Need Cascading groups (Send a group into another one)

Forums Forums SQ Forums SQ feature suggestions Need Cascading groups (Send a group into another one)

This topic contains 9 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of TimmyP TimmyP 1 month, 1 week ago.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #104755
    Profile photo of Niko Maniac
    Niko Maniac
    Participant

    Hi all,

    It would be useful for me fo be able to send a group into another one.
    For example, I have 3 guitars miked with DI and mic. each of them go to a dedicated group for compression, eq etc, and I’d need to send those 3 guitar groups into a main guitar group, with dyn eq or whatever on it…

    #104776
    Profile photo of Wolfgang
    Wolfgang
    Participant

    You could also simply compress the DI signals in the channels first.
    The signals from the speakers of the guitar amps don’t really need to be compressed, because their signal is usually already heavily compressed.

    There are two possibilities:
    A) You first compress in the channels, then you can compress again in the subgroups.

    B) you send the subgroup to a matrix. Then you can also connect two compressors in a row (with the channel compressor even 3!).
    You can’t just mix the matrix back to the master, you first have to send it out of the console (analogue via XLR, or digital routing via a Dante or MADI card) and then back into an input channel (in stereo, of course, two).
    Here you would even have another compressor at your disposal, so that in the end there would be no dynamics left at all 😉

    #104778
    Profile photo of Niko Maniac
    Niko Maniac
    Participant

    @wolfgang
    Yep, I’ve thought about the option to go out from a matrix, thanks for the tip anyway.
    Need to explain my setup, to enlight your blind judgement… “You can’t judge a book by looking at the cover”
    I’ve got 3 gypsie jazz guitars, with Schoeps CMC6, and just a few (or no) DI level depending on the stage, PA etc… In a quite loud stage sound…I almost don’t compress those channels
    I use the 3 mono groups not to compress (or compress at 1dB max), but to have graphic eq, to solve precise feedback problems end redundant frequencies. Then I need to manage the bassmid frequency band when the sum of the 3 guitars gives a exagerated amout of those frequencies. that’s why I need this setup.
    Please don’t judge when you don’t really know the subject you’re talking about
    Best regards
    Niko

    #104801
    Profile photo of KeithJ A&H
    KeithJ A&H
    Moderator

    Hi Niko,

    Most people would want to cascade through multiple mixes for compression (e.g. peak/fast followed by slow/levelling) rather than applying multiple layers of EQ, so it makes sense that Wolfgang would presume that was your main reason for wanting to do this and frankly, there is no reason to be so rude when they were trying to help, plus you led with compression in the original post!
    If you switch ‘compress’ and ‘compressor’ for ‘EQ’ and ‘EQ’s’ (or any other processing type) in their post, what they’re saying is spot on and answers your question.

    The basic signal path for SQ is shown here – https://support.allen-heath.com/hc/en-gb/articles/4402940459537-SQ-Basic-Signal-Path-Diagrams-Input-Group-LR-Aux-Matrix
    and you’ll see at the bottom of that page a diagram depicting the processing with regard to time.
    This is the key point, as the main reason for not routing groups into groups is that it would ruin the mix coherency, more info on that here – https://support.allen-heath.com/hc/en-gb/articles/4402940899857-SQ-Phase-coherent-mixing-in-SQ

    This functionality is available on the more powerful dLive however (which has a much bigger routing section in the core), so this is what you need to be looking at – though you’ll still need to consider the coherency and signal path ‘length’.

    Thanks,
    Keith.

    #104803
    Profile photo of RS
    RS
    Participant

    This functionality is available on the more powerful dLive

    But still only one group into one group. Not multiple groups into one group, without using aforementioned workarounds that would leave the phase-coherent mixing. Just to clarify….

    #104804
    Profile photo of Niko Maniac
    Niko Maniac
    Participant

    Thanks for your explanation Keith
    I apologize if my message is perceived as “rude”, that was really not my intention. Sorry Wolfgang

    #104814
    Profile photo of Wolfgang
    Wolfgang
    Participant

    @Niko, Apology accepted. 😉
    Your first post above was simply written in a misleading way. But now we know.

    By the way, I know the Schoeps microphones very well, I have some myself and they are built here in our city. That’s why I personally know people who work there.
    You made a good choice!

    The fact that you don’t compress these channels on loud stages, or only very little, is also a good choice. 😉

    How will you proceed now?

    #104816
    Profile photo of Wolfgang
    Wolfgang
    Participant

    Me again:
    I have two approaches to EQ.
    One is more musical, with it I try to support instruments in their sound.
    This is the art EQ for me.

    The other approach is EQ, with which I try to work on problems of the playback chain or the room.
    For me, that’s the science EQ.

    I use the channel EQ for art, and I use the subgroup EQ for science.
    That is usually my approach. But that’s not nailed down, I can deviate from that sometimes.

    #104857
    Profile photo of Niko Maniac
    Niko Maniac
    Participant

    @wolfgang
    In that particaular case, I operate exactly the same way. I do use track eq for “musicality”. I prefer to only use the Schoeps on guitars, but in some difficult situations, I add a little bit of Di to have a more defined midbass, when the mics tend to become too “thin”. I try to delay the DI track but it’s quite uncertain method because of the guitarists movements… Always have a bit of phase coherency issues, that’s why I try to avoid Di most of the time. The mixbusses for guitars allow me only to do surgical eq with graphic eqs, to “fight against” feedback problems and resonnances which can occur in some venues. I also add a little bit of compression for one of the 3 guitarists who don’t manage dynamic as well as the others, just to control some peaks.
    Maybe next show I’ll try the matrix out back to a stereo track to add a little dynamic eq on the guitar bus. The GypsieJazz guitars are very “rich” in 200Hz and 400hz, and I need to keep this on individual instruments because it’s a part of the “signature” of their sound. But sometimes the 3 guitars goes rythmic together, the 200 and 400 bump is really exagerated and I need to control it.

    #104947
    Profile photo of TimmyP
    TimmyP
    Participant

    Parametric EQ is much more ‘surgical’ than graphic.

    To fix inconsistent “Buildup’ of a frequency area, use multiband compression or dynamic EQ on the guitar buss (or anything for that matter).

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.