Please do test it. I think of the Audio A6 send return routing. I'm considering this mixer in combination with X1, but maybe the Ecler Nuo 2.0 is better?
Printable View
Please do test it. I think of the Audio A6 send return routing. I'm considering this mixer in combination with X1, but maybe the Ecler Nuo 2.0 is better?
Ok, so i did some testing and its not that bad at all, in fact it can be done. Im gonna try to explain my process but be patient because as i said before english is my second language and this is very technical.
I'm not familiar with the audio 6, but I tried to replicate a similar setup to yours and for your gear I can assume you're gonna use traktor 2 decks, so i setup my motu ultralite mk3 and used the deck A and B in traktor for tracks (no TT's) and the controller doesn't really matter for this example.
To get this going you need to have two stereo outputs in your audio interface to send the track decks into the mixer, an available stereo imput where you are gonna plug in the FX send of the mixer and one more stereo output in the interface where you are gonna plug in your FX return of the mixer (i don't know if the A6 has that many imputs and outputs, you tell me).
Then comes the configuration in traktor, i'm sure there is a better and simpler way to do this since i'm no traktor expert, but for the purpouse of demonstrate that the audio routing in the mixer is ok, this works.
As said before, deck A and B are track decks, then I set the deck C in traktor as a live imput deck and in the imput routing of traktor you set to deck C the imputs of your interface that are receiving audio from the FX send of the mixer and then in the output routing you set deck A and A as you would do normally and you set in deck C the channels of the interface that send audio to the FX return of the mixer.
That done, you assign one FX unit in traktor only to the deck C and you set that unit to a 100% wet.
That solves the problem of having dry signal leaking through the FX return of the mixer (cause you are in 100% wet mode, of corse), now you only have to controll the amount of FX that you want in the mix and you cant do this with the cannel C fader since traktor is set into external mixing mode but you still have the deck gain knob that is a full kill when fully counterclockwise, so there you have it, if you are using a controller-based setup you can map that knob anywhere you like and this works perfectly. This done you can hide back deck C and D and it's ready to go. This done there is cero dry signal leaking, no volume bump of any king and there aren't unwanted effects.
Must say again that im sure there is a simpler way to do this, I did cero reserch and this was what i could pull out from my memory, but traktor has to have a way to set up a FX unit to process audio from an external source and in that mode it would be logical that you could set it as a unit that only delivers the wet/affected by the effect signal and in that case "D/W knob" should be just a level knob.
I say traktor has to have this because this is something that in hardware world exists and its known as a parallel FX loop (i.e. a FX loop that treats dry signal and wet signal separately), if it doesnt have it, you can always do as i did. And if it doesnt take for ever, im gonna try to upload a demonstration video, but my internet connection it's not the best.
For last, this was maybe what got confused the guy on AH forum in the first place (at least it got me confused for a while): in the mixer, the way to assign the channels to the FX loop is hitting the filter button on each channel, the thing is that the filter doesnt have an off button, so the only way to bypass the filter is to have it set as a low pass and the cutoff freq in 20kHz or to have it set as high pass and the cutoff freq in 20hz. What happens is that if you use the filter, you probably have the resonance set to a relatively high value so that is what adds volume when you hit the filter button to send that track to the external unit, the fact that resonance accentuate (i.e. makes louder) whatever frequency you set with the cutoff. So the proper way to use only the external FX unit is to set the resonance in cero and the frequency in 20Hz or 20kHz depending on the type of filter you use (must say, it took me a few moments to pull that one out).
As for the pioneer FX unit, i cant tell but im pretty sure it has to be a way around as well as there is in traktor.
Hope this helps and sorry again for the bad english and for my google chrome auto-correct that changes some words to my native language.
The ecler nuo 2.0 has a dedicated FX send knob per channel which would certainly solve your problem. In the other hand, it doesn't come with the classic AH filter (or any filter at all). In that matter it's just a personal choice, for the construction and audio quality i can't speak.
About the vumeters, when you hit any cue button the meters switch from L-R master out meters to L-R cue channel meters, in other words if you got one channel with audio coming in and you hit the cue button, both meters light up, there is no way to assign one meter to each channel.
Thanks for checking. A6 has the option of fx send return, it has third pair of ins/outs besides those for dvs, but the article explaining the routing is gone from their site (?).
What do you use to control the Traktor fx? I'm weighting between fx mixer and regular one + Traktor fx (X1). I like the modular approach better but the send return implementation on the Xone 23 worries me. How is it different from the DJM send return where there's also no regulation like on the Eclers? Btw is the Ecler send return proper, issues free?
Im not sure if im getting your doubt rigth.
About the DJM two channel mixers from pioneer, they don't have a FX loop, the DJM 250 doesnt have effects at all and the 350 and 400 have internal digital effects (more limited than traktor FX units), but they dont have a FX loop to route the audio through a external FX unit. The bigger-4channel versions do have a loop and proper controls but it's a whole other price range.
About the ecler, i never had one in my hands, but for what i saw in pics it should work well.
About the effects on the mixer vs "regular mixer"+traktor (if i got this right) I must say that if you are already using traktor to play the tracks and you want to use some kind of digital effect unit, the simplest/easiest way is to just use the traktor FX units before things get out of the PC and into the mixer. I mean, if you are going to use traktor, no matter where you get your effects from, you need a controller (lets say the X1) to play/pause/browse/loop your tracks, once you are at that point, using the traktor FX units with the X1 is the logical thing to do, then audio goes out the computer through the A6 into the mixer. With this setup you dont need any FX loop in your mixer or any strange routing of any kind, just traktor>A6>mixer and effects are being applied to the tracks before they get out the computer (and its a pretty standard and well known setup).
It's a different story if you are not playing your tracks from traktor or if you are using an external FX unit, and i did the previous testing to emulate those situations, but if you are going to play traktor 2 decks with traktor FX units then any 2 channel mixer will work regardless the FX loop.
In my opinion, xone 23 (or 22 as well) it's still a good choice cause all the audio remain analog, the pioneer mixers are digital so you have digital audio in traktor that converts to analog in the A6 that converts to digital in the mixer in that converts to analog in the mixer out, and that many A/D conversions is not a good thing, but in the end its a personal choice (before you ask, i dont know if the ecler is analog or digital).
To control traktor FX units, in my latest setup I was using a xone k2 with custom mappings in combination with a Akai APC40 mk2 and a 4 channel mixer.
Thanks. I'll break it down as simple as I can. Need comparison of sound quality (and other aspects worth mentioning) between:
Traktor live input + Traktor FX via Xone 23
VS
Pio DJM and its FX
So,
real vinyl played through Traktor with post fader application of Traktor FX
VS
Real vinyl played through DJM mixer and its FX.
I need post fader routing due to use of echo, delay and similar.
Ok, now it's much more clear. Traktor FXs are better and more versatile than the ones on the two channel DJMs, no doubt about that, BUT if you are playing real vinyl, a mixer with on board effects or a standalone effects unit is so much simpler... the pc+traktor+audio interface+controller just for add some effects is a lot of work and you are adding a lot of points of failure in the chain, for me is not worth the effort, as you said I would give a chance to the DJM mixers and also read the pionneer RMX manual, if you can kill the dry signal in the unit or somehow set it to be used in parallel loop FX it'll fit your setup.
About the pre/post fader issue, in the xone 23 the filter/loop assign is independent of the fader position.
I'm getting Traktor for the DVS, its fx are a bonus that I'm exploring if it's worth using. I'll play combination of real and timecode vinyl and real vinyl will be played as live input. I'm thinking that can't be worse than a DJM mixer regarding sound quality since it's also doing AD/DA, just as Traktor with the live input. With this combination there's the option for full analog chain in case I don't use Traktor fx, while getting a digital mixer makes it impossible. That's why I like modular. Seems that only thing that screws it is the S/R implementation on the Xone 23 and I see no other analog 2ch mixer with S/R except for the Ecler Nuo 2.0 which to me is still unconfirmed in this regard.
Now I get it, very very nice set up! You can always read the manual/user guide on the ecler, my instinct tells me it's just what you need but obviously I can't confirm.
It annoys me to hell that I have to keep on pointing out the Denon X600Quote:
Originally Posted by electroshock