"MULT" on SSL patchbays

[moamps]

  Really? I would think it's a matter of resources. Equipment availability, transportation, crew, set-up time...

It's  government TV. That's the point. With all the money, crew, time, consoles, multicores, mikes etc. they want.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I disagree. Chasing a good sound with paralleling compressors outputs in the situation where you have Duality in hands is stupid, IMO.

The author missed to warn watchers of video that this what he did isn't usual procedure. Also he missed to explain patchbay normalling  what's essential. It looks that he doesn't know much about it.
I found few more videos from the same author, about sound and microphones, and  watching it was a waste of time. Maybe he is good producer but he shouldn't do any technical explanations. I believe, for example, that the member pucho812 can do that 10 times better.

For decades I have designed products to mostly tolerate misuse and abuse by unwashed operators. The build our resistors, used to protect against short circuits can often deliver a crude sum when hard wired together.

+1 to what Abbey said, not recommended, but you do what you can get away with, as long as it sounds OK. 

If the product blows up, they don't blame the operator, they blame the product.  :

JR

 

[Bo Deadly]

Each input point had a 1.5-2k (?) resistor between input and normal out. The R was not so much impedance that you couldn't use it as a normal thru patch point.

Then I had a few mults in groups of three or four.  If you want to sum a couple sources patch their normal outs (with build out R)  into the same mult... To combine even more just jumper two (or more) mults together.

Yeah, I guess R should be much lower. It can be 1K and input impedance is still at least 1.3K with all inputs used. Then output Z drops to 909-220 ohms. That might even work ok with my 600 ohm CI passive stuff.

So I changed R to 1K in my schematic and updated the original graphic in Reply #12.

I don't know what you mean by normalling outputs though.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I don't know what you mean by normalling outputs though.

Feel free to disregard, my vague recollection from decades ago may not reflect modern patch bay organization or usage.

JR

 

[Bo Deadly]

Now I've really gone off the rails. Here's a stepped version of my "mult mix" circuit:

The idea being you can attenuate relative to the first input in 3dB steps (to get -9dB you use inputs 2 and 4).

 

[PRR]

> you can attenuate relative to the first input

Why?

And how? If there's no ground switching, and the load is 100k, feeding input 4 is 0.5dB down.

 

[Bo Deadly]

> you can attenuate relative to the first input

Why?

And how? If there's no ground switching, and the load is 100k, feeding input 4 is 0.5dB down.

The attenuation is relative to another input. So there has to be at least two inputs in which case the load is defined by the other input(s). If there is only one input, then yes, there is basically no attenuation.

As for why, it's seems natural to me to want some inputs to be at different levels. A compromise might be to make inputs 0, 0, -3 and -9. Then you can get two inputs with equal level and still make -3, -6 and -9dB attenuation if desired.

 

[pucho812]

The author missed to warn watchers of video that this what he did isn't usual procedure. Also he missed to explain patchbay normalling  what's essential. It looks that he doesn't know much about it.
I found few more videos from the same author, about sound and microphones, and  watching it was a waste of time. Maybe he is good producer but he shouldn't do any technical explanations. I believe, for example, that the member pucho812 can do that 10 times better.

there is one video where he is at a local pro audio shop doing speaker demos, and at one point, he points his mic at the speakers asking the you tube viewer to hear the difference...

 

[sodderboy]

Finally, if it sounds good, it is good.

This sounds like the automation computer crashed with faders full-up and they laid down a pass as the basis for a remix.  Evdard Graham Lewis, John Fryer producing  I'm sure John has multed some outputs in his day. . .
Mike

 

[JohnRoberts]

This sounds like the automation computer crashed with faders full-up and they laid down a pass as the basis for a remix.  Evdard Graham Lewis, John Fryer producing  I'm sure John has multed some outputs in his day. . .
Mike

Product design was always about getting a good result despite the customers.

This discipline was taken up another notch after I went to work for Peavey to accommodate inexperienced customers.

Hint: when customers get bad results they don't blame themselves, they blame the products.

JR