I have an interesting or stupid question As you can see.
Some of you know me, I’m a German keyboardist.
What I like to do: Main Signal from GP, Klick from GP. For that I need three outs. No problem.
Then I have an interface with four analog Ins. First in is a mic. In the past I send the signal via the interface software control to another output… for example for and to my in ear mix.
In the second I have the monitor mix from FOH and send it to my monitor mix.
All with the Interface software mixer.
Yester I thought about another solution: Forget the software from the interface and do all the things with GP. As an additional impact it would be easier to you use the mic for backings vocals and for the vocoder.
I route my Kurzweil through GP, as well as two ambience mics for our IEM through GP (Scarlet 8i6) and send everything by USB to the Main Mixer (Ui24R).
Check your complete signal chains regarding possible latency issues between your submit and the FOH/Main mix
No, I have a fixed setup in Focusrite Control. Everything else needed I do in GP. E.g. a fist Low-Cut on the ambience mics, limiting the sum of my virtual rig (= GP racks) and the Kurzweil and have one volume control in one application (= GP)
My Vocal mic goes straight to the main mixer, and we use personal tablets for IEM mix on it. So no need to do anything by GP
If I ever will have the need to use a vocoder I would use an additional mic and route this through GP to „convert“ it to an instrument - completely independent of the main vocal mic
I think i inderstand and its definitely possible. It will depend on what you want on the output and how you want to route it. I use an x18 desk but all the gp functions are going out over usb. I run 2 hardware synths in sterio which is 4 channels and then these are summed into a single channel over usb for foldback (in ears) gp also runs the click which outputs on a third channel. I also have a audio player for backing tracks which outputs over channels 1 and 2 and vocal mics that can be re routed back as a vocoder… it all depends on the audio interface and how you set it up.
To clarify. The x18 has 18 ins. I then set up gp so that it mirrorerd this so all 18 ins are patchable in gp and theoretically i could set up a rack space with all of the controls, never actually touching the x18 mixer at all
thank you for your reply. I have a XR18 as submixer for my hardware setup. In this case I do all the routing and mixing in the XR with the tablet.
But I think it’s easier with the software setup to user the interface only as a patchbay. I would like to do it with a smaller interface.
I have a iConnectivity but at the moment I’m not able to run in like that
The red button delivered today when I was out for working
After working the kids would like to play with me an now I’m able to test it.
Great!!! I’m so happy. The output and the sound feeling is much better than everything else I have… could be subjective, in fact of the price But I’m happy and that’s important!
Well… we have had discussions on this subject in this forum. Personally, I did double-blind tests and had several members of my family do the same. The conclusion was that among the tested audio interfaces, the RME sounded the best on the piano plugin I used for the tests. Others say that the audible differences are simply the result of a particular mix or equalization, and that with identical mixes/equalizations, the audible differences are not at the level of the price differences.
The fact remains that I’ve had two UCXs for over ten years, and they’re still working perfectly, and still benefit from driver and mixing software updates.
As you can see.
But I’m happy and that’s important!