The Church Media Community
Equipping You to Communicate Effectively
support CMN & share a
library of 19K+ images, videos, etc
Go Pro!
 
Go Back   The Church Media Community > Audio > General Audio
Forgot Password?
                          Register

General Audio All things about sound are discussed here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Friday, July 30th, 2010, 01:54 AM
New Church Media Member

 
 Join Date: Nov 2009 
 Last Online: Monday, October 11th, 2010 
Live Broadcasting

Hello,
In my church we have a live internet broadcast unfortunately the audio in the broadcast isnt great since we have the audio connected from the mixer to the video mixer we have but what i wanna know is a way where we can have our seperate mixer to have a good sounding broadcast, we have a allen & heat gl2400 with 32 ch. and our video mixer is a Data Video SE-800 Digital Video Switcher
Reply With Quote Start a New Topic From This Comment
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Friday, July 30th, 2010, 06:51 AM
cmchamp's Avatar
Church Media Mentor
Become a CMN Professional Member!

 
 Join Date: Dec 2005 
 Last Online: Today 
If you want a "broadcast" or "recording" mix done live with the ability to make quick changes, you need to look into a mic splitter and separate mixing console dedicated only to the broadcast mix. It is also best practice to have this mix position isolated from the sanctuary.
__________________
Cory Champion - Fortress Productions
Technical Director - Cambria Baptist Church
Reply With Quote Start a New Topic From This Comment
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Friday, July 30th, 2010, 01:23 PM
New Church Media Member

 
 Join Date: Nov 2009 
 Last Online: Monday, October 11th, 2010 
what do u mean by mic splitter and yeah we know were gonna need a mixer we just dont know how to hook it up, our main stage snake is 200ft. and it runs to the foh mixer but our broadcast center is in the offices of the church its a little broadcast studio so it definately is isolated from the sanctuary.
Reply With Quote Start a New Topic From This Comment
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Friday, July 30th, 2010, 04:17 PM
Tech

 
 Join Date: Jul 2010 
 Last Online: Yesterday 
There are two ways you can connect another mixer. You can split the microphone inputs by making or buying "Y" to go from your snake to your board AND off to a second board. You must turn off Phantom power on one board, and you may run into ground loop hum problems. The only to know is to try it.

The other way is to come out the "Direct outs of your existing board and into the Line ins of the new broadcast board. The one problem with this is that your input gain (preamp gain) will effect both boards. This just means that once you have pre amp gain set at practice you need to leave them alone during the service. Use only the faders to adjust volume.

Frank
lbpinc.com/DI.html
Reply With Quote Start a New Topic From This Comment
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Friday, July 30th, 2010, 07:24 PM
waynehoskins's Avatar
The Crazy Analog Guy

 
 Join Date: May 2006 
 Last Online: Today 
The third, and preferred, way is to take the "Y" approach, but with isolation transformers. Ground loop issues are minimized, phantom power only is taken from one console, and levels between consoles are independent.

Here's a basic splitter bank from Whirlwind as an example.
Reply With Quote Start a New Topic From This Comment
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Saturday, July 31st, 2010, 08:31 AM
Tech

 
 Join Date: Jul 2010 
 Last Online: Yesterday 
Yes, The Isolation transformer method is definitely preferred, but at about $120 per ch you are looking at $3840 and you need another board for all of these methods. Before I did that I would put in a digital board with two separate mixers. and sell the GL2400

Our church just did that for less then the price of the above transformers.

Frank
Reply With Quote Start a New Topic From This Comment
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Saturday, July 31st, 2010, 11:26 AM
bpalermini's Avatar
First Impressions Pastor

 
 Join Date: Aug 2004 
 Last Online: Yesterday 
I was thinking about this thread and started to wonder about how complicated your streaming mix is. Are you streaming the entire service, music and preaching/teaching? Do you have the proper licenses to stream all of the music and other materials used in your service? For most of us this is a daunting and expensive task.

If in doubt you might want to take a look at the Christian Copyright Solutions web site.
__________________
Bob
Reply With Quote Start a New Topic From This Comment
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Monday, August 2nd, 2010, 05:23 AM
New Church Media Member

 
 Join Date: Aug 2008 
 Last Online: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 
Simply wiring 'Y' splits in the snake is clearly the wrong way to approach the problem. Low-impedance microphone signals are designed to be run to a standardized load. Wiring a 'Y' will double this load (double in conductance terms, halve in resistance terms). This incorrect loading will mess up the frequency response of many of your sources.

A single digital console probably isn't a good solution either in that both audio mixes are done at the same station, missing the isolation of the recording mix, potentially overloading the operator with work (flipping back and forth between two mixes), and separating the location of the audio for broadcast and video for broadcast locations. Of course, if you select a digital console that can be remotely controlled from the broadcast control room, then the above are not a concern. Of course, such a board would cost more than the splitter transformers and you can run into the "dueling operators" problem. And, you could not separately set EQ and dynamics.

Another thing to consider is the cabling. Your snake is already 200 ft. How much more will the split to the control room add?

The best solution in today's technology is probably to use a digital board with a digital split to a second digital board for the broadcast. But, that can be very expensive.

A low-cost alternative is to apply the groups on the GL2400 to create four sub mixes at the console, taking the direct outs of these to the broadcast, which can then be mixed to the broadcast signal at the control room. You can't do separate EQ and dynamics with this setup and the mix is pretty limited. But, with careful selection of what's on each of the four subgroups, you may be able to accomplish 90% your improvement goals.

Blessings,
Reply With Quote Start a New Topic From This Comment
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tuesday, August 3rd, 2010, 08:36 AM
Tech

 
 Join Date: Jul 2010 
 Last Online: Yesterday 
I found some great info on splitting mics to two or more outputs.
audiosystemsgroup.com/Mic_Splitters.pdf


My summery.
It depends.
Most mics will handle a passive split.
Some won't. they will lose volume or distort. (certain models)
XLRs wired in parallel is a passive split.
A box full of transformers and XLRs are a passive split.
The transformers help deal with grounding and RF noise, not with
loading. (no free lunch)
Many places get away with 2, 3, and 4 way passive splits but one or
more of there mics won't work right. (certain models)
Grounds and pin one problems must be under control.
Active splits (pre amps) work but cost money.

Thanks to Jim Brown


I still like a digital system with two boards, And I love transformers. I build and sell DI boxes but this is just not a good app for 32 transformers in my opinion.

Frank
Reply With Quote Start a New Topic From This Comment
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tuesday, August 3rd, 2010, 09:16 AM
bladeaudio's Avatar
Church Media Regular

 
 Join Date: May 2004 
 Last Online: Today 
Quote:
Do you have the proper licenses to stream all of the music and other materials used in your service? For most of us this is a daunting and expensive task.
Actually this isn't so anymore. Using the WorshipCast license from Copyright Solver makes it simple. It's a yearly fee of about $1,000 and you are covered to stream just about any content from your worship service.
Reply With Quote Start a New Topic From This Comment
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tuesday, August 3rd, 2010, 08:16 PM
Church Media Expert

 
 Join Date: Mar 2010 
 Last Online: Yesterday 
http://www.audiopile.net/products/St...cutsheet.shtml
Reply With Quote Start a New Topic From This Comment
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wednesday, August 4th, 2010, 05:38 AM
New Church Media Member

 
 Join Date: Aug 2008 
 Last Online: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 
In certain applications, a direct 'Y' split will work. Jim Brown points out conditions for proper application not only in design, and limitations in use. I argue that first the conditions for application of the direct 'Y' do not exist here and the limitations on use are not appropriate in a church environment where volunteers support the workflow.

First, the conditions for proper application don't exist: Major concerns are the RF mitigation and ground loop issues. Mr. Brown points out that if proper isolated grounding is applied the shield currents are acceptably minimal. But, this is almost certainly not the case as the FoH mix and the broadcast mix are in different rooms. Further, with a long cabling run (more than a few feet) between the mixers, a long ground loop will be created, increasing the likelihood of ground-loop-induced hum and RF. Even if it appears to work OK at the outset, in today's RF-rich environment with lots of switch-mode power supplies and other electronically-noisy devices there's no telling when adding or moving a device or repairing a furnance, etc. will cause problems.

Second, in a volunteer-oriented workflow, not everyone is going to have the tech savvy to know not to use a some microphones on some of the channels. Or to make sure that they use phantom power appropriately because it could damage the mixer if used incorrectly.

Finally, another major concern is the loading placed on the microphone output. The assertion that passive transformer splits do not help with loading is totally false. Passive transformer splits are wound with a 2:1:1 ratio (or 3:1:1:1, etc) such that the apparent impedance (in the frequency range of interest) of the transformer is twice the parallel combination of the loads on the output. In fact, this load ratio is the primary (no pun intended) reason transformer splits are applied; isolation is a secondary benefit.

I definitely agree that two digital boards with a digital split is the best way to go. But, I'm betting that isn't in the original poster's budget, at least for the near term. And, 24 channels of high-quality passive transformer splits probably aren't either. That's why I'd recommend applying the group outputs to form sub mixes that are then sent to the broadcast room and there mixed down to the broadcast signal. It obviously doesn't do everything, but it's a good pareto solution until a better option is specified, designed, funded and installed.

Blessings,
Reply With Quote Start a New Topic From This Comment
Reply

  The Church Media Community > Audio > General Audio

Tags
audio, broadcast, mixer, production

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:



Add to Google


Register Now for FREE!
Our records show you have not yet registered to our community. To sign up for your FREE account INSTANTLY fill out the form below!

Username: Password: Confirm Password: E-Mail: Confirm E-Mail:
Agree to forum rules 


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:31 PM.

   
 
© 1995-2008, ChurchMedia™, ChurchMedia LLC

SEO by vBSEO 3.1.0