Balanced line level mixer

[judelaw]

Good morning everyone!
I would like to know if such exist as a balanced line level mixer

I need two stereo inputs ( 4 mono channels), a headphones output, and also potentionmeters to set the volumes. That's it.

It's for monitoring purposes.

By the way how do you monitor yourselves when singing ? What gear do you use for that ? It would be interesting to know.
Thanks in advance.

[Alistair S]

Personally, I simply use a pair of closed headphones plugged into my audio interface and have record monitoring on. Alternatively, I could use direct monitoring from my interface and have record monitoring off in Reaper (but the first method is fine, generally).

Does that approach not work for you?

[Stella645]

Kramer VA-14 is about the only thing I can find that meets these specific requirements.

Why do you need the 4 inputs? Are you premixing multiple live elements?

I monitor either straight out the headphone out of my mobile interface (Zen Go - it has dsp realtime FX) or in the desktop setup I have a little SSL Six patched in to my MOTU interface and can monitor there and have a couple external FX boxes for some monitor reverb.

[karbomusic]

This will work unless you really need mono instead of separate L/R:

https://www.presonus.com/products/Mo...-V2/tech-specs

[bjohn]

Originally Posted by judelaw

By the way how do you monitor yourselves when singing ? What gear do you use for that ?

I always use direct hardware monitoring. No latency. Fortunately the singer I work with despises reverb while recording; she likes a small amount applied afterward but hates hearing any reverb when she's singing. She also hates compression, and won't let me use much on her voice even when I'm mixing. That makes my job easier when tracking, I just use direct hardware monitoring, no effects.

[serr]

Originally Posted by judelaw

Good morning everyone!
I would like to know if such exist as a balanced line level mixer

I need two stereo inputs ( 4 mono channels), a headphones output, and also potentionmeters to set the volumes. That's it.

It's for monitoring purposes.

By the way how do you monitor yourselves when singing ? What gear do you use for that ? It would be interesting to know.
Thanks in advance.

Most people use the digital low latency mixer built into their audio interface.

With the products and feature sets available, you'll have a LOT more bang for the buck with options and flexibility with the cuemix mixers included with most audio interfaces vs some little analog mixer.

I don't know if you're dismissing this for some reason. The typical low latency cuemix mixers aren't 2nd class in any way. In fact they would be higher quality for your signal path than most inexpensive small analog mixers. Once you get into the higher quality analog mixers, they're not small and they're not cheap! You'd end up paying 10x for what a stock audio interface would do just fine and with convenience.


If this is for premixing extra channels because you're running out, an 8 channel mic preamp and ADC unit with ADAT output to expand an audio interface with an ADAT input would be no more expansive and then you'd be able to actually mix those tracks after.

[judelaw]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

This will work unless you really need mono instead of separate L/R:

https://www.presonus.com/products/Mo...-V2/tech-specs

My idea would be to monitor myself singing on reaper, with reaper playing the instrumental track I'm singing on while recording my dry voice .

I would be mixing the line outputs of my babyface (1st gen) with the line outputs of my reverb unit (lexicon mx200). That's 4 balanced cables to plug in the mixer's inputs.

Then of course I need a headphones output to listen to the mix.

-The right channel line output of the babyface will be mixed with the right channel line output of the lexicon.
-The left channel line output of the babyface will be mixed with the left channel line output of the lexicon.

I won't be rising the volume of the right channels over the volume of the left channels for instance, But I want to be able to raise the general volume (left+right) of the babyface over the general volume of the lexicon (or the general volume of the lexicon over the general volume of the babyface).

[serr]

The cuemix mixer built into the average audio interface would be more featured, better quality, and less expansive. These are not 2nd class toy kind of things!

Reverb or delay for tracking can be latent, FYI. It's already "latent" by definition! You only need your live inputs with no lag. The cuemix mixer will do just that.

[judelaw]

My lexicon mx200's reverb is good.

I'm not able (yet?) to get good results with the reverb on the babyface 1st gen and its totalmix fx software, and I've also seen a few people in forums saying that the reverb on it is "questionable".

I spoke with RME employees about that and they told me that I shouldn't expect the high reverb quality from a dedicated Lexicon reverb unit on (I quote) "a cheap and old device such as the babyface first gen".

[serr]

So use your reverb then. That doesn't lead to dismissing the cuemix mixer for an analog setup.

If the reverb is important enough for tracking (and I don't mean to argue or dismiss that) and ReaVerb followed by ReaEQ really doesn't cut it, then go through the trouble to patch it in and dial it up for tracking.

The Reaper mixer and the cuemix on your interface will still be the most convenient mixers available.

If you insert and dial it up in Reaper, only monitor the post reverb. (Hopefully that's bluntly obvious!) Leave Reaper high latency. That's what my comment "It's already latent" was aimed at.

[judelaw]

What exactly is a cuemix mixer? Something like totalmix fx ?

ReaVerb is good, I was wondering also if I could monitor my voice with ReaVerb's reverb on it in reaper. It would double the latency though wouldn't it ? While with analog reverb I get absolute 0 latency aside from the lexicon's latency that I never felt existed.

[domzy]

yeah, you've got TotalMix. Why not use that & set up an FX bus in there for the lexicon (using spdif if it's free)

[serr]

Originally Posted by judelaw

What exactly is a cuemix mixer? Something like totalmix fx ?

ReaVerb is good, I was wondering also if I could monitor my voice with ReaVerb's reverb on it in reaper. It would double the latency though wouldn't it ? While with analog reverb I get absolute 0 latency aside from the lexicon's latency that I never felt existed.

I mean the mixer built into the audio interface. Cuemix/total mix/direct mix/etc. Monitoring reverb from Reaper through higher latency shouldn't be a problem. Reverb is "latent" anyway. That's what it is!

As far as the reverb sound...
For me, as long as it isn't something that sounds metallic and stupid, the eq I put on the reverb is more important. But like I said, I don't mean to dismiss a favorite reverb sound you might have!


Recording while monitoring live input from the interface mixer:
Your recording track is muted so you don't double your vocal with a latent copy in your monitoring. Instead of muting it, just don't route it. (ie. disable the master send or the track send). Now you can send from it to a reverb. (Or your inserted hardware.) Monitor that reverb return.

Some people like pre delay on their vocal reverb anyway.
Hearing the reverb with the system latency tacked on shouldn't be an issue.

There are different levels of interface built in mixers too.
On the simple end, you get a balance knob between the DAW output and the connected live inputs and that's it. Then the MOTU or RME units that have a more DAW like system with routing options and even fx built in. Then there are the X32 and similar mix systems that are full mix system first and recording interface second. If you need a little more flexibility in the interface mixer, you might want to look at upgrading the interface before an external analog solution.

[judelaw]

Originally Posted by domzy

yeah, you've got TotalMix. Why not use that & set up an FX bus in there for the lexicon (using spdif if it's free)

I don't think it's possible : The spdif on the lexicon mx200 is rca, while the spdif on the babyface 1st gen is optical toslink.

Edit : Although I'm thinking, maybe there is some kind of a converter, but it would introduce latency wouldn't it ? Also I've never done an fx send, I have no clue about any of this or if it works, but why not, sure.

[The Kid]

I think you're over-complicating things. Any old software reverb will do the job for headphone mixes lol
I even have a system for using direct monitoring AND software reverb. If you think hard enough you can figure it out lol
It works.

[judelaw]

@serr: Actually I like my reaverb reverb files more than the lexicon's reverb.So if it works well that would be cool.What do I have to do for that? Just turning on "record monitoring"(red arrow the picture)and add some reverb to the "show track input fx windows" button (blue arrow)?

https://i.ibb.co/Vt9LBX8/monitoring-reaper.png

[Alistair S]

Originally Posted by judelaw

@serr: Actually I like my reaverb reverb files more than the lexicon's reverb.So if it works well that would be cool.What do I have to do for that? Just turning on "record monitoring"(red arrow the picture)and add some reverb to the "show track input fx windows" button (blue arrow)?

https://i.ibb.co/Vt9LBX8/monitoring-reaper.png

Yes, you could do that. If you place the reverb on the input fx the recording will be of the vocal with the reverb applied.

However, you could simply put the reverb on the normal track FX (or even as a send to a reverb bus) and you would still hear it while tracking - but you'd also be able to adjust it later if you wanted to (the recording itself will be of the dry vocal).

[Stella645]

Originally Posted by judelaw

@serr: Actually I like my reaverb reverb files more than the lexicon's reverb.So if it works well that would be cool.What do I have to do for that? Just turning on "record monitoring"(red arrow the picture)and add some reverb to the "show track input fx windows" button (blue arrow)?

https://i.ibb.co/Vt9LBX8/monitoring-reaper.png

You can direct monitor yourself in the interface to avoid latency on the dry signal and still add reaverb (which will have latency but will just seem like a little extra predelay so no big deal)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TtOATfL0EU

If you use Reaverb make sure zl and ll boxes are ticked.

[serr]

Originally Posted by judelaw

@serr: Actually I like my reaverb reverb files more than the lexicon's reverb.So if it works well that would be cool.What do I have to do for that? Just turning on "record monitoring"(red arrow the picture)and add some reverb to the "show track input fx windows" button (blue arrow)?

https://i.ibb.co/Vt9LBX8/monitoring-reaper.png

I monitor live inputs during tracking with the mixer in one of my audio interfaces. That leads to the recording track needing to be muted.
(Most people record this way. Hopefully this is clear so far either way!)

Instead of muting the recording track, just don't assign it to an output. (ie Don't tick the master send if using that or remove the send to your bus if doing it that way.)

That lets you send somewhere else - like to a reverb - while keeping the dry sound from it unheard.

The input monitor switch for the recording track will need to be on input or auto (needs to be rolling to hear on auto).


There are 6 other ways to do the same thing between mute buttons, pre vs post sending, etc. I use muted recording bin tracks anyway so the above is the fewest mouse clicks to setup.

Again, this introduces the current latency setting as a pre delay for that reverb. And again again, it's not going to be a problem. Or maybe you even like it and start dialing up a similar pre delay on your reverb in post.

As a rule of thumb, look to your DAW and the mixer built into your audio interface for solutions. These are powerful tools!

[judelaw]

Hi everyone!
I got quite lazy these last months with me failing at managing anything technical, but today I finally tried the fx on reaper for monitoring, I managed but I didn't like it. The reverb was not natural, it came late and didn't sound right and It's not very practical to turn it off each time if you want a different reverb for tracking and for play back.

I tend to think that nothing beats the lexicon for monitoring and that anything else is amateur. I know I might be wrong if not incompetent, but I mean the lexicon just works nice, no questions asked.

So here I am, back with my first question: Where can I find a Balanced line level mixer? I've found the Kramer VA-14 on ebay, but it's quite expensive (500€)

[bjohn]

Originally Posted by judelaw

So here I am, back with my first question: Where can I find a Balanced line level mixer? I've found the Kramer VA-14 on ebay, but it's quite expensive (500€)

A balanced line level mixer shouldn't be hard to find, what makes it challenging is your requirement for two STEREO balanced inputs.

[judelaw]

Hi Bjohn!
No, I don't need two stereo balanced inputs, I just need 3 balanced mono line inputs (and a headphones out), That's it.
I need to be able to adjust the volume and I think also the pan of each input.

[bjohn]

Originally Posted by judelaw

Hi Bjohn!
No, I don't need two stereo balanced inputs, I just need 3 balanced mono line inputs (and a headphones out), That's it.
I need to be able to adjust the volume and I think also the pan of each input.

Okay, check out the Sound Devices 302 field mixer. A long-discontinued unit, available only on the used market. It has three balanced mono XLR inputs, each of which can be set to either line or mic level. Each channel can be panned, but only to hard left, hard right, or center. Built like a tank and can run for more than a full day on three AA batteries or you can power it from other sources.

If you need continuously adjustable panning you could look at the Sound Devices 442, which is more expensive but gives you four inputs with continuous panning dials for each channel plus a lot of interesting options for outputs.

Both of these mixers have Lundahl transformers in the preamps and at the stereo outputs, which is a plus if you ever want to use them for recording.

[judelaw]

It's ok with me if there's more than 3 inputs. i won't be using it to record, just for monitoring.
Do you know anything good with a smaller price tag ?

[bjohn]

Originally Posted by judelaw

It's ok with me if there's more than 3 inputs. i won't be using it to record, just for monitoring.
Do you know anything good with a smaller price tag ?

Seems like any small mixer would do it, what about the Mackie MIX5:

https://mackie.com/en/products/mixer...ries/mix5.html

That's about $70 USD.

[judelaw]

Nice
Is the sound affected when it goes though this kind of mixer? Will I be able to hear a difference before and after it goes though the mixer? Will there be some potentially annoying higher noise floor level or something? Or is it basically neutral?

[bjohn]

Originally Posted by judelaw

Nice
Is the sound affected when it goes though this kind of mixer? Will I be able to hear a difference before and after it goes though the mixer? Will there be some potentially annoying higher noise floor level or something? Or is it basically neutral?

It's all line level so I'm assuming it would be completely neutral but I've never used one of these. Similar small analog mixers are available from lots of other manufacturers such as Soundcraft, Presonus, even Peavey.

[judelaw]

Thanks a lot Bjohn!

Now I just have to find an either nice or neutral preamp with one mic input and two balanced line outputs. Do you have a suggestion about that ?

[bjohn]

Originally Posted by judelaw

Now I just have to find an either nice or neutral preamp with one mic input and two balanced line outputs. Do you have a suggestion about that ?

I think you'd need a mixer for that. Normally a standalone preamp would have one mono output for each input.

[serr]

Originally Posted by judelaw

Hi everyone!
I got quite lazy these last months with me failing at managing anything technical, but today I finally tried the fx on reaper for monitoring, I managed but I didn't like it. The reverb was not natural, it came late and didn't sound right

Fair enough review I suppose?
The "came in late" part. Are you describing the delay from your higher latency choice? (ie. The 'set the computer latency high' and use interface direct monitoring workflow.) What block size is that?

Originally Posted by judelaw

and It's not very practical to turn it off each time if you want a different reverb for tracking and for play back.

You know about saving projects, right? Dial up both reverb choices for tracking and mixing. Mute one or the other. Save the project and pick up from where you left off last time.

Originally Posted by judelaw

I tend to think that nothing beats the lexicon for monitoring and that anything else is amateur. I know I might be wrong if not incompetent, but I mean the lexicon just works nice, no questions asked.

Fair enough review.

Originally Posted by judelaw

So here I am, back with my first question: Where can I find a Balanced line level mixer? I've found the Kramer VA-14 on ebay, but it's quite expensive (500€)

Wait... What happened? We were just talking about reverb choices. Did we switch gears here to talking about a small live mix situation sans computers and sans recording?

If not... As mentioned, you can use the live (direct) mixer built into an audio interface as you please. That means you can connect your favorite fx units and run them as you wish. Product feature sets as they are today means you probably would get a direct mixer in an interface with the features you need for less than a small stand alone mixer. Then you'd have the live inputs (including that Lexicon you like) recording at any moment without challenging interconnections and splitting mic preamp analog outputs.

What do you have right now?
What interface?

[judelaw]

Hi Serr!
I have a Babyface old gen.

[judelaw]

Originally Posted by bjohn

I think you'd need a mixer for that. Normally a standalone preamp would have one mono output for each input.

Well then a mixer it is . But my Mic doesn't need phantom power. What I sing in the mic has to take two paths
-First path : Directly into the babyface input.
-Second path : It has to be transformed from mic level to line level then passed through the lexicon to get echo on it, then sent to my headphone mix.

[bjohn]

Originally Posted by judelaw

Well then a mixer it is . But my Mic doesn't need phantom power. What I sing in the mic has to take two paths
-First path : Directly into the babyface input.
-Second path : It has to be transformed from mic level to line level

A preamp isn't just about providing phantom power: even a dynamic mic needs a preamp. When you say "directly into the babyface input" I assume you mean through one of the XLR inputs on the d-sub breakout cables, not the Hi-Z guitar input next to the headphone jacks?

I don't know about the first-generation Babyface's routing capabilities with TotalMix, but it must have at least one line-level output among the d-sub breakout cables; is there any way you can configure it to route the mic input to the line output?

[judelaw]

There is a dedicated xlr input on my babyface that accepts both mic and line level.

Originally Posted by bjohn

I don't know about the first-generation Babyface's routing capabilities with TotalMix, but it must have at least one line-level output among the d-sub breakout cables; is there any way you can configure it to route the mic input to the line output?

I don't understand, and what for ?

My goal is to mix in my headphones the music played by the output of the baby face with my singing + reverb on my voice, and to record my dry voice with the dedicated line/mic level xlr input of my babyface old gen.

I previously tried to do that using the built-in reverb of the babyface, then using reverb on reaper. I managed both but didn't like it. So now I'm looking for a solution using my lexicon 200 reverb unit and a mixer (also eventually my Presonus TubePRE preamp)

[serr]

Originally Posted by judelaw

Hi Serr!
I have a Babyface old gen.

OK, so you have two analog inputs and 4 analog outputs to play with. Not enough if you need 3 inputs! (And no matter what you plan to do with monitoring. So that might justify a new interface purchase to get more inputs. Either add another interface to it in aggregate device setup or replace it with one with more I/O.)

That aside, you have that I/O for now.
That thing has a basic little mixing board built in that you run with RME's TotalMix app. (Works like a DAW itself.) You could set up to record vocals and use your Lexicon reverb. Use the TotalMix mixer to send to the Lexi using one of the outputs. Return it to the 2nd input. Dial up the TotalMix board to taste for tracking. You'll be monitoring with phones of course. You'll have the vocal mic and the Lexi output on inputs 1 & 2 respectively to record into Reaper. (Might as well record that reverb you dialed up since it's already patched in right there.)

And yeah, that means you'll have to patch your control room monitors back into the outputs when you go back to mixing. So there's another reason to upgrade or add on to your interface for more I/O.

And that leads to...
You will easily find an interface with the ins and outs you need and with a built in zero latency mixer for much less than putting together separate pieces with an analog mixer with the required splitting and interconnections.

And again, you have that RME and it's built in mixer right now. (Input shy as it might be.) You may have to patch cables back and forth between tracking and mixing but it's right there and already paid for. Patching a couple cables isn't exactly a show stopper! Save the setup in TotalMix. Once you get rolling you'll know your setup and patch back and forth on autopilot.

[judelaw]

I think I'm done playing with total mix. I'm a bit stupid :/ For what I understand you say that it's possible to somehow achieve what I want by just using the lexicon and the babyface. I'm not sure it's possible. I'm looking looking for something simple now.

If my presonus Tubepre had two balanced outputs (It has only one balanced output and one useless unbalanced output),I would just have to buy a Mackie MIX5 as Bjohn suggested, and I everything would be solved.

[serr]

The "analog" mixer you currently own has controls that come in the form of a piece of software called TotalMix. That's what that little mixer (that's part of the Babyface interface) was designed and shipped with. So if that becomes a show stopper for using this hardware, that's your choice and fair enough.

Building physical controls costs money. This and the digitally controlled approach has led to the products available. And that's why you don't just see the options you are looking for anymore - and why that configuration of gear would be quite expensive for the return. (Low bang for the buck.) Pick your battles wisely. I tend to put the actual hardware choices and quality thereof first. That's the expensive part and the actual physical parts that have to be built. The software control - in such cases - is just a learning curve as long as there are no gross bugs that lead to instability or crashes. But it's fair to reject something because of poor software control! That's really the choice.