Mixer mess.

[cton58]

What book would you suggest on learning mixer functions, buses, sends etc. to educate yourself?

I’m a bass player. Not a recording engineer. I know there’s a lot online, but I like to use books.

[Kwackman]

Something like this?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Basic-Mixers-P ... C96&sr=1-3

[cton58]

Thank you. There’s so many books

[sonics]

I always like to recommend the David Miles Huber book Modern Recording Techniques

[ef37a]

Also, go to mixer manufacturers websites and download user manuals. Pay particular attention to 'signal flow block diagrams' these can teach you much about the internal signal structure.
Don't bother with Behringer though, they USED have first class manuals and diagrams, not any longer. Get clued up about Operating Levels as well, decibels and stuff.

Dave.

[ajay_m]

You can add Yamaha to the manual hall of shame too. Their manual for the dm3 is just dire. I work in technical documentation and plan to write a proper manual for it to share, haven't figured out the best place to host that given how many blog sites have the lifespan of a mayfly though.

[Arpangel]

Are we talking analogue or digital?
Analogue is very straightforward, and the best way to learn is by experience, digital is something else, and can be product specific in many ways, to the point where manufactures actually host teaching days.
Remember what everyone says, all you really need to learn is one channel of an analogue mixer, it’s just duplicated many times, same with digital but it’s more complex actually accessing things, seeing everything all at once, unlike analogue.
Also depends on application, are you going to use the mixer for actually "mixing" after recording, then we get into tape returns, in-line desks, feeding interfaces from groups, it then starts to get a bit more complex.

[tea for two]

I did a quickie on understanding mixers : there were over 1K SoS article responses from which selecting sound advice gave these 63 results amongst which there are stuff for mixer explanations.
https://www.soundonsound.com/search/all ... ion%3A6975

::

I learnt by getting my first mixer a Spirit Folio in the mid 90s.
Couldn't do worse than getting a used analogue mixer approx £50 thereafter going from there.

[tacitus]

Did you really mean “couldn’t do worse”? I’m not running on full power yet this morning, but I’m assuming you mean “could do worse”, or, less likely, “couldn’t do better”?

Anyway, that’s my pedantry for today. I too started with a Folio 10-2 in the 90s and learnt on the job. Still a bit feeble with groups as a result …

But half a dozen OK preamps I’ve used for orchestra and organ recordings on occasion. I can still get a mix together quicker on a Soundcraft than any other make. Have their preamps and EQ actually changed in substance or just in name?

[Drew Stephenson]

Whilst you're reading up on the ins and outs of mixers, it'd be worth reading up on gain staging as well (if you're not already up to speed).
Here's a few places to start: https://www.soundonsound.com/search/all ... %20staging

[Hugh Robjohns]

I wrote a piece way back in 1997 describing the terminology and basic concepts which might help:

https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/anatomy-mixer

Amongst useful books to read, The Sound Studio (Alec Nesbitt) and Sound Recording Practice (John Borwick) are worthy references which will set you up well... especially the first (Nesbitt was a BBC trainer and although updated, the book is quite old school and thorough in its teaching approach to the fundamentals which many find helpful).

As for understand mixers. The main point to grasp is that a mixer is really many mixers in the same box. The obvious part is that inputs are mixed together to feed the main outputs.

But actually, that two mixes, one for the left and one for the right main output channel.

If the mixer has sub-groups then those are additional mixes, usually working on a subset of inputs, with the group outs usually being mixed in to the main outputs, or to feed a multitrack recorder.

Then there are the aux sends (or fx or cue sends) which can be derived before (pre) or after (post) the channel faders. Again, the sends from individual channels are mixed to creat a master aux/fx/cue send.

So even a simple mixer may actually provide 6 or more separate mixes for different purposes.

[Matt Houghton]

You can add Yamaha to the manual hall of shame too. Their manual for the dm3 is just dire. I work in technical documentation and plan to write a proper manual for it to share, haven't figured out the best place to host that given how many blog sites have the lifespan of a mayfly though.

They published this one many years ago, which was brilliant and probably still puts them in credit

[ef37a]

You can add Yamaha to the manual hall of shame too. Their manual for the dm3 is just dire. I work in technical documentation and plan to write a proper manual for it to share, haven't figured out the best place to host that given how many blog sites have the lifespan of a mayfly though.

Really?! That IS a shame because Yamaha just few years ago not only provided a clear block diagram but underneath it a level 'graph' of each section. I shall see if I can hunt one up for the OP and post a link.

Dave.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Yamaha provide several different D3 user manuals. The standard manual (which I presume is the one the desk ships with) is available as a 3MB pdf, whereas the full Reference manual is over 12MB, and on a cursory flick through looks to be as comprehensive and thorough as previous generation Yamaha manuals which I've always found to be extremely good.

All the manuals are downloadable here (scroll down).

https://europe.yamaha.com/en/products/p ... oduct-tabs

Theres also a block diagram of the DM3 which is very informative.

[Wonks]

Analogue mixers are easier to understand here with block diagrams than digital ones, as for a digital one, the signals all go into an A/D block and then into a processing block and then out through D/As and that's it. As a lot of the digital signal path is often configurable, then it's impossible to show that in a simple diagram format, which is where a well-written manual comes in very useful.

So I'd definitely stick with understanding an analogue mixer to start with. And a decent-channel count one as well. A lot of the one or two mic input mixers have non-standard routing for maximum connectivity of the few inputs and outputs. It's best to first know what a normal mixer has and its features and the typical signal path. Then you can see and understand what the smaller mixer are missing, but it's still really necessary to have signal flow block diagram to understand exactly what's going on. Sometimes it's not at all what you'd expect.

[Wonks]

I've not explored the DM3 manual, although I found a helpful block diagram here... but I've found previous Yamaha manuals to be extremely good and thorough.

Helpful? I just get a Yamaha headed page but no diagram with that link.

Try this.

https://europe.yamaha.com/files/downloa ... _bd_a0.pdf

[Hugh Robjohns]

I edited my post above, but on my phone browser that link took me directly to the same pdf:

[James Perrett]

I always think of the signal flow in a console going in a U shape. The signal enters in at the back left, flows down to the front, then across in the mix busses along to the output where it flows to the back right.

Start looking at something simple like an MM or HH 12:2 which will give you all the basics and then you can start adding extra facilities like groups and extra aux busses. For a recording mixer you will also find that there's a second signal path for the recorder returns but they still conform to the same basic principles.

I've got a copy of "Sound Recording Practice" here which is very comprehensive although nothing beats actually getting your hands on the gear and trying things.

[ajay_m]

Yamaha provide several different D3 user manuals. The standard manual (which I presume is the one the desk ships with) is available as a 3MB pdf, whereas the full Reference manual is over 12MB, and on a cursory flick through looks to be as comprehensive and thorough as previous generation Yamaha manuals which I've always found to be extremely good.

All the manuals are downloadable here (scroll down).

https://europe.yamaha.com/en/products/p ... oduct-tabs

Theres also a block diagram of the DM3 which is very informative.

I think you are being too kind, Hugh. Have a closer look and try and imagine this is your first digital mixer. (it's my second, if I count the KMIX as my first).

Unlike the Rivage, the CL series or arguably even the TF series, this little mixer is going to be purchased by people who aren't sound techs and may have little experience with digital mixers. And yet the manual is written for a very experienced audience. It might be a weeny little unit but there's quite of lot of depth in there as Yamaha didn't want to be embarrassed like they were with the inflexible routing on the TF series.

Strangely, the reference manual points out the obvious, such as that to press a button on the screen, you touch it!. If it's grey, it's off, and so on. This, however is 'stating the bleeding obvious'. After that, though, it just throws you off a cliff. As a professional documenter, the example I give is a hypothetical manual that says

LRF1194 mode. To enable LRF1194 mode, click the checkbox. To disable LRF1194 mode, unset the checkbox.

This isn't documentation for the rather obvious reason that (a) it's obvious what to do but (b) what IS LRF1194 mode and why should I use it?

The Yamaha manual is just 300 odd pages of this.

For someone coming from an analogue mixer world, it does not explain any concepts. e.g what is the difference between busses and matrixes (as it turns out, almost nothing as far as I can see except the graphic EQ available on the busses isn't available on the two matrix sends). This isn't necessarily true on other digital mixers, I appreciate that on some mixers, you can only send busses to matrixes, but on the DM3 the routing makes no such distinction.

What's the difference between MAIN and STEREO out?. You'll look in vain in the manual - MAIN changes to the bus master out automatically as you switch 'sends on faders' views and STEREO out stays locked on the main outs.

Which protocol should I use in DAW REMOTE mode? (turns out to be HUI by a process of reverse engineering).

If I power down with phantom power enabled, is it enabled at power up?. As it turns out, yes, which is a rather stupid and dangerous feature about which the manual is silent. This is because in an environment where a mixer like this is used in a gig and then powered down, the next person to use it might connect something before powering it up, not realising that phantom power from the last selected scene is going to be applied (and consequently it's impossible to know on which channels this might be, either). The manual should warn about this as the users for this mixer will be less sophisticated than Yamaha's normal customers.
[actually it shouldn't do this at all, but that's a firmware issue I might take up with Yamaha. Someone will fry a synth or two and get very cross about that. It should just say ' enable phantom power?' on powerup, if the master was enabled, and underneath list the input ports that have phantom power set, if any.]. Yes of course my two most precious synths are on the TRS combo jacks but because, weirdly, Yamaha didn't equip the remaining 12 with combo jacks, you can't protect everything. Still, this isn't the fault of the manual but it IS the fault of the manual not to walk you through the dangers of phantom power.

While these are likely to be things any sound tech is familiar with, manuals are also supposed to be there to help people who aren't necessarily familiar with the product.

KMI's K-MIX, for instance, comes with an excellent manual which carefully explains each and every concept.

My Hydrasynth came with an exceptional manual, whereas my Yamaha FS1R manual is almost impenetrable, so this seems to be a long-running thing with Yamaha products, though I imagine there may be exceptions.

I do get for experts like yourself who have spent their lifetime in professional audio, you probably could pick up the DM3 and never look in the manual. But that's why there should be good manuals.

And yes, there are those Yamaha videos. If you can take more than 3 minutes of the presenter, you're a better man than I. Some scathing comments have been made elsewhere about these videos so I'll just say that 'patronising' springs to mind as the least offensive thing I can say about them.

Still - it's such a great little product I guess it's not the end of the world. Haven't had a single glitch so far, which is, in the end, what counts.

[Hugh Robjohns]

I think you are being too kind, Hugh. Have a closer look and try and imagine this is your first digital mixer.

I haven't read it in depth, I just skimmed, and I don't have a physical console to relate it to. It just looked typically comprehensive to me at first glance.

The Yamaha manual is just 300 odd pages of this.

I understand your frustration. As you'll be all too well aware, judging the right audience for a written manual is always a challenge. Assume little knowledge in the reader and you're writing a Sound Recording Practice tome all over again! Assume too much experience and it's completely impenetrable to a novice.

For someone coming from an analogue mixer world, it does not explain any concepts. e.g what is the difference between busses and matrixes...

I'm not a spokesperson for Yamaha's position here but, to be fair to them, the introduction of the Reference Manual states clearly:
Target User This product is geared toward people accustomed to mixing the audio of PA systems...

Busses and matrix sends are both very standard features of PA consoles. So, yes knowing the difference is assumed knowledge and they have made their (reasonable) expectations known before you get into the manual...

To help, though, in general (analogue) terms, buses (or sub-groups) receive signals directly from input channels, whereas matrixes normally receive signals only from the buses*. Typically, you might use buses (sub-groups) to create sub-mixes of specific instrumental sections to make balancing things easier — such as a drums bus, backing vocals bus, rhythm bus and so on.

Matrixes pick up those bus sub-mixes to create alternative balances which can be used for things like IEMS and monitors, or for additional speaker arrays etc just as a faster and easier way of creating a specific mix without having to dial up individual sends from every source channel.

*Given the inherent versatility of a digital console, the DM3 also allows channels to send direct into matrixes as well as the buses (sub-groups), removing the normal distinction between buses and matrixes to some extent. Other differences remain, a key one being that the buses can route into the Stereo Out mix bus while the matrixes can't and, as you noticed, the matrixes don't have graphic EQs while the buses do.

What's the difference between MAIN and STEREO out?. You'll look in vain in the manual - MAIN changes to the bus master out automatically as you switch 'sends on faders' views and STEREO out stays locked on the main outs.

From a quick scan of the manual, my understanding is that 'MAIN' refers to the on-screen main fader strip, the role of which varies depending on the current display mode. Normally it controls the main (Stereo Out) mix level. If you change the screen to show 'Sends on Faders', then it logically changes to become the relevant send's master mix level instead. That seems a fairly simple conventional (for Yamaha mixers) to me... although I have some familiarity with the Yamaha mindset as I own a DM1000 and used to use the related 02R96 and DM2000 consoles a lot in years gone by. The newer generations of console still share familiar operating paradigms.

Which protocol should I use in DAW REMOTE mode? (turns out to be HUI by a process of reverse engineering).

Reference Manual Page 269: 2. Configure the ports of the control surface of the DAW.Select either HUI or Mackie HUI for the type of control surface or for the remote device. Gotta say that seems explicitly detailed to me without any need for reverse engineering...

If I power down with phantom power enabled, is it enabled at power up? As it turns out, yes, which is a rather stupid and dangerous feature about which the manual is silent.

You mean like every analogue PA desk on the planet has always worked?

In olden analogue days, a standard ritual was the 'zeroing of the desk' after a gig, resetting all the aux sends, the EQ, the channel gains, and the phantom power (etc) precisely to avoid any surprised or mishaps when rigging for new gig.

Of course, being a digital desk, the DM3 comes with the ability to load an initial setup Scene with all phantoms off, all EQ's zeroed, standard routing set up etc. So the sensible approach if rigging for a new gig would be to recall an initial default Scene to establish a 'safe' operating condition and then configure as needed before saving the completed Scene ready for the gig.

There's also a Master phantom-off option in the Setup screen menus too, for additional safety!

But for many users, having the desk re-boot in exactly the way you left it when turned off is a not only a normal expectation, but a definite preference!

So, sorry, but I think you're being unfair there, too.

It should just say 'enable phantom power?' on powerup, if the master was enabled, and underneath list the input ports that have phantom power set, if any.

Nice idea. Certainly worth suggesting... but loading with a no-phantom initial scene is a simple, safe and valid solution.

Still, this isn't the fault of the manual but it IS the fault of the manual not to walk you through the dangers of phantom power.

Again... This product is geared toward people accustomed to mixing the audio of PA systems... The danger should be known to that level of user and the risks accommodated appropriately.

While these are likely to be things any sound tech is familiar with, manuals are also supposed to be there to help people who aren't necessarily familiar with the product.

I don't wholly agree. I didn't expect the manual for my new car to explain how to drive, or list the complete Highway Code. The basic function of a manual is to assist those unfamiliar with the product, yes. Some also go further and aim to educate the user on how to use it in specific applications... but these tend to be manuals for novices with entry-level products. As Yamaha clearly state, they have assumed the DM3 user is already familiar with standard practices and applications in the PA world.

You're arguing that that decision was wrong... and I really do understand your frustrations, and why you feel the manual should do more novice user hand-holding. Indeed, when reviewing products for SOS I do try to explain why a product's feature is useful and how it can be used rather than just list it, for all the reasons you argue. But the SOS magazine is specifically intended to be educational, whereas the DM3 comes from Yamaha's Professional division and its manual is clearly intended to be informative for experienced pro users rather than educational to novices.

So I do get it's not what you want... but I don't think it's entirely fair to lambast the company for making that choice based on who they think their customers will be.

The same problem arises in many other high-tech fields. For example, when I bought my first Canon DSLR a few decades ago I had the same problem as you're having with the DM3. I was out of my depth and lacked the knowledge and experience to understand what many of the functions were there for on the camera, or why they worked as they did, or why I even needed them, let alone how to use them.

So I bought a third-party book specific to that camera model that made all those things clear in a really helpful way. My knowledge and understanding improved considerably and, when I subsequently upgraded the camera to an even more capable model I didn't need such a helper book because the supplied reference manual then made perfect sense.

So your idea of writing a DM3 for Dummies type book (I'm not inferring you're a dummy by the way! It's just a brand of that type of helper manual) would be a great idea for those of limited experience to bridge the knowledge gap. Given the console's very attractive price and feature set I'm sure there will be many others who have made the investment without yet having the depth of knowledge and experience Yamaha have assumed.

[ajay_m]

A wonderfully eloquent response and I totally take your points. I guess with increasingly complex tech finding its way down the food chain (I mean, before the x32 came along a digital console was *way* beyond most non professional budgets), the market expands in ways the manufacturers don't always anticipate. In this case if you look at Yamaha's marketing material they clearly *are* targeting the product outside the traditional live sound market but possibly didn't brief the manual authors.

I will though defend the comments about phantom power. Thing is, consider where more than one person uses one of these. With actual phantom power switches you just make sure they are off, something I do religiously with my other bits of gear that do have manual switches.
In this scenario person A powers the desk down and person B grabs it to set up and starts plugging things in before powering it up. You see the Russian Roulette scenario here. Of course I personally won't do that because I am the only owner and user. But in a rental market etc there is scope for an unfortunate accident and there should be a failsafe here. Just confirm at power up that phantom power was enabled previously and require confirmation and show me what inputs will be powered.

[Hugh Robjohns]

I mean, before the x32 came along a digital console was *way* beyond most non professional budgets...

I'm not sure that's entirely true. Yamaha lead the way with things like the 01R and the 01V96 and Tascam and Roland both produced budget-level digital consoles for the project studio market. The X32 was certainly a game changer for a the live-sound market, though, I agree.

In this case if you look at Yamaha's marketing material they clearly *are* targeting the product outside the traditional live sound market but possibly didn't brief the manual authors.

I think that's a distinct possibility. As I said, the console has come from the Professional division, but it is being marketed across several semi-pro markets.

In this scenario person A powers the desk down and person B grabs it to set up and starts plugging things in before powering it up.

That would be silly and potentially embarrassing or expensive... and experienced trained operators know not to do it because exactly the same risks would occur if Person A didn't reset an analogue console properly and Person B plugged it up before powering on.

In the real world, though, it's always possible to misuse gear... that's why we have training. At least with a digital desk like the DM3 you can load a safe default Initial Scene to circumvent that problem.

I haven't read the manual so I don't know if it's possible to configure the Setup menus so that the desk automatically loads a particular Initial Scene on startup. You can on some consoles specifically to accommodate the scenario you describe.

...there should be a failsafe here. Just confirm at power up that phantom power was enabled previously and require confirmation and show me what inputs will be powered.

I agree that would be a nice safety feature with negligible downsides and very positive benefits. I don't know of any digital desk that includes that kind of warning feature, but your argument is sound and it would be very simple bit of coding to add during the startup sequence, especially as there is already a software Master Phantom Off lockout feature already included.

I commend your plan to request Yamaha to add it in a firmware update!

[Hugh Robjohns]

Reflecting on your phantom concerns a little more, it's a potential issue with the DM3 only because Yamaha like to use a single XLR for the channel input, capable of receiving line level or mic signals. My DM1000 is the same, and I've no idea why they do it, but it is a pain at times.

[ajay_m]

Yes, precisely. Why all 16 ins don't have combo jacks is a mystery to me. Still, as I said, it's one of the few pieces of gear I've bought that makes me feel utterly confident it'll work precisely as promised. So whatever gripes I may have, frankly, it's a brilliant piece of kit.

[Arpangel]

Start looking at something simple like an MM or HH 12:2

Oh James please, my heart is racing!