Use outboard on master track

[Peters86]

Hey guys,

I use a Midas MR18 USB interface for recording and mixing in PT. I have two hardware Klark Teknik EQ's I'd like to use on the master bus. The problem however is, with the Midas, a channel number can either be an input channel or an output channel, not both. So, if I set channel 3 to "USB return", it receives audio from PT if I set the output of the track in PT to "out 3".

This is a problem when using inserts because I cannot select use channel number 3 as an input and output simultaneously. With individual tracks I work around this by sending the output of a track to for instance "out 3", which then goes to the hardware and the output of the hardware goes into track 4 which I then record on a new track. This works for individual tracks but I have no idea how to do this with the master fader. I could of course bounce a mix, import this as a new audio file and then use the same trick, but I like to make subtle changes to a mix when processing the master bus.

Any tricks or ideas? Of course I could upgrade the interface but I'd rather not.

[philgrab]

Without physical inserts on the interface, there is not much you can do except wire the outputs of the interface into the EQs and then the EQ outputs L&R into two of your track channels like 1&2. It all depends on the versatility of the interface software.

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by Peters86

Hey guys,

I use a Midas MR18 USB interface for recording and mixing in PT. I have two hardware Klark Teknik EQ's I'd like to use on the master bus. The problem however is, with the Midas, a channel number can either be an input channel or an output channel, not both. So, if I set channel 3 to "USB return", it receives audio from PT if I set the output of the track in PT to "out 3".

This is a problem when using inserts because I cannot select use channel number 3 as an input and output simultaneously. With individual tracks I work around this by sending the output of a track to for instance "out 3", which then goes to the hardware and the output of the hardware goes into track 4 which I then record on a new track. This works for individual tracks but I have no idea how to do this with the master fader. I could of course bounce a mix, import this as a new audio file and then use the same trick, but I like to make subtle changes to a mix when processing the master bus.

Any tricks or ideas? Of course I could upgrade the interface but I'd rather not.

Humm ?
Can you Post some screen shots of the I/O setup in PT showing the channel setup of your MR 18 ? and of Mixer window
Because I am confused as to what if I set channel 3 to "USB return", How is there a USB return ?


That said sans a screenshot of your I/O
I am wondering IF you can go out via the Aux outs on the MR18, and in via the Inputs So channel 3 Aux to EQ XLR in,,,,,, and the EQ XLR out, back into Input 3 on MR 18 ?

Also note in using hardware as "inserts" you don't output the track to the hardware channel number You output the track to the main outs or sub bus (same as if it were a plugin)

In the screen shot below the "M7" is my hardware Reverb and the "3U" is my hardware Comp

So the M7 is an insert on the "Vox vrb" Aux track (3rd from right ) which is outputting to the "2 Mix" Aux track and the 3U is an insert on the 2 Mix track outputting to Main 1 & 2 Outs (labeled "Stereo Montr")

[Peters86]

Thanks a lot for replying!

You have actually fixed my problem, thanks so much. In the MR18 setup, I have now set Aux 1-4 to correspond with tracks 9-12. If I then use insert 9 in PT and use Aux 1 as send to hardware and input channel 9 as return from hardware, it miraculously works!!

Thanks so much!

[albee1952]

Now that you have it working, you might consider not doing this. Why? A great question. You don't mention what KT EQ you are talking about so here's info to consider with any.
1-graphic EQ: a bad idea because every slider that moves away from zero adds phase shift, so you introduce phasing problems with every slider not set to zero.

2-parametric: On your master, you need exact symmetry between left and right. This is unlikely with an analog EQ that is dual-mono. There are many good plugin EQ's that will do this job better and will be exactly equal between left and right.

3-Pultec clone: I love a Pultec and unfortunately, the KT version vs the real thing is like comparing hamburger to tenderloin. I like hamburger too, but on your master, you want the best you can do for your music. The Waves Puigtec will do what the KT is doing, but will do it much better.

Last 2 cents; just because you CAN use hardware, doesn't mean you SHOULD use it while mixing. I use plenty of outboard comps and EQ's, but I use them while tracking and keep mixing all ITB(in the box). It avoids lots of hassle and is 100% recallable. Of course, you are free to do anything you like as there are no rules. I just wanted to offer info for consideration

[Peters86]

Originally Posted by albee1952

Now that you have it working, you might consider not doing this. Why? A great question. You don't mention what KT EQ you are talking about so here's info to consider with any.
1-graphic EQ: a bad idea because every slider that moves away from zero adds phase shift, so you introduce phasing problems with every slider not set to zero.

2-parametric: On your master, you need exact symmetry between left and right. This is unlikely with an analog EQ that is dual-mono. There are many good plugin EQ's that will do this job better and will be exactly equal between left and right.

3-Pultec clone: I love a Pultec and unfortunately, the KT version vs the real thing is like comparing hamburger to tenderloin. I like hamburger too, but on your master, you want the best you can do for your music. The Waves Puigtec will do what the KT is doing, but will do it much better.

Last 2 cents; just because you CAN use hardware, doesn't mean you SHOULD use it while mixing. I use plenty of outboard comps and EQ's, but I use them while tracking and keep mixing all ITB(in the box). It avoids lots of hassle and is 100% recallable. Of course, you are free to do anything you like as there are no rules. I just wanted to offer info for consideration

Thanks a lot man, I appreciate it!

With regards to your considerations:

1) I indeed do not use outboard graphic EQ's for this application;
2) I indeed do not use a parametric EQ's for this application;
3) Here we (sort of) disagree. I have used Pultecs quite a few times in world-renowned studios, so I kind of know how they are supposed to sound (although I've heard quite some differences between units, probably due to aging etc). I have the Waves PuiqTec EQ and to my ears, the outboard KT unit sounds significantly better. I might be biased when A/Bing knowing that it's software vs hardware but still, I think my ears really prefer the KT unit. Does it sound close to a real Pultec? Hard to say, although I do really hear similarities in the EQ curves and as said, I prefer it over the software Pultecs.

So, to my ears, I generally really prefer the KT over the PuiqTec plugin, plus I like the tactile ergonomics of turning real knobs. I use them as well during tracking as well as several other outboard units, it's just a matter of what works best at a given time. To each his own I guess

I agree that there are no rules and that it's all about what works best for the specific situation. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!