What do you think about this setup?

[gatekeeper]

hey guys trying to build nice setup here. What do you guys think of the following

Splitting system being build into a stage box, with 2 iso outs, and ground lifts, with 4 Mass w4 outs. 1 Main out, 1 Direct out, and 2 Iso Outs. Basically something nearly identical to this

http://www.whirlwindusa.com/sgi.html


Then via a trunk to a fanout similar to this either one top one or the doghouse.

http://www.whirlwindusa.com/fan01.html

Now, the idea is to eventually get this into 2 midas venices, which would go to apogee converters, then to either a nice computer or some sort of hd system like the alesis hd24. Tell me what you think, this would give me a massive amount of flexibility knowing that w4 are like the standard, give me some sweet pre's/eq and some top notch converters. Any comments suggestions? As soon as I figure out how to upload pictures I will upload a little layout for you guys to have a visual.

thanks

-cliff

[Remoteness]

Yeah, but what about the gals? I'm sure they lurk around these parts (or at least I hope so!!)

Your build project sounds pretty cool.

Your splitter stage box system with four W4 connectors is a good plan but, why do you need two direct outs since main out and direct out are non-isolated? I guess you can feed a FOH and MON desks but is that your job? Usually we give the live sound company a feed and they do their own split since they already have that covered. If you're considering handling the Live sound department, that's another story and a valuable feature to have.

The fourth W4 could be wired as an input or just don't install it. As you may already know, the direct out is wired on the primary side (FXLR) of the XFMR and the ISO outputs are wired from the individual secondary outs from the XFMR. You could spend the extra bread and get a XFMR that has three secondary outputs. Do you really need that many feeds? It sounds very groovy to me but, if you're not gonna use them 70 - 80% of the time why spend the extra cash on super expensive XFMRs, switches and such?

The 2 Midas Venice situation is not a bad idea but, you could do better. Think about it, the splitter you want to build is going to cost as much as those two Venice's, maybe even a bit more if you go the extra mile.

Why not go to separate mic PRE/EQs to your Apogee converters, to your digital recorders? Then, the outputs of the recorders could go analog or digital to a mix and/or monitor desk(s).

IMO, the Midas Venice desks have good pres and EQs but I would not call them sweet.

[gatekeeper]

Originally Posted by Remoteness

Yeah, but what about the gals? I'm sure they lurk around these parts (or at least I hope so!!)

Your build project sounds pretty cool.

Your splitter stage box system with four W4 connectors is a good plan but, why do you need two direct outs since main out and direct out are non-isolated? I guess you can feed a FOH and MON desks but is that your job? Usually we give the live sound company a feed and they do their own split since they already have that covered. If you're considering handling the Live sound department, that's another story and a valuable feature to have.

The fourth W4 could be wired as an input or just don't install it. As you may already know, the direct out is wired on the primary side (FXLR) of the XFMR and the ISO outputs are wired from the individual secondary outs from the XFMR. You could spend the extra bread and get a XFMR that has three secondary outputs. Do you really need that many feeds? It sounds very groovy to me but, if you're not gonna use them 70 - 80% of the time why spend the extra cash on super expensive XFMRs, switches and such?

The 2 Midas Venice situation is not a bad idea but, you could do better. Think about it, the splitter you want to build is going to cost as much as those two Venice's, maybe even a bit more if you go the extra mile.

Why not go to separate mic PRE/EQs to your Apogee converters, to your digital recorders? Then, the outputs of the recorders could go analog or digital to a mix and/or monitor desk(s).

IMO, the Midas Venice desks have good pres and EQs but I would not call them sweet.

What would you recommend for mic pre's? The whole idea is to get all these channels in the computer, my original idea was to skip the recorders and go straight into the computer with a raid array, maybe through an rme or motu interface, something pci based. But everyone was telling me not to go that route due to reliability etc, so I was thinking to incorporate both worlds, use the recorders and the computer as a backup. The idea to use the midas was that I THINK THEY LOOK FREAKIN AWESOME!!!HEHE. But seriously any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

[gatekeeper]

also about the whole multiple feed thing, your right it's not my job to split for foh and monitor mixes, I might just do the direct in's hadn't thought about that.

[Remoteness]

There's nothing wrong with redundency... If I got you correctly you want to have a mic pre for each input of the main and backup recorder, right?

I'm not sure what your budget is but, there are plenty of threads in this forum discussing that so... Check them out.

There's nothing wrong with recording directly to the computer with a RAID array via RME or MOTU interfaces, as long as you have a backup system running too. Full redundancy is an awesome idea if you can afford it.

Incorporating both worlds is a great idea. And, you're right the Midas Venice desks DO look freaking awesome and they sound good too. We use our Venice desks for monitoring and/or mixing. I have used the mic pres for live broadcasts when we were not recording to multitrack.

[gatekeeper]

What I realy want to have was to have adecent console that could be used for live sound, and that the pre's were good enough to use it in a studio scenario, that's why I was initially looking at the venice. Basically I just wanted to have a high quality signal from mics to pres to converters. Not the best but somewhat up there. here's the picture of the setup I was thinking of, excuse me for the beautiful artistic display of excellence...e

[Remoteness]

Again -- Why do you want two non-isolated outputs?

Also, you said, ground lifts on each. On each what?

Do you mean, on every isolated output?

I noticed you don't have any return (non-isolated tie) lines.

[gatekeeper]

that was the original plan, I think I'm gonna change my mind and just stick with one main out, and one iso, and a direct in.

[Remoteness]

Again -- Why do you want two non-isolated input/outputs?

If anything, you should consider one direct (also known as Main) out and two isolated outs. But, like they say, YMMV!

[gatekeeper]

a box like that made already and ready to go with 1 main, and 1 iso, would be around how much?

[Remoteness]

Originally Posted by gatekeeper

also about the whole multiple feed thing, your right it's not my job to split for foh and monitor mixes, I might just do the direct in's hadn't thought about that.

The direct in thingy is a groovy thing when you have a PA company that uses W4s... You can just patch a mult trunk right into your box via the input W4. Sometimes this situation may not work because of return lines and/or comm interfacing discrepancies.

[gatekeeper]

so your recommendations would be a direct in, a direct out, and if possible 2 iso?

[Remoteness]

Originally Posted by gatekeeper

a box like that made already and ready to go with 1 main, and 1 iso, would be around how much?

It depends on a few things...

How many transformers, How many returns.

Also...

The type of transformers, XLRs, switches, cable wire and such really makes a difference in the price.

[Remoteness]

Originally Posted by gatekeeper

so your recommendations would be a direct in, a direct out, and if possible 2 iso?

You need to figure out how you plan to work and what situations you're going to come across.

IMO, a standard system would consist of one direct output and two isolated outputs with ground lifts for each channel of each iso out.

I would also consider installing a few non-isolated (return) tie lines. You can get 56 or 58 channel snake and those W4s can handle up to 58 balanced circuits.

Imagine 48 to 52 transformers with 4 to 10 tie lines...

Now, that's something to think about.

[gatekeeper]

given a situation just recording, when would I use the return lines?

[Remoteness]

Originally Posted by gatekeeper

given a situation just recording, when would I use the return lines?

Well,

You may want to send a foldback or stereo mix back to the stage.

You may want to have a VOG or SA feed to the stage or wherever your stage box lives.

You may need to communicate with your stage A2 via (headset & belt pack) intercomm.

You may want to sent TC to someone's rig.

You could feed a small PA system or monitor rig when applicable.

How about an IEM system?

As you can see above, there are many possibilities.

[gatekeeper]

very interesting, sounds pretty handy, and plus if I bring it down to 48 transformers, that's big amount of pocket change that I can use for something else as opposed to 58

[Remoteness]

Some of our Active splitter systems have built in Y cords and the tie lines have built in turnarounds.

Our passive splitters have similar setups.

Look at this old dog... It even had active DIs, headphone amp, our comm system and cable tester built into it. Expendables and all our stand adaptors and such lived in the cobbies within the swing out doors. Crazy, right? It weighed a ton. We decommisioned "Big Burtha" and placed the 40 channel BSS active splitter system in a smaller 16 rack space rig with 16 tie lines and such.

[gatekeeper]

thanks alot for the advice steve. Let me ask you, did you the foh back in august at the university of connecticut? It was a live recording, the main artist was a brazilian composer by the name of Eliseu Gomes. I remember that the guy who did foh was also called steve

[Remoteness]

Nah, it wasn't me...

How did that gig workout?

[gatekeeper]

I was playing drums that night, and the guy who did FOH resembled you a little. Well I found him, his name is Steven Bowers you can see him here towards the bottom.

http://www.revistapalavra.com/Home/E...6/Default.aspx

That night is when the whole remote recording thing hit me in the face. The guy who did the recording was using 2 002's and some other interface while taking direct outs from an A&H forgot exaclty which one. But the point was that, the whole project was meant to be recorded live, and they never made arrangements until the last minute, where the artist just took his personal 002 and the guy they contracted to do the recording brought his 002 and that was basically it!
That's when I knew I had to start doing this, capture the live feeling, working in the studio is fun and all, but it's not the same as doing that one take with all the energy in the world. But, despite the lack of organization IT WAS THE BOMB! We rocked the night, 2 keys, guitar, ac guitar, bass, drums, and about 15 back vox. The auditorium was packed and it sounded awesome.

[gatekeeper]

A week before the event, they had asked if I had drum mics, which I do, some pretty decent mics I guess, beta98 for toms, 57 snare, d112 kick, c451 hats, 81's for overhead, pretty standard stuff nothing out of this world. They asked me to bring my mics and then at the last minute they used those sennheiser drum mic's which I hate, and sm57's on bottom snare, miced the hihat from the bottom with a 57 and some sdc by at for overheads. I don't know just pretty disorganized, we focused so much on getting it down packed musically that I guess PR forgot about the technical side of things.

[gatekeeper]

bump spells bump