[johncParticipant]

Let me supply a little more detail.
The pulpit mike in our sanctuary is poorly placed (just under the main hall speaker) and feedback is a major problem with soft spoken speakers. I have a DBXpro speaker processor and I want to use one of its input streams to take advantage of its automatic feedback processor just for the pulpit mike. I now send the pulpit mike input to a recording aux and a radio aux and of course to the MAIN aux.
I have not found an FX processor that is as good as the DBXpro so my great idea was to break the pulpit to MAIN send and send that through the DBXpro via its unused b channel, use the auto feedback processor on that channel and then mix it back into the main speakers using the a+b mix within the DBXpro. Of course I need to have a fader available on the console to set the pulpit mike level that ultimately finds its way to the MAIN speakers. Thus a console fader available in the direct output line.
I suppose the only way to do this is to commit another aux to the pulpit mike input and send its output via the AR2412 to the DBXpro and use that aux as the “input” level control.

[johncParticipant]

Thanks cornelius78 and you are absolutely correct.It turns out the routing approach fixed my problem although it does seem that the “level” block should apply to the level on all sends. Possibly something to consider in an update although there may be a good reason not to do so.
Thanks again

[johncParticipant]

Thanks guys and collectively you have cleared this up.

It was not clear to me when looking at the block diagram in the manual that the fader that can be routed to the Main aux has special status.

I understood that the single fader on each input channel could be used to control multiple sends by using the mix button on the receiving auxes (sp?). What was unclear was that the send to the Main aux had special status and that the pre and post switch on all the other sends was relative to it. I assumed that all the sends and the “virtual” faders created for each aux had equal status wherein the pre/post would have simply taken each respective virtual fader in and out of the circuit.

As it is, the actual implementation is necessary to create special effects (reverb, etc) that can be either fixed to the input or varies relative to the Main output. It all makes sense now.

Thanks again. This is a great forum and again I appreciate your patience and your help.

[johncParticipant]

Thanks Eli,

Let me set up a different scenario. Suppose you have lp1 driven by a monaural music source and Aux1 and Aux2 feeding into monitor speakers A and B respectively. Aux1 relates to lp1 PRE and Aux2 relates to lp1 as post (not PRE). Now we press Aux1 mix and set the lp1 level to -40 and then press Aux2 mix and set lp1 to -20. These values are both stored and if we press the Aux mix buttons back and forth the lp1 fader will jump back and forth between -20 and -40.

But it would seem that the PRE setting on Aux1 would force it to read the lp1 level as -0 ( ignoring the fader) while Aux2 would take the signal at -20 under the control of the fader (post fader). Is this correct or does pre and post only have effect elsewhere?

[Author]

Posts