Splitting audio to foh and monitor mixer

[dreerozz]

It is safe just to split audio using y cable from every mic or amp so i can route them to foh and monitor mixer, or do i have to use something like behringer splitter/mixer? or if my monitor mixer have direct output, can i plug it to snake cable and route them to foh?

[sabianq]

Is it safe?
If you asking if you will start a fire, the answer is no.

but in reality, you can do any of what you are suggesting.

a post preamp, line level signal will split fine.
It is when you want to combine signals that you run into attenuation issues.
but that is what a mixer is for.


go fourth and experiment young grasshopper.
and welcome to audio forums.

[oretez]

of course there are these (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home;jsessionid=GGTRMJhyGl!1469300675?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=352812&is=REG&addedTroughType=search)

[dreerozz]

wow, that was fast response from you all. thanx.
but i still curious, whats the best configuration? i mean whats the pros and cons of either using splitter, y cable, direct outs or else..

[oretez]

A 'y' connection (parallel) not only connects mic to next nodes in the signal path (FOH and recording consoles) but connects those nodes to each other. This is not necessarily a problem but . . . but can be. My experience is that some form of isolation is, shall we saw, statistically (that is significant primarily if you do this a bunch) beneficial.

General rule is that low impedance (mic) feeds high impedance (mixer), increased cable runs (parallel, split, in addition to simply length from mic to mixer) increase load on mic signal . . . increase the load enough and you will eventually degrade the signal . . . the point at which this happens is partially dependent on materials used (interconnects playing a more significant roll then most audiophile hype) as well as cable lengths.

different impedance levels of differing nodes (mixer, recorder, etc.) does, inherently introduce additional noise (how much is, of course, system dependent), without isolation the 'noise' does introduce feedback loops, eddy current clicks & pops.

next step from 'y' splitter is transformer isolation this doesn't change impedance load but does block 'DC' (on the isolated path) in both directions

Using an 'insert' as a direct out to next stage accomplishes something of the same thing, the 'return' connection is broken at the TRS interconnect.

one reason to use a stage box (manfcrd splitter) is simple logistics, plus home rolled 'y' cables, without isolation, running parallel to one another will induce, distribute, magnetic 'noise' among cables . . . the longer the cable runs the more of a problem this is

but essentially you experiment and you use what fits the budget .. . . but generally speaking isolating a parallel low Z signal going into a recorder tends to be at least slightly less problematic then non isolated.

[simoch]

hey what are some good suggestions for monitor mixers?

assume that i have some kind of mic splitter and i want something besides the small mackie monitor mixer and a lot less expensive than the allen heath WZ3 12M Mix Wizard, what would you suggest?

this is for a contemporary Church setting where we are getting close to switching to IEM's, but regardless would like a custom mix on stage for the monitors.

thanks!

[crystie]

No. Don't do either. You don't want to use the direct outs on your monitor mixer to send the signal to the front of house mixer is because the direct outs on the monitor mixer are probably post-fader and the levels going to the front of house will change with the level of the faders on the monitor mixer, which complete defeats the purpose of having two separate mixers.

The reason you don't want to do it the other way is because you don't need an entire mixer to split signal. That way you'd have to have three mixers in the deal, and that's not cool.

Most patchbays are automatically wired to split signal on one side if there's only one thing plugged in to the other side. That works as a splitter. Almost all patchbays come with a wiring diagram when you buy them new.

Hope this helped.

[crystie]

It all depends on how many monitor mixes you want. How many?

[dreerozz]

hmm, i think active splitter is the way to go.
but i heard some mixer has some kind of splitter, so foh snake can just plug to this output.is that true?

[crystie]

On the active splitter part, no, it's not an active splitter. It's efficient and cheap to do it with a patchbay. And on the mixer with a built in splitter, there may be a manufacturer that builds one, but, I think in that case they're called Matrix mixers and you're gonna spend probably close to $5,000.00 to get a mixer that has a Matrix mixer in it.

[TimmyP1955]

Many people regularly use hard-wired (direct) splits (wye cords or the equivalent) with no troubles at all. Unless you have grounding problems in your rig, it should work fine.

[howlingwolf487]

If you're looking for a small-format monitor mixer, try APB-Dynasonics ProRack Monitor (http://www.apbdynasonics.com/products/Products_ProRackMonitor.html)

It's gotten rave reviews and it has a built-in splitter.

[TimmyP1955]

If you're looking for a small-format monitor mixer, try APB-Dynasonics ProRack Monitor (http://www.apbdynasonics.com/products/Products_ProRackMonitor.html)

It's gotten rave reviews and it has a built-in splitter.


The quality is top notch, but so is the price. If one has a budget to meet, the Allen & Heath would be the ticket: http://www.allen-heath.com/US/DisplayProduct.asp?pview=69

[howlingwolf487]

If they (whoever "they" are) have gone this long with "putting up" with wedges or a bad IEM mix, then I'm sure they can wait a little longer until the funds are there to buy the best-suited piece of gear for their cash and circumstances.

That said, however, I do very much understand budgets and needs of equipment. They might consider renting the gear for a show or two to see what would work best for them and then aking their choice.