Topic: UA5 & 4 Mics Question

[DMBprez]

My friend runs:
SP-C4's->Art Phantom II->MIT 176's->JB3

I run:
SMK-H8K's->PMOD UA5->JB3

Is there a way of running all 4 through the UA5 and have it come out into TWO JB3's?


Thanks in advance.

[Krispy D]

no.  well yes, I mean not really. 

you could have all four mics go into the ua5 and output to one JB3.  you would end up with a two track recording like normal so there would be no way to separate the mic sources from one another once they get to the JB3.  You could feed the same signal to two different JB3's (one analog and one digital) but they would be the same 4 mic to two track recordings.  does this make sense?

basically you could run the SMK-H8K's->PMOD UA5 to the front xlr inputs and

SP-C4's->Art Phantom II->MIT 176's to the back rca inputs

the output (whether digi or analog) would be the same blend of the two sources.  this is the same way so many people use the UA5 for on the fly matrix recordings.  Works great.  The only downfall is you have to mix on the fly.

[DMBprez]

no.  well yes, I mean not really. 

you could have all four mics go into the ua5 and output to one JB3.  you would end up with a two track recording like normal so there would be no way to separate the mic sources from one another once they get to the JB3.  You could feed the same signal to two different JB3's (one analog and one digital) but they would be the same 4 mic to two track recordings.  does this make sense?

basically you could run the SMK-H8K's->PMOD UA5 to the front xlr inputs and

SP-C4's->Art Phantom II->MIT 176's to the back rca inputs

the output (whether digi or analog) would be the same blend of the two sources.  this is the same way so many people use the UA5 for on the fly matrix recordings.  Works great.  The only downfall is you have to mix on the fly.

Hey, 

Thanks for the help.  So, can you do me a favor and let me know what the hell is wrong with this?

Hahah

http://www.archive.org/details/um2007-10-22.flac16

[Brian Skalinder]

So, can you do me a favor and let me know what the hell is wrong with this?

Which C-4 caps were used?  (Sounds like omnis?)  You were there...you heard what it sounded like in the venue, where your mics were......what's wrong with it to your ears?

[DMBprez]

It echos like hell.   But I don't think the omni's were on.

But the venue wasn't very "echoy."

[shayne]

Not sure what the benifit of 2 sets of cards? I was under the impression if you were running 2 sets of mics it's good to have a pattern diffrence, would 2 sets of cards give phasing issues? Not trying to hyjack this post, I am asking for myself becasue I am not sure what types of issues this could bring on, On a side note I thought it sounded ok, a little muddy, like a larger venue, probobly the echo you refer to.
Shayne

[DMBprez]

Wouldn't running omni's on the C4's cause even more echo?

[shayne]

I would think the omni would give you more sence of the veue, more crowd more sence of space, if the venue didn't have an echo I don't think the omni would create one, Just my take on the sound an omni produces, to the other side of this Yes if the room was boomy or had an echo the omini would most likely aplify that because the wider pattern than say the cards. When speaking in terms of cards I don't see the benifit of having 2 sets running at once and being mixed down to 2 channels, I am very happy runnig 1 set of mics, ease of set up and less to worry about, all though I have been thinking of getting omni caps for my octavas and running them split a couple of feet with the lsd2 running x/y cards center and mixing it all down w/ the ua-5. Just not sure if there is any advantages, and so far the lsd2 sounds great by itself, don't want to mess that up.
Shayne

[DMBprez]

Very cool idea ^^^. 

Please keep me updated on whether you try that out or not!

Thanks for the help!

[NOLAfishwater]

I guess I will have to try running CA omnis into RCA + 460 ck63 into the XLR in. Could be great.

[gratefulphish]

I am considering buying a UA-5 as a pre for a rig that I can loan out, as I have a second set of mics, and a MT24/96.  Can you also use the RCA jacks to plug into the board from the tape outs, and run the mics to the XLRs, and do an on the fly mix that way.  Has anyone tried this, and are there any issues due to the time delay of the sound through the mics vs. the sound from the board?  Just wondering before I really decide to buy one. 

[shayne]

Yes you can, some great tapes have been made that way, as for the delay, the mics need to be closer to stage to avoid any delay, I think it has been discussed in the past and I want to say you need to be within 30 or 50 feet of stage/sound source, not sure about that one though.

[F.O.Bean]

I think its 30-40ft and then a delay is needed. Thats why onstage+SBD is always nice! We(Team Pittsburgh) have made an AMAZING Lotus recording this way! its 2/17/2006 if anyone wants to check it out!!!!

[shayne]

Thanks, wasn't sure about the distances.

[NJFunk]

I've done the UA-5 on the fly matrixing a lot (before I got the R4 which makes everythign 100x easier...).  For delay, ideally, you want to be within 20 feet.  Any further and the sound gets muddier.  By 30 ft, you will start to hear a distinct echo.  The most successful ventures I've had with this is in small bars where the PA feed is just vocals (and unusable by itself) and the room is too small and boomy to make an adequate audience.  Set up the mics stage lip and run the PA feed into the RCA.  If you get the mics behind the PA, the mic feed will have just the stage sound and the PA will have just the PA sound and there will be very little overlap between the two, which gives you complete control over the mix on your tape.  Make sure you have good noise blocking headphones, too, since you'll have to mix the levels on the fly.