True post fader vs follow fader

Forums Forums dLive Forums dLive feature suggestions True post fader vs follow fader

This topic contains 0 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by Profile photo of Carl N Carl N 2 months ago.

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • Author
  • #109247
    Profile photo of Carl N
    Carl N


    There’s a couple of features I’m very interested in requesting, both have been mentioned by myself and others in the SQ and Avantis forums, however I’m now moving to dLive so I thought I’d start a discussion here.

    First one is post fader inserts. This is extremely useful in broadcast for things like Dugan Automix, but also for putting a post fade compressor on each mic so you can mix into them, more fader = more compression. This then all feeds into a group with another compressor on it. I do this every day on a Calrec Artemis and it’s a pretty typical broadcast workflow.

    Another reason post fade inserts are useful is for allowing a “send/return” style effect routing without the need for a return channel. You just insert the effect on a mix post fade and route that to LR, that fader then becomes the send master and no return is needed. Not an every day use case but just an illustration that it allows for some creative uses.

    The second feature request I’d like to mention is a workflow I use often on other brands of consoles.. I tend to set my monitor mixes to “post preamp” and “pre fade” but then have a few double patched vocal channels that are post fade, which means they also include any channel processing. This doesn’t seem possible on dLive or any of the other XCVI based consoles. They all seem to use a concept of “follow fader” rather than true post fader signal flow. This has also caused issues for me for example using the built in AMM and not being able to PFL channels without removing them from the AMM first.

    The reason I included both these feature requests together in one post is I’m wondering if there is an architectural design reason that would make a true post fader signal flow either impossible, or hard to implement, due to the way the XCVI core works?

    I absolutely love the platform and these features would be fantastic if they are possible. Hopefully some of the A&H guys can chime in with some info 🙂

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.