple speakers....can never have enough! Speaking of selectors, it's cool having an unbalanced 1/8" "ext" jack for guest phone/whatever sources on the front panel, but I would think at least more input should be added so I can hear playback of my mix from my Ampex ATR-100 <g> after I'm done recording.

My original thinking for things like that was that you could bring the tape back in through the stereo FX return - which can be routed to either the mix bus (standard), or muted and selected as a source from the "Monitor Source" switch...but I had an error in "Version 0.6," since I was routing the AUX 3 L/R sends to the Monitor Select instead of the Stereo FX Returns (fixed in "0.7").

EDIT: I forgot to ask....are we totally giving up on the input trim, as found on the x-desk and LILO?

I'm not completely opposed to it, but since the very first thing the signal encounters after being unbalanced is either a fader or an Aux level control, I guess I don't see the point. What are we trimming? In a "standard" console, you might need it since there could be EQs or other inserts with no input level control before the fader, but the idea here is to patch inserts before the input of the board, and you should have control of the output level of those devices (or your interface).

An elephant in the room remains.....Solo.

Again, my preference is for KISS design principles. I like an AFL/SIP style solo with an indicator LED and a relay to mute the mix bus when activated, like this:

Simple, effective...and what most people would expect when they hit "solo."

And here's "Version 0.7":

 

[OneRoomStudio]

Good points. I will check out those reverb units.

Which reminds me, the mixer will need some AUX returns. Are you sure one stereo return will be enough?

Cheers

Ian

That is a good point. I don't want to get too crazy for lack of budget & panel space, but maybe it should be one mono and two stereo returns instead of two mono and one stereo?


Edit: Thinking out loud - when I mix, I typically use two aux sends. Generally, a mono delay (there are some nice plugins out there, but I have a Roland RE-501 that I like OTB), and either a mono-in/stereo-out reverb, or a stereo-in/stereo-out reverb (usually digital hardware, but one day I'd love a plate or a nice spring like an AKG BX15). I often use the delay on the vocals and send the return to the reverb to add a little extra pre-delay on the vocals to bring them more out front of the "band." So for my purposes, I'd probably use two mono sends and one mono return and one stereo return. If I wanted a stereo cue mix for overdubbing, I could still use the stereo send, and since I don't need to return that, I'd still have a mono return at my disposal that I could use as an additional input channel in a pinch. I can see the utility of that being a stereo return too...all that to say I could go either way.

 

[MidnightArrakis]

In assuming that I am counting things correctly, so far.....I am counting that there are 26 - XLR connectors being used.

That number of XLR connectors is going to require a fair amount of rear-panel space for just the XLR's alone and doesn't even include the amount of additional space that will be needed for the adding-in of any 1/4-inch connectors, any 1/8th-inch connectors, a necessary -- mains/power-source -- connector, a possible fan-vent or even just some passive air-louvres or anything else that you guys want to place back there on this rear-panel.

Just sayin'.....

/

 

[OneRoomStudio]

In assuming that I am counting things correctly, so far.....I am counting that their are 26 - XLR connectors being used.

That number of XLR connectors is going to require a fair amount of rear-panel space for just the XLR's alone and doesn't even include the amount of additional space that will be needed for the adding-in of any 1/4-inch connectors, any 1/8th-inch connectors, a necessary -- mains/power-source -- connector, a possible fan-vent or even just some passive air-louvres or anything else that you guys want to place back there on this rear-panel.

Just sayin'.....

/

Yeah, that is a very good point and something I was starting to think about too. Switching to TRS jacks would save some room, but this might be the reason that SSL went with multichannel connections

 

[MidnightArrakis]

Yeah, that is a very good point and something I was starting to think about too. Switching to TRS jacks would save some room, but this might be the reason that SSL went with multichannel connections

[Switching to TRS jacks would save some room] -- Maybe for Sends/Returns and/or AUX-OUT/AUX-IN, etc. but MIC-IN basically HAS to be an XLR-connector, right???

/

 

[OneRoomStudio]

[Switching to TRS jacks would save some room] -- Maybe for Sends/Returns and/or AUX-OUT/AUX-IN, etc. but MIC-IN basically HAS to be an XLR-connector, right???

/

Luckily, there are no mic-ins!

 

[OneRoomStudio]

Ok, I took @ruffrecords suggestion and made an additional return stereo - so now there's a mono-send/mono-return, a mono-send/stereo-return, and a stereo-send/stereo return. I also changed all the connections to TRS. The connections are now:

8 Line Inputs
4 Aux Sends
5 FX Returns
2 Mix Insert Sends
2 Mix Insert Returns
6 Monitor Outs
2 Mix Outs

So...29 TRS jacks (not including the ⅛" "Ext In" or headphone outs, since those will be on the front panel). Leaving ¾" square for each jack, that means we'd need around 22 sq in of panel space, not including power connection. With an external PSU, I don't think we'd run into much in the way of heat issues with only 8 channels and a fairly simple master section. Four rows of TRS jacks would fit in 3" vertical space, and eight across (which would give us more than enough space for 29 jacks), would only take up 6" of width, out of 12" total...so I think we're good.

Here's Rev 0.8:

 

[MidnightArrakis]

Luckily, there are no mic-ins!

[there are no mic-ins!] -- MY BAD!!! I haven't been following this thread that closely, so when I viewed your block-diagram schematic and saw all of the XLR-connector symbols, I just wrongly assumed that the XLR's shown on the left-side were "MIC IN" signals and the ones shown on the right-side were "Line-Level" outputs. SORRY 'BOUT THAT!!!

/

 

[k brown]

Ok, it was bugging me that it was incomplete, so here's version "0.6," which includes the ext-in and headphone section. Feature-wise, I think this about sums up (pun intended) my wishes. What do others think?
View attachment 143745

I still don't get the need for balanced ins and outs for line levels within a studio. Going to be using a lot of really long cables?

 

[ruffrecords]

Returning to the module front panel and its cost for a moment, there might be some money to be saved by separating the slider faders from the rest of the panel so for example there would be a 4U high panel for faders and, say, 3U or 5U for the plug in module. A single panel holding all the faders will be significantly cheaper than a dozen or more individual fader panels. Normally I would avoid large panel like this because they can be a nightmare for servicing but as long as there is little more than a fader per channel this objection does not apply.

So, I have just designed a rough front panel with 13 faders and their legends on a 4U panel which is 105HP wide (13 x 8 = 104 which is a "standard width in the synth world). The cost comes out at 171 Euros which is basically 13 euros per fader. (fpd file attached using @MidnightArrakis patent method of simply adding .pdf to the whole file name.

Cheers

Ian

 

[Newmarket]

I still don't get the need for balanced ins and outs for line levels within a studio. Going to be using a lot of really long cables?

Why not ? the effects may be magnified over longer distances etc but the same mechanisms apply - mains related "ground noise" ; H field interference ; computer related noises ; etc etc
Single ended connections, by definition, always mix signal return currents with noise currents. In many cases maybe not audible but in many cases are . Even in a studio environment.

 

[MidnightArrakis]

Returning to the module front panel and its cost for a moment, there might be some money to be saved by separating the slider faders from the rest of the panel so for example there would be a 4U high panel for faders and, say, 3U or 5U for the plug in module. A single panel holding all the faders will be significantly cheaper than a dozen or more individual fader panels. Normally I would avoid large panel like this because they can be a nightmare for servicing but as long as there is little more than a fader per channel this objection does not apply.

So, I have just designed a rough front panel with 13 faders and their legends on a 4U panel which is 105HP wide (13 x 8 = 104 which is a "standard width in the synth world). The cost comes out at 171 Euros which is basically 13 euros per fader. (fpd file attached using @MidnightArrakis patent method of simply adding .pdf to the whole file name.

Cheers

Ian

[I have just designed a rough front panel] -- I have two minor suggestions for your front-panel design:

1. Add another "fixing" slot above Channel-8 (primarily for a more symmetrical look, not necessarily for mechanical reasons).
2. Change the legends of -- +10 -- instead to be as -- +11 -- because it will have "more meaning" and subtly add some "humor"!!!
3. >> THANK YOU!! <<
4. I had no problems either downloading or importing your "MA-renamed" file into my FPD program.

/

 

[OneRoomStudio]

Returning to the module front panel and its cost for a moment, there might be some money to be saved by separating the slider faders from the rest of the panel so for example there would be a 4U high panel for faders and, say, 3U or 5U for the plug in module. A single panel holding all the faders will be significantly cheaper than a dozen or more individual fader panels. Normally I would avoid large panel like this because they can be a nightmare for servicing but as long as there is little more than a fader per channel this objection does not apply.

So, I have just designed a rough front panel with 13 faders and their legends on a 4U panel which is 105HP wide (13 x 8 = 104 which is a "standard width in the synth world). The cost comes out at 171 Euros which is basically 13 euros per fader. (fpd file attached using @MidnightArrakis patent method of simply adding .pdf to the whole file name.

Cheers

Ian

I can't seem to access the file this way.

 

[Brian Roth]

My original thinking for things like that was that you could bring the tape back in through the stereo FX return - which can be routed to either the mix bus (standard), or muted and selected as a source from the "Monitor Source" switch...but I had an error in "Version 0.6," since I was routing the AUX 3 L/R sends to the Monitor Select instead of the Stereo FX Returns (fixed in "0.7").

That seems WAY too convoluted to me! So to play back from whatever source (tape machine, DAW stereo playback pair, whatever) I will have to unplug the EFX device's return signal from the rear of the mixer, plug in the playback source into the back of the desk, mute the Aux return and don't touch the aux return level (that would screw up the mix in progress). After playback, fiddle behind the desk again to disconnect playback and reattach the EFX,

Just add an additional external input pair, like on the x-desk.

Or am I missing something here?

Bri

 

[Brian Roth]

Again, my preference is for KISS design principles. I like an AFL/SIP style solo with an indicator LED and a relay to mute the mix bus when activated, like this:
View attachment 143805
Simple, effective...and what most people would expect when they hit "solo."

That is mono AFL, just like on the first studio desks (MCI and Auditronics) I used back in the 1970's. It is NOT solo-in place (SIP) as noted in the diagram. You don't hear the panned position and you don't hear any effects applied on the signal. Unlike those ancient desks I mentioned, the "local" LEDs make it easy to find which solo switch(s) is pressed vs. only a single indicator for the entire desk.

True SIP (called "Destructive Solo") works by muting all other channels that are not selected so you hear stereo position and effects.

FWIW, the x-desk and LILO have non-destructive solo.....but you still can't (reliably) hear the signal with Effects. shrug.....

Bri

 

[OneRoomStudio]

That seems WAY too convoluted to me! So to play back from whatever source (tape machine, DAW stereo playback pair, whatever) I will have to unplug the EFX device's return signal from the rear of the mixer, plug in the playback source into the back of the desk, mute the Aux return and don't touch the aux return level (that would screw up the mix in progress). After playback, fiddle behind the desk again to disconnect playback and reattach the EFX,

Just add an additional external input pair, like on the x-desk.

Or am I missing something here?

Bri

Well…I have a patch bay, so no fiddling required. I’m not against adding it, but another pair of jacks in the back and another set of controls for the handful of people that have to hardwire their tape returns seems on the edge feature-creep wise. There are already two stereo inputs, not including the Ext In.

That is mono AFL, just like on the first studio desks (MCI and Auditronics) I used back in the 1970's. It is NOT solo-in place (SIP) as noted in the diagram. You don't hear the panned position and you don't hear any effects applied on the signal. Unlike those ancient desks I mentioned, the "local" LEDs make it easy to find which solo switch(s) is pressed vs. only a single indicator for the entire desk.

True SIP (called "Destructive Solo") works by muting all other channels that are not selected so you hear stereo position and effects.

FWIW, the x-desk and LILO have non-destructive solo.....but you still can't (reliably) hear the signal with Effects. shrug.....

Bri

Fair points - but it would be easy enough to make the solo light per-channel by using a 3pdt switch and having the LED on its own pole. You’re right that it’s not stereo or true SIP, but AFL seems fine for most purposes (i.e., setting EQ or dynamics, editing a part, etc). I’m not adamant about it or anything, but simple is nice, in terms of parts cost, panel space, and DIY-ability.

 

[Brian Roth]

Well…I have a patch bay, so no fiddling required. I’m not against adding it, but another pair of jacks in the back and another set of controls for the handful of people that have to hardwire their tape returns seems on the edge feature-creep wise. There are already two stereo inputs, not including the Ext In.


Fair points - but it would be easy enough to make the solo light per-channel by using a 3pdt switch and having the LED on its own pole. You’re right that it’s not stereo or true SIP, but AFL seems fine for most purposes (i.e., setting EQ or dynamics, editing a part, etc). I’m not adamant about it or anything, but simple is nice, in terms of parts cost, panel space, and DIY-ability.

How do you currently listen to playback of your mixes, even if not using a tape deck? I admit being from the Olde School and not totally up to speed with current workflows.

I was just looking at the feature set of the x-desk and LILO which had two external inputs.

My Solo comments were merely "musings about this Camel"....lol.

Bri