Using a Splitter Box or Main Stage Box
Big Mike
stage and leave the FOH to our sound man. Our soundman sits at the end
of a 100' snake and works a Mackie 1604 (non VLZ). I understand the only
way to accomplish this is to get a splitter box. If that's the case why
don't I ever see these advertised in the usual music magazines as it
would seem this would be a popular piece of equipment. Lastly, were can
I find them and are they the way to go if you want monitors controlled
from the stage..Thx, Big Mike
Aurasonic
Hey Big Mike,
A mic splitter for your MON and FOH positions is a great idea.
There are three ways you can split your mics.
1 - A transformer isolated splitter.
2 - An non-transformer splitter. (Y cords in a box)
3 - An active splitter.
You should have seen at least a few ads about this. Some of the smaller
companies place their ads in the back of most audio magazines.
Also, whirlwind usually has large full page ads. They don't push splitter per
say, but they do make them.
A splitter system is a popular piece for professional companies. They already
know how to build them and/or where to buy them, etc.
Companies that build and sell passive mic splitters:
Whirlwind and Wireworks come to mind.
Companies that make and sell active mic splitters:
XTA, BSS, Klark Teknik, Whirwind...
I think I saw an ad from a company called Radial (I think that was their name)
in the back of an audio rag a few days ago...
Steve Remote
Aura Sonic Ltd.
the home of ASL Mobile & Location Audio Production
Email: aura...@aol.com
URL: http://www.aurasonicltd.com
Mich
use the direct outs to send to the FOH desk.
M.
Big Mike <huff...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:39FD7A79...@bellsouth.net...
Mike Borkhuis
> use the direct outs to send to the FOH desk.
That does work, but bear in mind where in the signal path the direct outs
come from. All of them are after the preamp, so a change in the monitor
boards trim level will change the FOH level. Some direct outs are post EQ and
post fader too......
There are dedicated monitor boards that have a split built into them...
That would work better and leave the two consoles isolated.
Mike Borkhuis
Worship Technology
Mike Borkhuis
> stage and leave the FOH to our sound man. Our soundman sits at
> the end of a 100' snake and works a Mackie 1604 (non VLZ). I
> understand the only way to accomplish this is to get a splitter box.
More or less....
> If that's the case why don't I ever see these advertised in the usual
> music magazines as it would seem this would be a popular piece
> of equipment.
A spliter snake is a more expensive thing... Most musicains are not
willing to spend cash on their system let alone for something like that.
That's probably why you don't see them advertised much.
> Lastly, were can I find them and are they the way to go if you want
> monitors controlled from the stage..
Almost any and every snake manufacture will make splitter snakes.... Just
a matter of picking which manufacture you like and what kind of split you
want. The catch for you is that you'll need to replace your snake to get the
split..... That's not going to be cheap.
Mike Borkhuis
Worship Technology
Iain Critchley
What you need is a splitter stagebox and these can be made up by any
reputable maker of even by yourself if you buy a blank 'box' with all the
XLR cutouts etc in place and you fancy an evening with the soldering iron!.
I have used my own 36-way passive splitter box in exactly the way you
describe without any trouble - but bear in mind that you will lose 6 dB of
signal down each split signal path (assuming the load imedances of the two
mixer inputs and cable etc are roughly equal.
Otherwise it will work OK.
Iain Critchley.
"Big Mike" <huff...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:39FD7A79...@bellsouth.net...
E. Hill
> describe without any trouble - but bear in mind that you will lose 6 dB of
> signal down each split signal path (assuming the load imedances of the two
> mixer inputs and cable etc are roughly equal.
Doesn't this increase the S/N ratio? If so, does it really have that much
affect on the end result (what is being perceived at the ears of the
audience)?
- Eric
BillHart,KarenPierce
Iain Critchley wrote:
>>you will lose 6 dB of signal down each split signal path (assuming the load imedances of the two
mixer inputs and cable etc are roughly equal.
------------
Whereas the transformer split, properly done for the source and load you
have, will lose 3 dB.
Is this loss a significant reduction in S/N ratio? Probably not if you
singing loudly an inch from the mic or put the mic on a guitar amp.
Very likely so if you mic a soft instrument like a nylon string guitar
or someone speaking softly a foot from the mic. It also depends how
quiet your mixer is.
Bill
Dennis Moody
must say that in my experience I would strongly recommend an active
splitter box. I worked all over Europe in every crummy club you can think
of. I had the pleasure to have to use active and passive spliters. You will
risk grounding and noise problems with a passive splitter much more than
with an active splitter. Also keep in mind that you probably only need 8 to
12 channels and not a full 24 channel split box. Maybe you'll want to keep
all the vocals, your bass, kick, snare and a few other things in the
monitors. This will save you a lot of expense as active split boxes are not
cheap!! If you call a few big audio companies, perhaps you can find a used
one or have one built for you cheaper. Check it out and good luck.
Dennis Moody
In article <39FD7A79...@bellsouth.net>, Big Mike
<huff...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
--
Dennis F. Moody
denni...@earthlink.net
<http://www.dennismoody.com/>
André Huisman
> What you need is a splitter stagebox and these can be made up by any
> reputable maker of even by yourself if you buy a blank 'box' with all the
> XLR cutouts etc in place and you fancy an evening with the soldering iron!.
> I have used my own 36-way passive splitter box in exactly the way you
> describe without any trouble - but bear in mind that you will lose 6 dB of
> signal down each split signal path (assuming the load imedances of the two
> mixer inputs and cable etc are roughly equal.
This is assuming the split is a power split. In the case of microphones however,
the split is simply a voltage split. So unless you're using resistive ladder
networks or something, there shouldn't be any signal loss. If you connect two
inputs to one output, it simply means the output is loaded with a bigger load.
This does NOT have to mean the signal reduces as dramatically as you suggest.
Example: Simple mic: Output impedance 250 Ohm. Simple input: Input impedance 3k.
Now parallel two of those and the mic is loaded with 1k5 instead of 3k. The
reduction in signal will be some 0.5dB (estimate). Even if you use trannies, the
end result can still be the same. Only when you SERIES two primary sides of
trannies, will you get the 6dB loss you suggest.
Short: There is no NEED for a signal loss. If the signal loss is there in your
splitter box, I'd inspect the splitting method used. Remember: it's NOT a power
split, it's a VOLTAGE split.
--
André Huisman
New Line licht & geluid
hui...@new-line.nl
http://www.new-line.nl
--- pardon my French, I'm Dutch ---