What kind of mic split would be best?

[Rick Sutton]

I've got a folk duo to record for an album release. In addition to recording I'm also supplying a small sound reinforcement system. Normally I supply recording services only and if I need to access the house mics I take a feed from their board or use some Conquest transformer splitters on the stage to grab what I need. I don't have any high quality (although for the majority of the remotes I do the Conquest are ok) splitters so I'm wondering the best way to do this remote.
Since I'm running all the sound equipment, it will all be located at the back of the room and all gear will be on the same AC circuit. The recording will be API and Funkenwerk V72 Pres to Genex 9000 and DA38 backup. The PA will be Mackie board/Crown amp/Bose 802 speakers.

Option #1...Passive split (Y cables) the mics to both Mackie and recording pres. Obviously any phantom supplied by only one source.

Option #2.. Use the Conquest transformer splitters. Direct to recording and transformer side to Mackie. Phantom supplied from recording pres.

Any particular advantages/disadvantages to either option?
Thanks, Rick

[StefanM]

Though I don't know the Conquest splitters option #2 seems most reasonible to me. (I like to use Betatec 8-Chn. splitters)
Seperation from the pa stuff and no improper impedance loading of the mics - this is what I would want...

Stefan

[Remoteness]

An isolated splitter is my first choice when you're interfacing with another system. Since you're providing the complete system, do you really need a splitter for this PA / recording date?

Why not Option 3?
All mics & DIs from the stage make it back to your API and Funkenwerk V72 Pres, then to your Genex 9000 with a DA38 16 bit backup. The Genex or DA38 can then feed the sMackie board to an EQ and Crown amp/Bose 802 rig. If applicable, you could set up a second mixer to monitor the other recorder. Since all the gear will be on the same AC circuit you shouldn't have a ground or buzz problem from the recording/PA interface -- It's the same system!

Also, I prefer recording from the FOH position when a control room is not available. I set up a time aligned pair of near field monitors... It works out great.

[joaquin]

I set up a time aligned pair of near field monitors... It works out great.

Hi Remoteness. could you explain this further?
Thank......................Joaquin.

[Remoteness]

When mixing and/or recording from the FOH position, I like to set up a pair of near field monitors instead of (or in addition to) a set of headphones.

I take the monitor output of the mixer and feed that to a stereo delay then to a pair of (active) speakers. I figure out the distance FOH is from the stage math or the old fashion way.

Determining the correct amount of MS the old fashion way (using your ears) is a pretty simple plan. Have someone hit the snare, feed that through the PA. Bring up the level on your FOH near fields and dial in the stereo delay until the snare sounds perfectly aligned to what you're hearing from the stage. Once you have achived this set it and forget it. You may need to modify the number if the room temperture changes.

I have a headphone amp connected to the additional delay outputs. The headphones are also time aligned.

I use a Klark Teknik DN7204 for this task. It's a 2 by 4 delay with some cool extras.

[joaquin]

WOW!! Such simple things comes from profound knowledge...Thank you

[Remoteness]

Thanks bro! I'm just trying to be helpful.