It was a very complex and scientific endeavor. I read the manual.
There is nothing in the MX 821 manual!
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
It was a very complex and scientific endeavor. I read the manual.
There is nothing in the MX 821 manual!
Could you give more details about your technic to determine the "unity gain" of a line mixer? Is it by watching the input leds of your compressor? When you attempt to determine that unity gain, what is the level of your line mixer, is it max?
To determine whether you have unity gain you need two very advanced pieces of audio equipment (although one will do in a pinch), fortunately most humans come with them as standard equipment, they are usually located on the sides of ones head.
Before using a splitter and mixer I used the method you describe as it is a fairly straightforward application of the technology. (Are you the guy who invented the Internet too?). I found the difference in sound of the second unit in the chain to be substantially watered down (yes, even after checking input 2's pad switch) and the interaction between the two with the fixed 50/50 mix (and subsequent blending and output adjustments) to be too cumbersome and sensitive. Those were the specific problems I sought to solve for which led me to a buffered splitter and line mixer solution. There is no way to increase the level of the alpha unit without increasing the beta unit as well. When the volume of one controls both that's not really parallel in my book, but I get where you're coming from.Nope - you can run them in parallel. I figured out a way years ago and have posted it numerous times.
Before using a splitter and mixer I used the method you describe as it is a fairly straightforward application of the technology. (Are you the guy who invented the Internet too?). I found the difference in sound of the second unit in the chain to be substantially watered down (yes, even after checking input 2's pad switch) and the interaction between the two with the fixed 50/50 mix (and subsequent blending and output adjustments) to be too cumbersome and sensitive. Those were the specific problems I sought to solve for which led me to a buffered splitter and line mixer solution. There is no way to increase the level of the alpha unit without increasing the beta unit as well. When the volume of one controls both that's not really parallel in my book, but I get where you're coming from.
For the record I switched to the VT Bass Rackmount since then anyway, but I digress.
That's fine - you're in the minority as it's worked well for a lot of folks over the past eight years since I originally posted. I always recommend folks give it a whirl since it only requires one more cable rather than going to the more obvious and expensive mixer solution, which can have it's own set of issues.
If you want a blended tone, it works very well and is pretty straightforward if executed properly. If you are wanting to do more than just blending tones, a mixer is the next step.
As for your snarky internet comment, it's neither warranted nor appreciated.
Here again is the link to parallel SansAmp rack preamp operation, as discovered by JGR:
Something cool for Sansamp RBI/RPM users... | TalkBass.com
I've been using this method since it was posted, and love it.
There are limitations. If you want to alternate between one and the other via footswitch, the Tech21 manuals will show you how to do that. If you want the capability to alternate and blend, then additional gear is needed.
All that said, I've used the parallel method with RBI+RPM, RBI+VT-RM, and RPM+VT-RM. Despite the limitations it's still really versatile. Sometimes I've left both preamps active: the simplicity of "set it and forget it". Other times I have left the primary active full time, and switched the secondary in when I needed more overdrive.
And what do you prefer, the RBI+PRM or VT-RM+RPM?
Really guys? Just, really...?
Sorry for any confusion, I'm not talking about a particular solution. I was addressing the comments directed at me a few posts back.Sammy Hagar was wrong, there's more than one way to rock. You use what works for you, we use what works for us. S'all good, man.
Sorry for any confusion, I'm not talking about a particular solution. I was addressing the comments directed at me a few posts back.