Members Khazul Posted April 18, 2007 Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 indeed. i was in the same boat as you when i first got my neutrik. had to sit down and draw quite a few diagrams. now i have a 96 pt TT patchbay, and that's even worse Urgh!! really dont want to see my wiring diagrams...Currently 2 bays thinking of adding another 2.Tempted to ditch the bays I have fromthe Netriks tho as these are starting to get a little bit crackly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Yoozer Posted April 18, 2007 Author Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 The term "normal" merely means thing A is "normally" connected to thing B without having to plug in an external patch cable to do it. In other words, hardwired? Anyway, I've expanded it a bit. I've got no problems with drawing diagrams. I've got huge problems with working 2 hours in a row and still getting nothing as a result. Did I already mention that this makes me feel like my IQ has dropped 30 points? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Allerian Posted April 18, 2007 Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 Given the single synth and single effects unit, I'd do it this way: But that's just me. Hilarious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Allerian Posted April 18, 2007 Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 Yoozer - what's the goal you'd planned to accomplish with the patchbay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Umbra Posted April 18, 2007 Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 Easiest thing to do is to set one up different ways and see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Yoozer Posted April 18, 2007 Author Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 Well, the diagram is actually not complete - I left the Echo Park and Micromodular out, and I want to start using the inputs of the Virus and the JP. Anyway, what I want is to have 4 effects blocks like in Ableton Live - as inserts. I want to be able to change the order - reverb > delay > bitcrusher or delay > bitcrusher > reverb so to say. The result will eventually be piped into the 01V or (future purchase) the MOTU 828. I don't care much for writing settings down; but I do care about keeping the connectors on the effects themselves intact and I thoroughly loathe crawling at the backs of the rack to change cables . I'll handle the wet/dry on the devices themselves; my 01V doesn't have much useful in that aspect and my Mackie 24-4 is going away because it's too big (maybe I'll get a 16-channel as replacement, the 01V is now a glorified ADAT box) . It'll just be a rig to experiment. Stuff like EQ and compression will be done in software anyway. Umbra: I know - but what to me is important is that I actually get to understand how this works, so I'll make an informed decision. It's not so much that I don't want to make mistakes and learn; it's that my understanding and how you're supposed to work with this is vastly imperfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Allerian Posted April 18, 2007 Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 Anyway, what I want is to have 4 effects blocks like in Ableton Live - as inserts. I want to be able to change the order - reverb > delay > bitcrusher or delay > bitcrusher > reverb so to say. The result will eventually be piped into the 01V or (future purchase) the MOTU 828. I don't care much for writing settings down; but I do care about keeping the connectors on the effects themselves intact and I thoroughly loathe crawling at the backs of the rack to change cables . Gotcha - thanks for explaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Umbra Posted April 18, 2007 Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 I went through the same thing when I got mine and felt like a moron for a while. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here since I'm doing this from memory but: Normalized: top on back connect to bottom on back by default, plug in patch cord to the top front and the connection is broken and goes where the patch goes. Patch cord going into bottom breaks default connection as well (usually, but not with all patch bays.) Putting in a cable is basically the equivalent of an insert effect assuming the patch goes to another device and that device goes back to the bottom front of where the patch came from. Half: top on back connect to bottom on back by default. Patch cable in the top on front can route the signal somewhere else but still routes to bottom on back. Patch in bottom on front breaks default connection. Basically a send effect situation where you still get the dry signal but have a wet signal comming in on another input. So patch cable goes to another device and that device's output comes back to a different input. Denormal: Top on back not connected to bottom on back. No signal movement without a patch cable. Best option for most flexability, but requires more effort when going back to work on an older song. What you do next depends on some factors. IF you have enough I/O on your audio interface for everything that you have or are going to have you probably want to setup some normalized connections with device outputs on top and the audio interface inputs on bottom. Then a seperate set normalized with your audio interfaces inputs on top and effects/synth inputs on bottom assuming your controling audio routing in your DAW. But, if you don't have enough I/O I would probably setup everything denormal and use patch cables on the front to route stuff so you have maximum flexability and can easily add in signals from temporary devices that you may have without having to patch them into the back of the patch bay, etc. Personally I think the best route to go is to go all denormal (except with mic's) for a couple of reasons. 1. Simplicity. Every device has it's output right above it's input in the patch bay and there are no signals routed anywhere without a real obvious patch cable plugged in. Life is simple, simple is better. 2. Flexability. I suggest all audio going into the daw is dry except for effects local to the device and any additional external effects are patched in by routing the audio back out the daw, through the effect and back in. That lets you record the audio dry and with effects at the same time or quickly swap in/out additional effects as well as using soft-effects where ever you want in the signal chain at the same time as using hard effects. 3. Adding new devices or adding in devices that you will only have for a short time is easier and doesn't take any thought at all. Anyway, in my experience there isn't a lot of value to normalized and half when you have a mix of software and hardware, stuff is either hardwired outside the patch bay like audio interface to monitors or its denormal. It's really only more complicated if your using older gear like a mixer, seperate tracking device, all hardware, or one of those odd people that thinks a certain device should be routed through certain effects most of the time but not all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members donaldcrunk Posted April 18, 2007 Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 Urgh!! really dont want to see my wiring diagrams... Currently 2 bays thinking of adding another 2. Tempted to ditch the bays I have fromthe Netriks tho as these are starting to get a little bit crackly... a friend of mine from Switchcraft (recently moved up to the parent co, gepco) designed some sort of fancy blue patchbay that you would probably find a bit more flexible. switching between normalled and non is done with a screwdriver (neat!), and i believe it uses D-subs on the back to de-clutter your patchbay a bit. depending on your DAW front end, it may be too much for you, but it may fit the bill at the same time. Uses TT cables, so be aware that that is gonna cost you.Most TT bays sadly require either soldering or a certain kind of self-stripping block connection, so they're not exactly prosumer - but they'd be more reliable than the Neutrik (even though the neutriks are nice), especially if you have a pretty permanent studio setup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members donaldcrunk Posted April 18, 2007 Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 Anyway, in my experience there isn't a lot of value to normalized and half when you have a mix of software and hardware, stuff is either hardwired outside the patch bay like audio interface to monitors or its denormal. It's really only more complicated if your using older gear like a mixer, seperate tracking device, all hardware, or one of those odd people that thinks a certain device should be routed through certain effects most of the time but not all the time. this is very true. studios w/o inline consoles with lots of routing options are best to just go with de-normaled setups, its just much damn easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khazul Posted April 18, 2007 Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 Personally I think the best route to go is to go all denormal (except with mic's) for a couple of reasons.1. Simplicity. Every device has it's output right above it's input in the patch bay and there are no signals routed anywhere without a real obvious patch cable plugged in. Life is simple, simple is better.2. Flexability. I suggest all audio going into the daw is dry except for effects local to the device and any additional external effects are patched in by routing the audio back out the daw, through the effect and back in. That lets you record the audio dry and with effects at the same time or quickly swap in/out additional effects as well as using soft-effects where ever you want in the signal chain at the same time as using hard effects.3. Adding new devices or adding in devices that you will only have for a short time is easier and doesn't take any thought at all. "Normal"/"Half Normal" is for stuff that has a logical default routing - for example - a hardware synth to you audio interface or mixer via the patch bay, or perhaps a guitar modelling processor to mixer/audio i/f via patch bay - of course that probably only makes sense when you have sufficient inputs to deal with all of your source sources (ie excluding sound processors). "Through" or "Denormal" is used just to bring connectors from the back of fx devices multi-track ins and outs etc from awkward to get at back of panel connects to front of rack connections where you can get at them easily. I would also use through mode for bring synth inputs onto the patch bay as well to enable synths to be used as fx devices. Same optionally with additional synth outputs that have no default route to mixer, so stuff that is labelled output 2/3/4..., aux out, direct out etc etc. Another gadget thats handy for fx rack patch bays - audio splitter / mixing merger - basically some thing you can use to split a sigle and send to several fx devices in parellel and serve as a restuirns mixer as well... Unfortunately have seen very few useful flexible units such as thios though behringer do one that seems useable (maybe I was lucky and ended up with a useable unit) - MX882. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khazul Posted April 18, 2007 Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 a friend of mine from Switchcraft (recently moved up to the parent co, gepco) designed some sort of fancy blue patchbay that you would probably find a bit more flexible. switching between normalled and non is done with a screwdriver (neat!), and i believe it uses D-subs on the back to de-clutter your patchbay a bit. depending on your DAW front end, it may be too much for you, but it may fit the bill at the same time. Uses TT cables, so be aware that that is gonna cost you. Most TT bays sadly require either soldering or a certain kind of self-stripping block connection, so they're not exactly prosumer - but they'd be more reliable than the Neutrik (even though the neutriks are nice), especially if you have a pretty permanent studio setup. What are "TT" cables? Mini bantons or something similar?Probably cheaper just buy a new set of bays everytime the standard 1/4 TRS jobs start wearing out...IMHO the ones I have wore out WAY too soon...I allways have loads of 1/4 TRS anyway - actually about half a mile of the bloody things... - urgh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members donaldcrunk Posted April 18, 2007 Members Share Posted April 18, 2007 What are "TT" cables? Mini bantons or something similar?Probably cheaper just buy a new set of bays everytime the standard 1/4 TRS jobs start wearing out...IMHO the ones I have wore out WAY too soon...I allways have loads of 1/4 TRS anyway - actually about half a mile of the bloody things... - urgh! tiny telephone, bantam, many names for them. forgot you're in the uk so you probably would call them bantams. if you don't mind replacing your 1/4 bays and having like 8 of them then they're fine i suppose. TT saves a good bit of space, i guess that's why i like them. jacks make a tighter connection, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Umbra Posted April 19, 2007 Members Share Posted April 19, 2007 Another gadget thats handy for fx rack patch bays - audio splitter / mixing merger - basically some thing you can use to split a sigle and send to several fx devices in parellel and serve as a restuirns mixer as well... Unfortunately have seen very few useful flexible units such as thios though behringer do one that seems useable (maybe I was lucky and ended up with a useable unit) - MX882.Looks like a useful box for saving some I/O. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khazul Posted April 19, 2007 Members Share Posted April 19, 2007 tiny telephone, bantam, many names for them. forgot you're in the uk so you probably would call them bantams.if you don't mind replacing your 1/4 bays and having like 8 of them then they're fine i suppose. TT saves a good bit of space, i guess that's why i like them. jacks make a tighter connection, too. Ah ok - used to have those at the BBC. Very expensive for home studio use though - could replace regular TRS bays several times over by the time you pay for a set of bays and cables, connectors etc. Anyway - I personally prefer the larger connectors - it leaves much more room for labelling everything and TRS means I can standardise on cables, connectors etc which save quite a bit of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Don Solaris Posted April 19, 2007 Members Share Posted April 19, 2007 but what to me is important is that I actually get to understand how this works You need this document: http://cachepe.zzounds.com/media/PX3000_ENG_Rev_A-4c04b5639c564689b717df9de75c2e87.pdf There are good examples inside, very easy to understand, just watch carefully the main picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.