Aux compression enough for IEMs?

[sam.spoons]

If you go wireless you will need to eventually procure an RF analyzer...

why?

my working bar band's been on wireless IEMs for years... we've never "networked" or "analyzed" anything 

The FCC is getting ready to sell off more of the wireless spectrum again after a big selloff...

oh yeah, i guess our wide open wireless frontier is getting all civilized, isn't it? i don't see our 3 little bar band transmitters getting us in trouble, but i do see a day when fire and rescue chatter starts blasting into our IEMs! 

Well, I guess we will be the first ones out the door in the event of a fire, eh?  .

The Village People should be okay with that too 

[diggo]

I've got a config which is working pretty well except for IEM latency.

Aside from mixing bands and self-mixing my acoustic roots band, I've also formed an improvisation-based roots band which uses an array of loop stations and other devices normally used by DJs and EDM acts, plus phones, tablets and even a YouRock Guitar! We use those tools, but we make roots music with them. As with DJs, our sets are continuous, with each "song" segueing to the next. And we self-mix via my DL1608 (no FOH guy).

It's exactly the kind of act which can use the main mix as the dominant sound in the IEMs, with band members able to increase the gain of whatever tool they are using via their personal Aux Sends.

We run the entire config as mono. No stereo at all.

The topology I'm working with now relies on copying the left channel of the LR Main Outs to Channel 1 on the mixer. Headphones can run directly from the Aux Out used by each member. So Channel 1 is off with regard to LR Main, but is sent to each Aux via the Channel 1 fader for each Aux. There's a slight latency, but it's better than I anticipated and works fine at gigs. Doing it like this allows me to insert a limiter over the output of each Aux, but for backup I can also insert a limiter over Channel 1 (provided I dont select pre-DSP for the Aux channels). I also use a single condensor mic in omni mode (012) located to capture the room, which each of us can dial in to taste.

The above works great with wired headphones/earbuds. Sounds superb with Etymotic ER4 earbuds. It's great to have a good feel of what the audience is
hearing, but then be able to tweak our own feeds a bit when needed, knowing it doesnt affect FOH.

I've been playing around with a few different options for low cost wireless IEM, but I've encountered too much latency when it is added to the latency already inherent in the mixer config. I reckon we could handle maybe 5ms - 7ms of additional latency for the wireless IEM transmitter/receiver.

I'm really interested in the cutting edge stuff happening over the last couple of years with WiFi audio streaming and Bluetooth audio streaming. I own two sets of WiDigital AudioLink Wifi audio streaming systems, but I only use them for delay speakers - the latency is over 20ms, which is too long on top of the latency already in my config. But given I often use small delay speakers in the region 7 metres to 15 meters from stage, the AudioLink latency is not a problem in that context.

Anyone here used any of the Bluetooth audio transmitter/receiver sets being spat out like confetti from Shenzhen over the last 9 months?
Any latency numbers?

How about 2.4GHz spectrum "audio over Wifi" devices like the Wi AudioLink?

Thanks!

[Jerrylee]

Bought the wi audiolink and immediately returned it. Way too much latency. I posted a bad review about it online.  Also contacted the company who said they know about their latency issues. Blamed it on digital transmission. They gave me a figure of 28 milliseconds. That's huge. After trying it as an in ear I even tried it with my acoustic guitar. With a guitar latency issues don't affect the ears as much as vocals. And yet even with the guitar there was way too much. Also I didn't get more than 30 ft without dropping signal.

Bluetooth has even more latency. I thought I would try that a while back too. The latency is close to half a second.

[Harpman]

Lots of good info to digest. BT 4.0 is still evolving. Going to wait on IEM buds until the NAMM show. They offer lots of discounts and free fittings.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Harpman]

Bought the wi audiolink and immediately returned it. Way too much latency. I posted a bad review about it online.  Also contacted the company who said they know about their latency issues. Blamed it on digital transmission. They gave me a figure of 28 milliseconds. That's huge. After trying it as an in ear I even tried it with my acoustic guitar. With a guitar latency issues don't affect the ears as much as vocals. And yet even with the guitar there was way too much. Also I didn't get more than 30 ft without dropping signal.

Bluetooth has even more latency. I thought I would try that a while back too. The latency is close to half a second.

+1

Even BT 4.0 hasn't improved too much on the latency front.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[WK154]

I've got a config which is working pretty well except for IEM latency.
...snip...

The topology I'm working with now relies on copying the left channel of the LR Main Outs to Channel 1 on the mixer. Headphones can run directly from the Aux Out used by each member. So Channel 1 is off with regard to LR Main, but is sent to each Aux via the Channel 1 fader for each Aux. There's a slight latency, but it's better than I anticipated and works fine at gigs. Doing it like this allows me to insert a limiter over the output of each Aux, but for backup I can also insert a limiter over Channel 1 (provided I dont select pre-DSP for the Aux channels). I also use a single condensor mic in omni mode (012) located to capture the room, which each of us can dial in to taste.

The above works great with wired headphones/earbuds. Sounds superb with Etymotic ER4 earbuds. It's great to have a good feel of what the audience is
hearing, but then be able to tweak our own feeds a bit when needed, knowing it doesnt affect FOH.

I've been playing around with a few different options for low cost wireless IEM, but I've encountered too much latency when it is added to the latency already inherent in the mixer config. I reckon we could handle maybe 5ms - 7ms of additional latency for the wireless IEM transmitter/receiver.
...snip...

Thanks!

I'm trying to understand why you are feeding back your main mix to channel 1 just to feed aux outs? Fader cowboy? All you need to do is duplicate the fader positions in the aux channels to be the same as the FOH mix. This approach also gives the individual IEM users the opportunity to change and eliminate channels of no interest to them (create their own mix, change fader positions more Me). You'll also save 1.5 ms delay for the whole process as well which seems to be another concern in IEM's. Regain use of channel 1 for the FOH & aux mixes or use it for your ambiance mic. You have a comp/limiter on each aux out which should be sufficient for IEM protection. Depending on the IEM you may have built in protection there as well. Channel 1 comp/limiter is a waste of time IMHO for backup.
Now for the ambiance mic (audience mic). At 1 ms per foot delay from the sound source how far do you think you can go before it becomes annoying when mixed with the IEM's?. Five feet (5ms) is that where your audience is? Cozy. Plausible if you're recording or the FOH engineer listening solo but not if your the performer live.

Good luck finding latency specs on all but the real high end IEM units. If your using wireless mics that also adds latency to consider.

Read below 

[diggo]

I'm trying to understand why you are feeding back your main mix to channel 1 just to feed aux outs? Fader cowboy? All you need to do is duplicate the fader positions in the aux channels to be the same as the FOH mix.

And there's the rub - any time FOH changes, the Aux sends would also need to be adjusted. We prefer to hear the mix in our headphones as delivered to FOH. But as individuals, we occasionally need to boost a channel for monitoring. My method accommodates this and the latency is acceptable. Are you a performing musician working without a mix engineer? If not, I can see why you think what we are doing isnt optimal. But it works well for us and doesnt require an additional mixer - we can do it all with just the DL1608. So KISS has been applied, even though it seems to you that we've complicated something that should be simpler. We can each listen just to the FOH, or we can add a bit extra to monitoring individual channels if/when needed.

Now for the ambiance mic (audience mic). At 1 ms per foot delay from the sound source how far do you think you can go before it becomes annoying when mixed with the IEM's?. Five feet (5ms) is that where your audience is?

The ambience mic is located slightly to the front of where we perform, above the performance table we share. It sounds very similar to the sound when performing without IEMs and eliminates that feeling of being disconnected from the gig. We just dial a bit of it into the Aux sends, in accordance with our individual preferences. Again, it is a KISS solution when working with IEMs.

Good luck finding latency specs on all but the real high end IEM units. If your using wireless mics that also adds latency to consider.

The Line6 wireless products have good latency specs and work well, but we'll probably stick with wire until I swap out the DL1608 and replace it with an X32 rack. Our main goal is to reduce setup clutter by using less long cables, but we perform seated so there's no burning need for mobility. The two biggest problems are mic stands and foldback speakers. We've eliminated the need for foldback speakers and we can get rid of mic stands by using headset mics, so maybe that's what we'll invest in next. Wireless is a nice-to-have but not essential, especially given it means managing additional devices. KISS = wired.

[diggo]

Fader cowboy?

That's also definitely a factor. I'm a risk management kinda guy....I need the other band members to stay in touch with the FOH and not get lost in their own world, but controlling the FOH is on my shoulders.

[diggo]

I'm trying to understand why you are feeding back your main mix to channel 1 just to feed aux outs?

Another method we could try which would be better: send the Phones Out from DL1608 to a headphone mixer which can accommodate the main FOH feed plus discrete Aux for each headset. That would eliminate the latency and free up an input channel on the DL1608. Behringer's PowerPlay Pro XL would do that nicely as each channel has Aux input plus main input. Thanks for making me think different 

[WK154]

So you want DCA's . It doesn't always follow that FOH and IEM's need to be the same, it's mostly different but that's a personal preference as you stated. The DL's lack of features makes what you're doing a necessity. I'm a mix/mastering engineer, been that for a long time. You'll appreciate the X32 once you switch, I have. Maybe V3 will finally get you what you need virtual DCA groups. I'm not aware of IEM's made by Line6/Yamaha. Their specs leave a lot to be desired. You have an ambiance mic not a audience mic and that works for you. What headset mics are you looking at? Once we run out of airspace courtesy of the FCC we'll migrate to fiber.

[WK154]

I'm trying to understand why you are feeding back your main mix to channel 1 just to feed aux outs?

Another method we could try which would be better: send the Phones Out from DL1608 to a headphone mixer which can accommodate the main FOH feed plus discrete Aux for each headset. That would eliminate the latency and free up an input channel on the DL1608. Behringer's PowerPlay Pro XL would do that nicely as each channel has Aux input plus main input. Thanks for making me think different 

Scrap that idea it's been found to be full of surprises and it only gives you 1 IEM mix. Behringer has a personal headphone amp that would be suited for what you're trying to do called a P1 not the P16 but I haven't been able to locate any. It's on their website. Two balanced inputs and a limiter built in. You would connect one to the aux's output and the other to the main mix (I need to check the fan-out of the LR for how many it can drive). They have a pan and loudness control and it's small and rugged battery operated and low priced. Each performer would have to control their own levels as it should be. It's their ears not yours.

[diggo]

I'm trying to understand why you are feeding back your main mix to channel 1 just to feed aux outs?

Another method we could try which would be better: send the Phones Out from DL1608 to a headphone mixer which can accommodate the main FOH feed plus discrete Aux for each headset. That would eliminate the latency and free up an input channel on the DL1608. Behringer's PowerPlay Pro XL would do that nicely as each channel has Aux input plus main input. Thanks for making me think different 

Scrap that idea it's been found to be full of surprises and it only gives you 1 IEM mix. Behringer has a personal headphone amp that would be suited for what you're trying to do called a P1 not the P16 but I haven't been able to locate any. It's on their website. Two balanced inputs and a limiter built in. You would connect one to the aux's output and the other to the main mix (I need to check the fan-out of the LR for how many it can drive). They have a pan and loudness control and it's small and rugged battery operated and low priced. Each performer would have to control their own levels as it should be. It's their ears not yours.

I'm also a mastering engineer.

Have a look at the PowerPlay Pro XL - it can do exactly what I need: a main input (either one of the DL's main outs, or the Phone Output) which is routed to all four headset outputs. Each headset output channel can also accept an Aux input which can be mixed with the main signal. So each musician's Aux Send from the DL can be mixed at unity with the main FOH sound, but the actual audio level in the Aux channel will be set by the musicians using Master Fader on their iPads. That is actually a lot easier to achieve than using separate units like the P1. The 3 of us are positioned around a single performance table, so portability/mobility during the gig isnt essential. The only reason for wanting to use wireless was to reduce cable clutter, but the tradeoff is device clutter and increased risk due to wireless technology. It's cheaper and smarter for us to stick with wire. We'll get all the benefits we really need (as opposed to what we think might be cool) just by using wired IEMs and wired headset mics. I'll just use wireless for delay speakers.

As long as we dont forget we're wired and wander off dragging our kit (which has occurred!)

[WK154]

I'm trying to understand why you are feeding back your main mix to channel 1 just to feed aux outs?

Another method we could try which would be better: send the Phones Out from DL1608 to a headphone mixer which can accommodate the main FOH feed plus discrete Aux for each headset. That would eliminate the latency and free up an input channel on the DL1608. Behringer's PowerPlay Pro XL would do that nicely as each channel has Aux input plus main input. Thanks for making me think different 

Scrap that idea it's been found to be full of surprises and it only gives you 1 IEM mix. Behringer has a personal headphone amp that would be suited for what you're trying to do called a P1 not the P16 but I haven't been able to locate any. It's on their website. Two balanced inputs and a limiter built in. You would connect one to the aux's output and the other to the main mix (I need to check the fan-out of the LR for how many it can drive). They have a pan and loudness control and it's small and rugged battery operated and low priced. Each performer would have to control their own levels as it should be. It's their ears not yours.

I'm also a mastering engineer.

Have a look at the PowerPlay Pro XL - it can do exactly what I need: a main input (either one of the DL's main outs, or the Phone Output) which is routed to all four headset outputs. Each headset output channel can also accept an Aux input which can be mixed with the main signal. So each musician's Aux Send from the DL can be mixed at unity with the main FOH sound, but the actual audio level in the Aux channel will be set by the musicians using Master Fader on their iPads. That is actually a lot easier to achieve than using separate units like the P1. The 3 of us are positioned around a single performance table, so portability/mobility during the gig isnt essential. The only reason for wanting to use wireless was to reduce cable clutter, but the tradeoff is device clutter and increased risk due to wireless technology. It's cheaper and smarter for us to stick with wire. We'll get all the benefits we really need (as opposed to what we think might be cool) just by using wired IEMs and wired headset mics. I'll just use wireless for delay speakers.

As long as we dont forget we're wired and wander off dragging our kit (which has occurred!)

Yes it can do what you want but it doesn't play nice with the DL. I own two 4700's used for quartet practice and recording thru a Yamaha mixer. The pin 1 problem on the DL and the unbalanced input to the 4700 give you lots of 60 cycle noise. Using a DI box makes it complicated. I wish they had used balanced inputs on the 4700 and one less phone jack. Others on this forum have tried HA4400/4700's with similar results. Custom cables are required to quiet thing down. Check this out.
http://cacophony.aspinock.com/index.php?topic=582.0
 

[walterw]

The pin 1 problem on the DL...

the what now?

[WK154]

The pin 1 problem on the DL...

the what now?

We have all kinds of hidden treasures in this forum.
http://cacophony.aspinock.com/index.php?topic=383.0

Happy New Year to all!