Hugh Robjohns wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 1:07 pmWilliamAshley wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 12:12 amAgain it is 2025 this is now a multi decade old analog mixing console, and I am wondering what is the best way to use this with current product offerings (or older product offerings).
It seems rather odd to have a console that big and not already know how you want to use it with a DAW.
I have some ideas on how I would like to use it - but where I am now may not be the full potential of how the desk can be used. For instance, here are some of my current use cases - sending mixer channels from the daw to the channels to take advantage of the low and highpass and eq - like a channel strip of sorts, without inserts hardware compression etc.. isn't doable but some of fxs or dsp can be hooked up as inserts on a given channel again an advantage of the apollo or using the zenq on a few lines is that I can configure the inputs and outputs on the zenq and apollo to use as dsp fxs routed through a system - basically using them like the hardware units may be albeit with slight latency but still less than processing through a windows system.
The DDX3216 has primitive DSP also so it could also be hooked up - it actually also uses a sharc processor also for their onboard fxs. All these fxs however are not very tactile as combared to knobs on the mixer so for me currently feel more like set it and forget it, the one except would be possible if I can figure out how to use console 1 with UAD plugins loaded into the apollo as it gives more on the fly adjustment of parameters - however both the ddx3216 and console 1 still really only give channel by channel adjustment that would be more programatic than stream of consciousness. I don't like to think to much when I am playing with music, so I try to avoid anything that has me stop and do something other than interact with the sound - I would suspect this is more an issue of not being fully muscle memory for me though.
I make music "in the daw" although occassionally I use outboard gear (I should use it more often) I am pretty in the box and I am trying to find ways to force myself to use more automations and want to tweak stuff. The reason for the icon qcon g2 and ddx3216 as well as my controllers was to get me to expand my comfort zone and start to mix the music more and with more function beyond mouse click after mouseclick but to engage more with the process.
The Series 5 was sort of breaking the rule of impulse buying, it basically purchased itself. These mixers when they do show up are dramatically discounted to their original costs and as far as budget mixing boards have some useful capabilities.
Even using the VU meters feels more natural than using a GUI vu meter. I have found it is easier to monitor the sound through the mixing console than I would through my headphones. The levels feel more real especially peaks, like in sending out through the apollo into the desk I could massively hear and see the difference on the levels and dial things in - I felt it served as a mixing aid just running the output into the desk.
Now how I actually am interested in using the desk goes back to the direct input/outut currently I tend to use DAW mixers more or less on a sample or instrument basis but I'd like to start printing more stuff such as loops or sections of audio - so in this way I'd like to start mixing wet mixes of stems. So I envisioned it a bit of how a mixing console may be used in doing mix levels for individual channels such as classic kick, snare, bass etc.. I still am not concrete in template but I'd like to mix individual percussion channels into drum stems so they can be used more effectively as loops. I realize rendering them out or doing a send to a bus may make sense but I have this sense that doing it through an analogue desk rather than a daw mixer bus may get better results as a process.
I am still very new to mix downs, I seldom get something to a mix stage as most of my sound tweaking etc.. is done at a compositional stage but I'd like to start to mix audio a bit more but there is a bit of a wall. So in this way I see it as a bit of an enabler to expand my comfort zone on what sound I play with.
Of course I can see it also as a means of track mixing much like printing audio.
I also had the thought of using it as a snapshot for adjustments, so instead of relying on loading an eq and high and lowpass on each mixer channel in the daw, I could run the mix through the series 5 and see what I want to tweak then load vsts on a channel by channel basis in the box. While the audio may not be identical I had the thought it may act as a bit of a compass.
I am sort of commonly eqing and doing passes on stuff now to isolate channels and get the sound I am looking for with individual instruments and channels however its a lot of pigeon clicking with the mouse. A daw controller with full channel strip might serve this function better as it could actually directly tweak parameters but I havn't seen any affordable daw controllers that have a lot of channels. Currently I do have the console 1 that sort of does this but it is still a track by track adjustment rather than having all the tracks laid out, and buying like 10 console 1's is still cost barrier - so its partly the ease of having the channels laid out and easily accessible. I would love have each channel work as an automation like channel 1 but the cost of this is still prohibitive for my amateur budget.
Finally the ability to have multiple microphones mic'd up and my keyboards/synths/drum machines etc.. have their own channels is useful - as these are analogue devices anyway, I am thinking there probably won't be much signal loss - and it allows me to fine tune each of my hardware units or even use my analogue gear through the inserts when applicable such as a keyboard fxs section or a sampler fxs section etc.. so this traditional use of the desk is still there also of course you could go direct to interface with it but again it sort of goes back to the pass filters and eq being on hand, as well as being able to set general levels, and since these are mono channels to assign both stereo channels separately. Again just a little thing but it gets me more active as I am lazy with in the box stuff. In a way I feel it will encourage me to play and experiment more with the sound.
Much depends on how many channels you want to record simultaneously — presumably a lot — in which case you're best off using either the channel direct outputs to feed the DAW (and return DAW outputs to other channels at the other end of the desk). Or use the channel insert send/returns to effectively patch the DAW into those channel strips.
Its primarily imagined for bouncing signals from one daw to another. I actually am currently often using maybe 20 stereo channels sometimes less or more. But I actually don't use a lot of channels (relatively speaking) but I am also not doing a lot of industry level vocal mixing or dedicated parallel processing or channels that much. This is why I was thinking direct input output for each of my daw mixer channels because I probably wouldn't use more than the desk provides in my routine sound making.
I was playing with using the send/returns and I'm sort of convinced now that for the actual input and outputs I may be forced to use for input the direct inputs and for outputs either the direct outputs or matrix outputs etc.. as the inserts atleast how I was using them didn't appear to take advantage of the eq or pass filters but this may have been due to a setting not sure if the return point is always after eq/filter not 100% sure where the insert point is on the signal chain or if it is assignable but if it is after then to take advantage of the eq/pass I'd have to have the input at the direct input point - or possibly do routing of some sort - as said I am new to mixing on a mixing board so not 100% sure what is possible with the board.
Alternatively, if 8 simultaneous channels is dufficient, you could use the groups to feed the DAW, allowing flexible routing from any channel to any DAW input.
I think I will definitely use more than 8 mono channels, this may be enough for some basic drum track mixing due to often running some of my drum sounds as mono channels), I still think it may be deficient for some stereo channel mixing as the mixing board has 4 stereo channels - I do think it will do me for a bit of time but I still see myself going over 8 mono channels. I think for where I am at now 8 channels may cover a chunk of what I would need to do at any one time but I also don't want to unplug and plug lines all the time, hence part of the reason that I am thinking the ddx3216 might be useful as it will give me 16 adat inputs and outputs and perhaps 16 lines to work with which would cover the entire matrix or say the stereo channels and matrix/group/aux outputs. Still this looks like 32 channels will probably be the happy easy point to aim for as that is sort of the limits of what seems easiest to implement for input to recording, with 16 stereo channels ouptut from the ddx3216. The direct line outs however might require more inputs though - this does go back to the lightpipe that I still think may be the lowest cost solution. I do have a an old M-Audio Profire adat but it is firewire and my only firewire system is an old emac ~ protools 7 capable. But the suggestion to use something like the RME or Ferrofish seemed like possible solutions but cost wise I'm still not sure if they offer more use than a couple used 1st generation apollo16 as price shopping it seems these units may infact be selling at a higher price point than the apollo16's and I'm not entirely sure why that would be - there may be a good reason I just don't know why at this point. I tend to agree that having the electrical separation might be a good idea. That said I'm just not sure what to do as any audio interface will likely be a substantial cost consideration for my overall setup. As each unit used still seems to be ~$1000/£750 price point, so it is enough to weigh options for me before I make a decision on what will fit best.
All the information you need is in the excellent Series 5 manual.
I found the manual to be on one hand pretty general use and on the other with the electrical schematics to be very technical. I was still sort of trying to have an overall familiarity with considerations in setting up an analog mixing console in the current home studio environment, current technologies etc.. as the manual must be something like 25+ years old now. I disassembled and reassembled the board and there was basically not information available on how to do it on the internet. Like even the backplates say max current 500mA if I remember correctly so not even sure if all home studio equipment and interfaces will be at that level since their power supplies are often in the 2A range for instance. So for me it still sort of makes sense short of breaking out a multimeter and really getting super technical. I do know some electronics but I also recognize when I am technically not as capable as others in audio electronics or to think of risks that others might just know as obvious things - especially when you aren't working in audio engineering or audio electronics related activities. So while the manual is better than nothing I still found it a little slim.
Finally, is it safe to do a direct cable connection between the FOH mixing console and an audio interface or monitor without installing some type of breaker/interlock/fuse not sure if the inputs on all audio interfaces would be able to handle a stray current from the mixing console if the system faults to ground.
If the desk blows up all bets are off... I'd be more concerned about accidentally sending phantom power up an interface output since the Series 5 doesn't have dedicated line inputs.
[/quote] Yes I was a little concerned about phantom power in both directions but I also read that for phantom power it isn't normally actually active unless it is used, while 48volts seems like a lot I am curious how much line voltage would need to be sent for it to be above the 500mA range. To me computer line current must be relatively low.. but yes the series 5 does have direct line inputs and phantom power --- if phantom power is able to be applied to the signal I would think it could handle the phantom power from source or through a direct input box - before it got to the line input. Also I also have the thought the phantom power is electrically isolated and just serves to boost the signal level so again not really sure if sending phantom power into a hiZ or mic input on an apollo system would really do anything - I would need to think about that a bit but I still don't see how inputting into an apollo would be different than inputting into a direct input. That said it did seem able to handle the apollo monitor output at max volume although it was peaking the vu meters quite a bit. The phantom power on the apollo's seems limited to their line inputs not their line outputs. While I think the way phantom power works is that it boosts the signal level it doesn't actually mix the voltage on the signal path (I could be wrong). I should refresh my memory on that though.
What do you mean when you say the Series Five doesn't have dedicated line inputs?
Thanks for the interface suggestions - I will need to really consider some of them - generally speaking the pricing on some of the suggestions isn't compelling for me unless I can figure out why this would offer more capabilities. They look like great interfaces such as the Prism Titan but without any Dante in my current fairly basic setup I'd need to figure out why it is worth the extra $2000/£1500. I still have a lot of time before I make up my mind on it, I doubt I will get it in March just trying to learn a bit about possible setups and solutions as the apollo and orion were the only two interfaces I really had much knowledge at all on so I have a lot of learning before I figure out what is the best solution still.
James: The digiface looked like a great solution but couldn't really understood why they are price around $3000 per unit I will need to read more on them to understand the pricing. These seem like some good solutions but I am curious if they also have DSP capabilities to work as fxs units as inserts or if these are only going to be useful for the direct input output?
Anyway I have a lot of reading to do on these suggestions thankyou to the people who took time to provide some suggestions.
