Mixers/Consoles Is it possible to daisy chain mixing boards?

[chouston]

I work for a small private school and was recently told that the middle school spring productions MUST be miked with individual lavalier mics. They would like to run 10 mics for each production. However, I don't have 10 free channels on the small board in the theater where the shows are being performed. Rather than renting a larger board, what I'd like to try is to run all the mics from one board and run that board through the theater's main board. To make a long story short, I will be using a Mackie 1402 VLZ Pro for the main board (running dual CD playback, video sound, etc...) and a Mackie 1604 VLZ Pro for the mics (10 lavs and 4 choir mics). My question is, what is the best way to chain one to the other? My initial thought is to run the outs (main or aux) of the 1604 into one set of stereo channels in the 1402. Sound is not my strong suit, so let me know if there's a better way to do this, of if it can even be done. Thanks so much!

 

[metti]

You pretty much nailed it. That would be exactly how I would run a sub-mixer and I'm pretty sure that's the standard way it's done.

 

[chouston]

You pretty much nailed it. That would be exactly how I would run a sub-mixer and I'm pretty sure that's the standard way it's done.

Wow! Thanks! I guess I'm smarter than I thought.

 

[avare]

WOW! Congratulations on thinking out a correct to do it AND double checking before (potentially) making any mistakes.

Impressed,
Andre

 

[avkid]

You pretty much nailed it. That would be exactly how I would run a sub-mixer and I'm pretty sure that's the standard way it's done.

Without advanced routing, yes.

The only trouble you might run into would be if you need to utilize monitors.

 

[chouston]

Without advanced routing, yes.

The only trouble you might run into would be if you need to utilize monitors.

I might, actually. But I have space to run them from one of my amps. Not the best solution, but I think I can make it work.

 

[SHARYNF]

I would recommend that you make a small change in your set up. I would use the 1602 vlz pro as the MAIN board and run the 1402 as the sub mixer. The 1604 give you the option of channel assignment. Also if you are going to use monitors, you will want to be able to probably have better control of each of the mics along with the other feeds on an aux send and having the larger more comprehensive board as the main would IMO work better

A bit different approach, but I think you will find it easier

Sharyn

 

[waynehoskins]

I think I'd submix the playbacks on a small sidecar (like that 1402), using the 1604 as the main console with all the wireless on it.

Something to consider though, does the 1604 provide all the necessary or desired features? I'm thinking in particular about the limited EQ section. Is there a console that's better suited to this than the Mackie boards?

What little experience I have with young actors tells me that you need dynamics processing here, more than you might on an adult cast (who, by the way, usually still need it) because their voices are less trained; they're usually too quiet or screaming. Maybe not that bad, but you probably want compression even if you don't know it. That's more equipment to get, and if it's absolutely necessary it may impact your choice of consoles.

I presume you don't need automation. If you did, it would put you into basically digital-exclusive territory -- well, that and Cadacs.

 

[LightTamer]

I think what you said in the first post would work fine. We have the 1604 at my school, and it's not a bad board. I believe it has a mono output, so if you're only running mono sound, you could just go from the output on that into a input on the other board. Seeings how you're only going to have mics on the 1604, i would think this would be the cleanest way to do it. If the 1402 has a stereo input, than what you have in mind would be perfect also.

Either way, you get sound to both speakers from the mics.

 

[museav]

Think seriously about how you want to control and route the signals. Consider what signals need to go where, what inputs you may want to route, control, process or mute together and so on. Then see what approach works best for what you need to do. I agree that you may find it better to submix the other sources and then bring that in with the mics on the main mixer.

 

[nd925a]

It sounds to me that you should use the 1602 for the main and 1402 for the sub mixer. The 1602 has a few more in out and routing options, and there's a port next to the main outs that's labeled mono that appears to be able to be used to run monitors??

 

[bishopthomas]

...and there's a port next to the main outs that's labeled mono that appears to be able to be used to run monitors??

The mono out is just a summed output of the main L/R out. Since you don't typically want the entire FOH mix in the monitors I would not suggest using this as a monitor output. You at least want a separate volume control for it, which I believe exists on the 1602.

 

[nd925a]

The mono out is just a summed output of the main L/R out. Since you don't typically want the entire FOH mix in the monitors I would not suggest using this as a monitor output. You at least want a separate volume control for it, which I believe exists on the 1602.

Thank you for the correction. My earlier post was a quick one I had only glanced at the manual for the 1602.
Possibly use the Aux Sends then to mix monitors, you'd at least be able to single out vocals.