Unofficial Mackie User Forums > DL1608/DL806/DL32R/ProDX Mixers
Master/My Fader V2.0 Are Here!
WK154:
I did mention that I have somewhere near now 28 mixers and I do have a choice. Behringer has been quite satisfying in some areas but I do have Yamaha, Ramsa, Mackie, Behringer, ClearOne, Polycom etc. and I don't comment on things I don't have or have used extensively. Last week a PM5D but it's huge and expensive (a rental at the Honolulu Convention Center) that I played with thanks to my neighbor at AMT Systems. We had a failure of a safety circuit at Crown's top of the line amps ( it produced a thump about every 4-6 seconds and had us all puzzled) but like most professionals we made it a non-event including the audience.
WK154:
--- Quote from: nottooloud on November 12, 2013, 08:41:03 PM ---
--- Quote from: WK154 on November 12, 2013, 08:27:36 PM ---Nottooloud: That's why I posted the link if you don't understand it you need someone else's help. The AES and IES set standards not Yamaha. Cost savings of a few pennies isn't worth the loss of flexibility. If your happy with the results more power to you.
--- End quote ---
I used the handy search function in my web browser to examine that linked Wikipedia page for the phrase "dual mono". It was unsuccessful. So I ask again, since I don't understand what you're saying, what do you yourself mean by "dual mono"?
--- End quote ---
Dual means two (link). Mono means single (source). There is no interaction between the channels. Pan simply adjusts the loudness of the channels relative to each other. There is no "stereo" capability to bleed one channel into the other (width). KISS explanation.
LeeSteel:
--- Quote from: WK154 on November 12, 2013, 08:59:57 PM ---Dual means two (link). Mono means single (source). There is no interaction between the channels. Pan simply adjusts the loudness of the channels relative to each other. There is no "stereo" capability to bleed one channel into the other (width). KISS explanation.
--- End quote ---
As long a PAN (on the linked channels) is set at 0 (center), I would expect the two channels to be isolated. By panning I would expect one channel to be "bled" onto the other. Isn't this a valid description of the current operation?
nottooloud:
@WK154 Fair enough. So your archetypical home hifi is a dual mono? I don't recall hearing anyone call it anything but "a stereo" in the last 50 years, but whatever. Anybody cares about that why?
@Lee, panning away from a channel simply turns that channel down. It doesn't send it to the other output.
This is a remarkably capable and extremely inexpensive entry level mixer. Linked pan does what I expect it to. I think they're doing a great job.
LeeSteel:
--- Quote from: nottooloud on November 12, 2013, 09:12:24 PM ---@Lee, panning away from a channel simply turns that channel down. It doesn't send it to the other output.
--- End quote ---
I suppose I will test this on Friday. I have no need to pan the channels I have linked so I don't think I would have noticed that. Also, if it is working as a "home stereo" where common controls (DSP) effect each channel individually but the same way, then this too is exactly as I would have wanted.
In my book, once you need all that individual control over one channel or the other, there is no point in having them linked unless you are only looking to tie the volume controls together. At that point, two fingers does the trick.
It sounds like what WK154 REALLY wants is SUB GROUPING and not Channel Linking.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version