From Brian Mulvey Sent Tue, Jan 16th 2018, 19:37
From Brian Mulvey Sent Tue, Jan 16th 2018, 19:37
I=E2=80=99m thinking of going that route with my RME interface. Why nightmar= ish? Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 16, 2018, at 11:37 AM, A. Horton <xxxxxx.xxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx> wrote: >=20 > I used to have multiple MOTU boxes with multiple ada8000's. Nightmare. >=20 >> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 2:30 PM, Mike Perkowitz <xxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx> wrot= e: >>=20 >> I'm up to two saffire pro 40s, each with an ADA8000 attached. it's kind o= f >> nightmarish >>=20 >>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:24 AM, DJ Maytag <xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxx.xxx> wrot= e: >>>=20 >>> RME Digiface has the ability to connect FOUR Lightpipe devices (4 in and= 4 >>> outs). I have a pair of ADA8200=E2=80=99s even though I can only connect= one of them >>> to my 828mk2. >>>=20 >>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 1:02 PM Boniforti Flavio <xxxxxxxxx.x@xxxxx.xxx>= >>> wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> ... THREE ADA8200s? :-o Where do you connect them? On my 828 I get to a= >>>> max of TWO of them ;-) >>>> F. >>>>=20 >>>> https://soundcloud.com/bonnyfused >>>>=20 >>>> 2018-01-16 20:01 GMT+01:00 DJ Maytag <xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxx.xxx>: >>>>>=20 >>>>> I have a similar question. I=E2=80=99m looking at an RME Digiface USB,= after >>>>> having used a MOTU 828mk2 for a couple years. I=E2=80=99m interested i= n the routing >>>>> that Total Mix can do for me when I=E2=80=99m not connecting multiple A= DA8200=E2=80=99s to >>>>> the Digiface, versus when I am utilizing 2 or 3 ADA8200=E2=80=99s and a= n ES-3mk2 for >>>>> modular signals. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Mitch >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:42 AM Boniforti Flavio >>>>> <xxxxxxxxx.x@xxxxx.xxx> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Hi Jason. >>>>>> Now that you are citing RME - would it make sense to migrate away fro= m >>>>>> MOTU 828 MK3 to an equivalent RME? The only "pro" I can see now (beca= use of >>>>>> lack of information/details, of course) is that on Windows I could la= bel the >>>>>> channels in Totalmix (whereas MOTU's CueMix doesn't allow for this, i= t works >>>>>> only on Mac OS X). >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> F >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> https://soundcloud.com/bonnyfused >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 2018-01-16 18:09 GMT+01:00 Jason Proctor <xxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx>: >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> some interfaces include patchbay functionality, which can be used to= >>>>>>> emulate the conventional analogue mixer send-return flow. so for exa= mple, >>>>>>> with the RME Totalmix system, when you click on an output, the "volu= me" >>>>>>> controls on the inputs effectively become "send" levels to that outp= ut, and >>>>>>> the "volume" control on the output effectively becomes a master fade= r going >>>>>>> to that output. patch that output to the patchbay and on to the FX b= ox, then >>>>>>> take the output from the pedal back to an input. (taking care of cou= rse not >>>>>>> to route that input back to the "send" output!) >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 8:26 AM, Thomas Krugman >>>>>>> <xxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx> wrote: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Yes. If I'm not mistaken and judging from this page the "STANDARD" >>>>>>>> setup is half-normalled which is what you have? >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> http://www.neutrik.com/en/products/audio/patch-panels/1/4-patch-pan= el/nys-spp-l1 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> The advantage of a mixer is that putting an effect on an AUX allows= >>>>>>>> you to adjust the SEND level for each instrument you send to that A= UX. >>>>>>>> With just an interface and a patchbay you have to be creative in >>>>>>>> emulating that. Experiment! The way you work and record will dictat= e how to >>>>>>>> wire it all up. Like you said, you're not going to record 24 instru= ments at >>>>>>>> once so you have a lot of room to play with how you patch. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 3:03 PM, Boniforti Flavio >>>>>>>> <xxxxxxxxx.x@xxxxx.xxx> wrote: >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Hi Thomas... >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> 2018-01-14 20:04 GMT+01:00 Thomas Krugman <xxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx= >: >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> It doesn't matter that you already have your 24 channels assigned= >>>>>>>>>> to instruments. When you plug a patch cable to the front bottom r= ow (which >>>>>>>>>> is normalled to an interface input) you are breaking that connect= ion between >>>>>>>>>> that bottom row and it's corresponding top row (the instrument). S= o again, >>>>>>>>>> if you patch the output of your pedal to the bottom front row of a= n >>>>>>>>>> interface input, the instrument on the top row is no longer route= d to that >>>>>>>>>> input. Do you know what I mean? >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> This is the "half normalled bottom row" configuration, right? >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> So yes you can do the advanced way easily if you want. Because >>>>>>>>>> there's no way you're recording 24 instrument inputs at the same t= ime (or >>>>>>>>>> are you?) so you always have at least several inputs free for eff= ects. >>>>>>>>>> That's what's cool about half-normalled. >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Ah, you answer my above question here :-) >>>>>>>>> I know that I won't be recording 24 channels at once, that's for >>>>>>>>> sure. I'm simply used to remember how I worked with a physical mix= er, where >>>>>>>>> I had all channels labeled with the gear names. I wouldn't connect= to let's >>>>>>>>> say "TR-808" channel (if not used) the wet signal of my SH-101 pas= sing >>>>>>>>> through the phaser. But I guess, this is simply my mindset, which w= ould need >>>>>>>>> to be adapted. :-) >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure I understand your second question. As for Stereo to >>>>>>>>>> Mono you could take just one of the outputs into your MF-104m. Yo= u can >>>>>>>>>> create a simple MULT with 4 or 5 jacks connected together and rou= te several >>>>>>>>>> synths to it and from there into your effect. What interface do y= ou have? >>>>>>>>>> Have you gone over the manual to see if it offers any special int= ernal >>>>>>>>>> routing capabilities? >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> I do have a MOTU 828 MK3 Hybrid - there's where I configured the >>>>>>>>> different "Mixes" as explained before. Those are like send mixes, w= here the >>>>>>>>> return (stereo) is being brought back into Mix 1 (Master Mix). Con= fusion is >>>>>>>>> arising because both delay and reverb are stereo units and being f= ed with >>>>>>>>> stereo signal. I honestly have to admit that I don't know if I can= >>>>>>>>> output/assign a Mix (let's say Mix 4) to a mono output. That would= solve my >>>>>>>>> question, I guess... >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> And how about doing this in your DAW by assigning hardware >>>>>>>>>> instruments to inserts in your software. Have you tried this befo= re? Google >>>>>>>>>> "DAW hardware inserts how to". Then you really open up even more r= outing >>>>>>>>>> possibilities. Your software should be able to compensate for lat= ency. >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> Logic: >>>>>>>>>> https://documentation.apple.com/en/logicpro/usermanual/index.html= #chapter=3D10%26section=3D12%26tasks=3Dtrue >>>>>>>>>> Abelton: >>>>>>>>>> http://blog.dubspot.com/how-to-route-external-hardware-audio-effe= cts/ >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Thanks, I'll read through the above eventually. But I really prefe= r >>>>>>>>> to work in hardware and only record to my DAW the "almost final" p= roduct... >>>>>>>>> F. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>=20