How to send to 2 monitor pairs

[bitmob]

It's not a matter of different strokes. For example:

Jimmy Mixmaster wants to duct tape couch pillows to the front of his monitors. We tell him it's probably not a good idea for various scientifically proven reasons. He then proceeds to tell us that it's his personal preference and we as professionals shouldn't judge.

Considering 5.1 mixing it's not exactly unheard of to monitor beyond a stereo pair... it is however odd to monitor with two pairs (four speakers) all putting out sound at the same time in stereo configuration. I suppose for wow factor or fun you may want to rock out hard in your studio with some friends and at that point who cares about sound quality. Still not my cup of tea, but I can understand it.

Perhaps we misunderstood each other. Are you actually monitoring or mixing with two pairs of speakers going at the same time, or just switching between the two for reference? If you do want both sets going simultaneously, could you tell us why? Obviously we're very curious and some explanation would be awesome. This is after all a message board where people learn and discuss.

[bassbinoctuplets]

I'm over this thread. Found the solution already. Mods please close this now.

To each their own. I'm done explaining. Seriously. If I want to do something a certain way then I should be able to do it. Products with this functionality exist, so it's not that unheard of. I already found what I needed.

Did I ask if I should duct tape couch pillows to the front of my monitors? No. Did I ask anything similar? No, not at all. Your statement is so far out of context it's not even funny. That's not even a good analogy. If Jimmy Mixmaster wants to do something then let him do it. If it doesn't work out he'll find that for himself. He doesn't need some guy telling him it's wrong over an internet forum.

Also real manufacturers don't produce duct tape couch pillows for your monitors for producers that need them. Therefor your whole statement is just silly. REAL manufacturers produce what I need and was asking about. You know for people that aren't you, who actually need this functionality.

It really is different strokes. As hard as this is for you to believe: PEOPLE WORK DIFFERENTLY THAN YOU DO. It boggles the mind, right?

You don't see me asking you "why do you have this $5,000 box that you never use", "why do you have that?", "why don't you have this!", etc. I don't try and judge how YOU work.
So stop judging how I choose to work.

That's all I got to say about that.

[bitmob]

You're getting rather wound up over nothing. No reason to get overly defensive or jump to conclusions. Relax a moment and understand this is an open forum where advice and opinions are frequently given and debated. It's especially true in this case being that it was posted in the Newbie forum where people who can spare a moment of time in their work day come to try and help others.

Being that this is our profession we're curious about methods. I'd take a step back if I were you and not to be so hasty to jump down people's throats; otherwise you're going to continue coming off as rude. You made some bold statements and instead of giving us a little bit of insight we're met with attitude. What got you working the way you do? What monitors are you using? How are they positioned? What are the main benefits? In the end we may find you have a point, or you may find that we do, but at least you had an adult discussion about it.

"Why" is somewhat the point of this place.

[bassbinoctuplets]

Whatever man you came off as rude to begin with. All your questions have already been answered several times in this thread.

It's just getting annoying answering the same question over and over.
I don't monitor with 2 pairs at the same time for long. I do however like to switch between my monitors at will and having the option to play both at once is all I need. I asked a simple question looking for a device that can do this. I found said device. No more reason for discussion.

I appreciate the insight from those that actually helped. Some just kept asking me over and over "why why why. You can't do that. Don't do that. You're not supposed to. Why why why"

Not trying to be rude it's just annoying now. I found what I needed. That's that. People have different needs than you. Accept it.

Done with this thread. Thanks

[bitmob]

...but...but... why do you need it?

[NYCruiser]

How come?

[NYCruiser]

Are we there yet?

[8BitCulprit]

Just get a Big knob.

Mackie - Big Knob

Everyone wants a Big Knob.

[bassbinoctuplets]

Originally Posted by bitmob

...but...but... why do you need it?

You're lame man. Go make some music. Stop telling people how to make theirs.

[DillaSirens]

I thought you were done with this thread?

[Way Of The Heart]

Originally Posted by bassbinoctuplets

Also it's not like I would be monitoring with both pairs the whole time. It would be nice, however, to have both pairs playing at once every now and then.
I'm very serious about my monitoring, which is why I need a very specific tool.


Anyway thanks for the insight.

Sorry. Words are clumsy at best for me. Instead of saying 'when you get serious about monitoring', what I meant was, when you start monitoring your music sources seriously' you will not use 2 pairs at the same time. Here is why: You will discover a nice 'big' sound (that is just combined volume and 'more' sound waves reaching you simultanously) but the sound will be blurred, usually unpercpetible at first until critical mixing is required. This is because 2 sources (or 4 actually) coming from different locations in the room will reach your ears at different times. This creates comb-filtering and phasing anomolies. This actually happens with one pair of monitors in an untreated room or outside the 'sweet spot'.

You also are dealing with multiple 'early' reflections which also reach your ears at different times. This adds to the comb-filtering and phasing challenges. The stereo field becomes undefined.

No flame or disrespect here intended, I appreciate you experimenting and going at your own pace. That is what it is there for and how we move forward. Still just letting you know what you will eventually discover on your own and why certain responses have been provided. It might save you time...

And yes, you are right. Many manufactuers units can do ALL 3 at once, but this generally is not a design 'feature' so much as a cost cutter I would imagine, though it can be marketed anyway the company wants. Honestly I enjoy my Presonus Central Station for a basic $600 100% Passive unit.

Originally Posted by bitmob

I don't like working with the big knob partially due to it being an active device, but mostly because there are better options for much less

Active generally isn't the issue/problem folks have with the Big Knob, just the design of the active system. (Although I have been using the Big Knob in my 'temp' rig with enjoyable success) A properly designed active system is always superior (more transparent) than a passive system. For instance, the Presonus I have is a passive system (I think a good one), where as the Crane Song and Dangerous are both active and Coleman I beleive offers both. Both passive and active systems have their downsides which is why a properly designed active system costs a great deal more.

Have a great weekend!

[bitmob]

Originally Posted by Rodney Gene

Sorry. Words are clumsy at best for me. Instead of saying 'when you get serious about monitoring', what I meant was, when you start monitoring your music sources seriously' you will not use 2 pairs at the same time. Here is why: You will discover a nice 'big' sound (that is just combined volume and 'more' sound waves reaching you simultanously) but the sound will be blurred, usually unpercpetible at first until critical mixing is required. This is because 2 sources (or 4 actually) coming from different locations in the room will reach your ears at different times. This creates comb-filtering and phasing anomolies. This actually happens with one pair of monitors in an untreated room or outside the 'sweet spot'.

You also are dealing with multiple 'early' reflections which also reach your ears at different times. This adds to the comb-filtering and phasing challenges. The stereo field becomes undefined.

No flame or disrespect here intended, I appreciate you experimenting and going at your own pace. That is what it is there for and how we move forward. Still just letting you know what you will eventually discover on your own and why certain responses have been provided. It might save you time...

And yes, you are right. Many manufactuers units can do ALL 3 at once, but this generally is not a design 'feature' so much as a cost cutter I would imagine, though it can be marketed anyway the company wants. Honestly I enjoy my Presonus Central Station for a basic $600 100% Passive unit.

Active generally isn't the issue/problem folks have with the Big Knob, just the design of the active system. (Although I have been using the Big Knob in my 'temp' rig with enjoyable success) A properly designed active system is always superior (more transparent) than a passive system. For instance, the Presonus I have is a passive system (I think a good one), where as the Crane Song and Dangerous are both active and Coleman I beleive offers both. Both passive and active systems have their downsides which is why a properly designed active system costs a great deal more.

Have a great weekend!

I'd kill for an Avocet! I should have said *cheaper active unit. Dangerous ST looked great too but I like the metering on the Avocet. A metering solution would be great but I don't want to have to pass through yet another separate piece of gear before hitting my monitors. I'm know I'm just being nitpicky.

[Way Of The Heart]

Originally Posted by bitmob

I'd kill for an Avocet! I should have said *cheaper active unit. Dangerous ST looked great too but I like the metering on the Avocet. A metering solution would be great but I don't want to have to pass through yet another separate piece of gear before hitting my monitors. I'm know I'm just being nitpicky.

I understad, though honestly with a unit like the Presonus it is just not perceptible in real-time working conditions. The added benefit wholly outweighs any possible downside (which is hard to find). I have recorded many tests 'through' the Presonus versus direct from my RME FireFace and it simply is a non-issue.

The improvment in work flow dynamics is where the results come from. All of my gear is very 'usable', albiet not all of it is high on everyones list here on GS However results are all I ever care about.

Any deficiencies in my production or any excllence in my production is due to me and my diligence, it is rarely my gear. I know this because I have gotten stellar results from this gear (matching quality of production done with far more expensive gear) and I have gotten dogged results (matching in quality of lower-end gear). All results point back to me and my discipline or lack thereof during the process. You will have far more obstacles in-line before any monitor controller. In my real-life experience, something like a Presonus Central Station will only support your success.

It is like everything in life. Of course all gear has it's downsides, still I hear people blaming thier golf clubs for a poor round on the green. If more 'engineers' looked at themselves as the first and most important piece of gear in the studio, I think they would generally find it is they who 'color' thier sound the most or have the least transparency.

Learn your gear, that is where results come from.

[bitmob]

Haha... amen. Knowing you can run a smooth session and not have to worry about throwing off the mojo will yield the best results. Most anyone who has been doing this long enough will value workflow above all.

Still, I enjoy being nitpicky about gear. Everyone should be considering the absurd investments we make. It's unnecessary at times as the differences will be next to none, but a little min/maxing never hurt