[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: Splitting Signal

Thank you Andy. Much to ponder in there... clearly you have done this once 
or twice before :)

Phil :)

On Aug 8, 2011, at 8:24 AM, andy butler wrote:

> hi Phil,
> the 'rules' apply to any music gear with active electronics.
> 1.You can split any Output to a number of Inputs.
> 2.You can't combine a load of Outputs into a single Input.
> There's obviously 2 other rules:
> If you follow rule one and it sounds bad, then that's no good.
> If you disobey rule 2, but it sounds ok then that's good.
> The Send output from your amp *should* be suitable for splitting.
> You could always connect the Amp Send directly to the mixer,
> then split the signal 3 ways to the loopers on one of the mixer outs.
> I have a stereo three way split going from the Lexicon Vortex to
> my EDPs an LP1 and a mixer channel. That works fine (except that the LP1 
> would
> prefer a weaker signal than the other stuff, watch out for that).
> I use what I call "N cables", like conjoined  Y cables really.
> I make them out of regular decent quality microphone cable, and
> cheap metal jacks, both of which I buy in bulk.
> So you'd want a 'W cable', giving you 5 jack plugs in a nest,
> with any one of them being used for the source signal.
> As long as the devices involved have regular good quality
> circuitry for their ins and outs then all your doing is mimicking
> what goes on in a mixer when you use that to split a signal.
> andy 
> Phil Clevenger wrote:
>> Andy,
>> Reading thru some of your older posts on the subject, i see you have 
>> advocated for simple splitter cables before :)
>> "You can always use a Y cable to split an output to multiple inputs,
>> but you can't generally use a Y cable to mix into one input.
>> (of course, the output has to be buffered, which it will be on a mixer)"
>> (2009)
>> I had previously been routing line-level signal through the Mackie, 
>> then out via various means (an aux send here, alt 3/4 there, a half 
>> insert etc) to the loopers and back into the Mackie for mixing.
>> It seemed to me that this was not such an elegant solution and I was 
>> suspicious about all the conversions I assumed was going on :)
>> SO I thought splitting the signal before the Mackie might be better:  
>> going directly into the loopers, then neatly into the proper channels 
>> on the mixer for mixing. Less conversion must mean better signal 
>> fidelity, was the thinking...
>> Hence my search for a splitter. I tried splitter cables, but a Y on a Y 
>> on a Y to get four lines was comical and sounded bad; used a Whirlwind 
>> A/B box and that was clean but only two lines; then tried a Morley 
>> Tripler, which was noisy as can be; tried a Hosa passive 1in to 4out 
>> box, and that sucked the last drop of tone out of my world; then looked 
>> at Radial and now, I hope finally, looking at the Rane solution.
>> In your opinion, should your splitter cable rules, quoted above, apply 
>> pre-Mackie as well as post? Phil :)
>> On Aug 8, 2011, at 1:39 AM, Phil Clevenger wrote:
>>> : /
>>> On Aug 8, 2011, at 1:29 AM, andy butler wrote:
>>>> Phil Clevenger wrote:
>>>>> I've seen a lot of talk here about mixers, but not so much about 
>>>>> splitters: how to take one mono send and feed that to multiple 
>>>>> inputs....
>>>> Use a splitter cable.