828mk3 - inflexible signal routing from computer to 828mk3
Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 8:16 am
I'm moving to the 828mk3 from a Tascam dm-24 digital mixer, and the routing of the computer audio outputs surprises me.
On the dm-24, the computer had 8 outputs via firewire to the mixer. Those came into the mixer as input channels, very much like the adat digital channels come into the 828mk3. They each had fader and eq & meter, and I could route them to buses and outputs as I chose.
With the 828mk3, the computer outputs don't come in as inputs, but rather go right to a specific 828 output. So, on the computer, one selects analog out 1, or main out L, or whatever, and the signal is just summed in to that output. There's no channel fader or meter on the 828 specific to the computer output. The only way to meter the computer output on the 828 is the actual output meter, which of course also includes anything else routed to that output. There's no way to add reverb or eq (not a big deal) or even to attenuate (a much bigger deal) the computer output on the 828 itself.
Is it just me, or does that seem very inflexible? It would be nice to have some control over the computer->828 signals, at the very least an attenuation knob akin to a return knob on the selected output. As it is, the only way to balance the computer level with the levels of other inputs coming into the 828 and being monitored is to either modify all of those other input levels, or to control the computer output at its source, in the DAW or whatever.
My guess is that this is all baked into the hardware since, for instance, there's no physical LEDs on the 828 that could be assigned for this purpose (maybe some of the adat in channels could be assigned?) so it's not likely to change. Since CueMix FX is a reflection of the hardware capability, it probably can't be added there either.
So, since this is my first experience with a unit like this rather than a full-up mixing board, I was wondering if this is typical, and if others see it as a problem / nuisance? Was I expecting too much?
On the dm-24, the computer had 8 outputs via firewire to the mixer. Those came into the mixer as input channels, very much like the adat digital channels come into the 828mk3. They each had fader and eq & meter, and I could route them to buses and outputs as I chose.
With the 828mk3, the computer outputs don't come in as inputs, but rather go right to a specific 828 output. So, on the computer, one selects analog out 1, or main out L, or whatever, and the signal is just summed in to that output. There's no channel fader or meter on the 828 specific to the computer output. The only way to meter the computer output on the 828 is the actual output meter, which of course also includes anything else routed to that output. There's no way to add reverb or eq (not a big deal) or even to attenuate (a much bigger deal) the computer output on the 828 itself.
Is it just me, or does that seem very inflexible? It would be nice to have some control over the computer->828 signals, at the very least an attenuation knob akin to a return knob on the selected output. As it is, the only way to balance the computer level with the levels of other inputs coming into the 828 and being monitored is to either modify all of those other input levels, or to control the computer output at its source, in the DAW or whatever.
My guess is that this is all baked into the hardware since, for instance, there's no physical LEDs on the 828 that could be assigned for this purpose (maybe some of the adat in channels could be assigned?) so it's not likely to change. Since CueMix FX is a reflection of the hardware capability, it probably can't be added there either.
So, since this is my first experience with a unit like this rather than a full-up mixing board, I was wondering if this is typical, and if others see it as a problem / nuisance? Was I expecting too much?