issue08

EMUSIC-L Digest                                      Volume 46, Issue 08

This issue's topics:
	
	Mackie Automation (was Re: Fostex MIDI mixer) (6 messages)
	Mixer Automation

Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon .
You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with 
the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text.
 
The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the 
University of North Carolina.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:25:42 PST
From:         Peter Uchytil 
Subject:      Mackie Automation (was Re: Fostex MIDI mixer)

>
> >32 channels
> >of Mackie 1604 + MixerMixer and 2 OTTO-1604 automation is more like
> >$3000+ and 14 rackspaces.
>
> And you don't get full automation either.
>
>
> Nick.
>

Caught this thread a bit late.  Nick, can you explain a little more what
you *do* get with the Mackie automation.  From the ads it sounded wonderful
(yeah, gulible me).  Tell me what I'm missing.

Pete
--
Peter Uchytil   | ADC Kentrox Industries | "Let your dreams start a fire
peter@kentrox.com |  Portland, Oregon    |  Let your hopes fan the flames"

------------------------------
Date:         Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:47:44 +0000
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      Re: Mackie Automation (was Re: Fostex MIDI mixer)

>Caught this thread a bit late.  Nick, can you explain a little more what
>you *do* get with the Mackie automation.  From the ads it sounded wonderful
>(yeah, gulible me).  Tell me what I'm missing.

Read the ad. on page thirty-something of KEYBOARD and fill in the blanks. I
forget what features the Mackie has, but the automation upgrade doesn't
automate them all. EQ automation is lacking for one. Also, there's no
feedback on virtual settings (the Fostex does this with screeds of LED's).

In other respects, I'm sure the Mackie is by far the better mixer. But,
incomplete automation doesn't quite cut it for me.


                      Nick Rothwell  |  cassiel@cassiel.demon.co.uk
   CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance  |  cassiel@cix.compulink.co.uk

------------------------------
Date:         Wed, 18 Nov 1992 11:30:09 PST
From:         Peter Uchytil 
Subject:      Re: Mackie Automation (was Re: Fostex MIDI mixer)

> >Caught this thread a bit late.  Nick, can you explain a little more what
> >you *do* get with the Mackie automation.  From the ads it sounded wonderful
> >(yeah, gulible me).  Tell me what I'm missing.
>
> Read the ad. on page thirty-something of KEYBOARD and fill in the blanks. I
> forget what features the Mackie has, but the automation upgrade doesn't
> automate them all. EQ automation is lacking for one. Also, there's no
> feedback on virtual settings (the Fostex does this with screeds of LED's).
>
>
>                       Nick Rothwell  |  cassiel@cassiel.demon.co.uk
>    CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance  |  cassiel@cix.compulink.co.uk
>

Ok, I didn't even think about the EQ. My Fostex 2016 mixer that I use to
sub-mix my synths has no EQ, so I tend to forget about it. Is this something
that you're looking to tweak real time, or is more like having different
settings for each piece? I'm obviously not as sophisticated in my
playing/recording as you are.  I realize that whether you mess with
EQ during the song or just set it at the beginning of each song you are still
requiring the same "real-time-ness" of the mixer.  I'm just curious on how
you want to use it.

Pete
--
Peter Uchytil   | ADC Kentrox Industries | "Let your dreams start a fire
peter@kentrox.com |  Portland, Oregon    |  Let your hopes fan the flames"

------------------------------
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 23:19:44 +0000
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      Re: Mackie Automation (was Re: Fostex MIDI mixer)

>Is this something
>that you're looking to tweak real time, or is more like having different
>settings for each piece?

Yes. :-) Actually, I'm thinking mainly of snapshot mixing, but will
certainly experiment with controlled changes (assuming the thing doesn't
zipper too badly); in particular, riding the FX send/return levels would be
interesting, as might main faders (although MIDI volume gives more
selective control for multitimbral devices). Realtime control of pan is
probably out; it'd annoy the dancers...

The Fostex EQ seems to be fairly weak ("Bass and Treble"!) so I probably
won't do too much with it.

I'm getting back to MAX programming now, in preparation...!

                      Nick Rothwell  |  cassiel@cassiel.demon.co.uk
   CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance  |  cassiel@cix.compulink.co.uk

------------------------------
Date:         Fri, 20 Nov 1992 08:55:29 EST
From:         Larry Larraga 
Subject:      Re: Mackie Automation (was Re: Fostex MIDI mixer)

>The Fostex EQ seems to be fairly weak ("Bass and Treble"!) so I probably
>won't do too much with it.
>

At the customary 100 Hz and 10 KHz centers.  I've grown fond of the
Mackie's 80 Hz "Ppauun-nnch" in da bass register.

I just got the latest American Music Supply catalog.  Their prices are
usually a tad high for mail order; certainly better than the local stores
tho'.  They have the DMC100 and MixTab listed.  I don't remember the
individual prices, but 2 DCMs and a MT come to $1830 before shipping.
That's about $500 more than I had hoped, unfortunately.  I doubt a really
good place would shave even $300 off that.  Ah, but what's half a grand
difference for getting 16 stereo channels of fully automated mixer in
2U spaces?

Uh...  half a grand...  $-(

Now if the s/n were 90 db or so, would I scramble?  Hmmm...

------------------------------
Date:         Sat, 21 Nov 1992 12:24:27 +0000
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      Re: Mackie Automation (was Re: Fostex MIDI mixer)

>I don't remember the
>individual prices, but 2 DCMs and a MT come to $1830 before shipping.

Yup, that's pretty much what I'm going to pay (assuming the things turn out
to be good enough quality/functionality). List here is L1050.

>Ah, but what's half a grand
>difference for getting 16 stereo channels of fully automated mixer in
>2U spaces?

Quite so; or two gig racks each with a MIDI Time Piece and a dedicated
mixer (which is my plan)?

>Now if the s/n were 90 db or so, would I scramble?  Hmmm...

Well, I would...

                      Nick Rothwell  |  cassiel@cassiel.demon.co.uk
   CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance  |  cassiel@cix.compulink.co.uk

------------------------------
Date:         Wed, 18 Nov 1992 15:18:28 EST
From:         wbf@ALUX1.ATT.COM
Subject:      Mixer Automation


To what extent do you need/want to automate?  For volume/pan, are
controllers 7/10 inadequate?  I'm getting by with those, hence all I need
is line mixers.  EQ not included.  Actually, in order to do what I *REALLY*
wish, is to have sends and returns automated.  When that becomes
affordably available (as defined by my pocket book), then I would take
the plunge.  I do see the need/attractiveness of automated EQ, too, but
I'd rather have the pan, volume, fx sends, and fx returns automated
first.

Bill

------------------------------
End of the EMUSIC-L Digest
******************************