Share Your Block/Wiring Diagram

[Markyboard]

I love eye candy pics but always wish they were accompanied by block diagrams. This gives some insight into how people are actually using the stuff.

 

Here's my latest after recently updating and reorganizing to better match the position of each piece in my room.

 

[The Real MC]

My gigging system. I don't have a scan of my studio system yet.

 

http://analoguediehard.com/tour/offsite-rig/stage-system-diagram.jpg

[Markyboard]

Very cool Michael! Hammond organ in cancel mode?

[The Real MC]

Very cool Michael! Hammond organ in cancel mode?

 

Drawbars are off but XK3 still transmits MIDI. Useful for a rudimentary MIDI controller. I use it for synth sounds when the MIDIBoard is occupied.

[Markyboard]

Ah, makes sense.

[The Real MC]

We must be the only two who have diagrams.

[KuruPrionz]

We must be the only two who have diagrams.

 

Possibly.

 

I am still finding the best combinations for hooking up my home studio. When I get it all figured out I will mark cords and/or jacks accordingly.

 

Sort of a 3 dimensional diagram in real time?

 

There will always be variations here, there may be one guitar amp now but others could come into play. Several guitars/basses to choose from, sometimes the instrument is plugged straight in and/or into a magic widget and sometimes a microphone is needed on either the instrument or an amplifier.

 

Each of those variations would require it's own diagram and all the diagrams in the world still won't plug in any cables or adjust levels.

 

It is an "as needed" enhancement, useful but not flexible enough for all situations.

[Markyboard]

There are no rules - everyone works the way it suits them best. For me I'm reliant on a detailed diagram mainly because I can't remember things like which midi port is hooked to which keyboard or how audio is getting from here to there. Fortunately I don't often need to. Every synth is assigned a unique midi channel and port. For the ultimate in geekdom they actually match up with my mixer channel assignments. With all tracks enabled in my DAW I can play and/or record with everything live at once if desired. I don't have to think each time about what I have to do to get this keyboard to "work". Midi-wise anything can talk to anything with a simple 1 or 2 button push, either on my PC3x or at the DAW. Getting audio into and out of the DAW is just a button push or 2 away. DAW tracks can easily be routed to hardware effects using 2 channels from my D/A converter.

 

Unless I'm making a modification, adding something or reorganizing I don't need to re-cable stuff. I do enough patching with the modular/semi-modular gear (go figure). But when something isn't happening or there's scratchy audio or whatever I'm soon reaching for this diagram.

[KuruPrionz]

Markyboard, I'm not faulting your methods at all. It sounds like they work well for a keyboard/MIDI based setup.

 

I have 2 keyboards, both USB powered 25 key MIDI controllers. I don't play keys well at all but sometimes the infinite sustain and/or relative lack of false triggering is compelling.

If so, I plug in one USB cable, done.

 

Most of my sounds are analog - Vocals, acoustic and electric instruments with vibrating strings primarily but also percussion, harmonicas, recorders and xylophones.

 

Some have multiple options, guitars with built in pickups/microphones - I could just mic them or just plug them in or both. Things do change often.

In my experience 95% of all audio problems are cables and possibly jacks/connections. I've got nearly all of the defective cables marked and removed from service. Some of them are most likely repairable, someday.

[Mike Rivers]

We must be the only two who have diagrams.

 

I made diagrams when I was setting up my studio 30 years ago. It's still the same. I was about to make some decisions because I have a Mackie d8b console here that I was thinking about buying to replace my Soundcraft. In order to do that and keep my patchbay setup, I'd have to make or modify a lot of cables, as the Sound recorder I/O is on 1/4" TRS jacks and the Mackie is on DB-25s. The Mackie has no routing other than straight through from mic/line input to direct output (nor does the Soundcraft) so I'll want to keep my patchbay.

 

But I'll have to postpone that decision because this morning, it looks like the console's motherboard died, plus it wasn't passing signal into the guts from two of the tape return inputs, and much as I like the Mackie's basic design - it was designed to be a recording console first - I think it would be smarter to get a more modern digital console if I get a digital console at all.

 

But now I think I'll take a nap.

[Markyboard]

Things do change often.

 

I think that best sums up our different working methodologies. I do think yours is way more common as there aren"t too many studios, even home studios that are strictly keys. Electronic keyboards/synths have a high degree of flexibility and character built into the instruments themselves where just about anything else relies on external equipment to achieve varied and unique character of sound. Just look at the number of microphones and mic preamps out there.

 

It"s no surprise that diagrams make more sense for a more permanent type setup. Like I said earlier we all do what suits us best.

 

 

But I'll have to postpone that decision because this morning, it looks like the console's motherboard died, plus it wasn't passing signal into the guts from two of the tape return inputs, and much as I like the Mackie's basic design - it was designed to be a recording console first - I think it would be smarter to get a more modern digital console if I get a digital console at all.

 

 

Sounds like an unfortunate candidate for my recent ' Single Point Failure' thread on KC.

[KuruPrionz]

Electronic keyboards/synths have a high degree of flexibility and character built into the instruments themselves where just about anything else relies on external equipment to achieve varied and unique character of sound. Just look at the number of microphones and mic preamps out there.

 

In my experience, an electric guitar can instantly and spontaneously emit a huge range of expression in large part because you are actually touching the string - the source of the sound itself - in two different places and two different ways - simultaneousy - each with it's own set of expressive variations. I don't need to plug into an amp to get many of those expressions, most of them in fact.

 

If I do use an amp, I can not only get a vast variety of tones out of many current amps, I can change the tone fairly dramatically with nothing more than varying the force and/or location used to pluck the strings and also the method of plucking - fingers/pick etc.

 

I honestly don't think there is anything more expressive with the exception of the voice. A great singer can do unbelievable things. As a reference although you've probably listened to it, the Bobby McFerrin album with Don't Worry, Be Happy on it is entirely and only Bobby's vocals.

 

Not dissing keys, they do awesome things guitars cannot do but tonal variation and expression? Guitar is capable of a vast range of both, spontaneously, no buttons, no knobs, no sliders, just hands on strings. Touching the actual note generator is a powerful magic.

 

I could draw block diagrams of the fretboard but they already exist in abundance, for keyboards as well.

 

I will also say that in a certain sense, modular synths, guitars-effects-amps and mics-mic-preamps-eq-compressors have a lot in common. The order of the hookup sequence changes the sounds and the variations may take us out into the weeds but that's why it's FUN!!!!! Cheers, Kuru

[The Real MC]

In my experience, an electric guitar can instantly and spontaneously emit a huge range of expression in large part because you are actually touching the string - the source of the sound itself - in two different places and two different ways - simultaneousy - each with it's own set of expressive variations. I don't need to plug into an amp to get many of those expressions, most of them in fact.

 

If I do use an amp, I can not only get a vast variety of tones out of many current amps, I can change the tone fairly dramatically with nothing more than varying the force and/or location used to pluck the strings and also the method of plucking - fingers/pick etc.

 

No argument there. My primary instrument is keyboards, I learned guitar out of necessity when playing a song in a band that has no keyboard parts. I'm not a lead player (my piano fingers are clumsy on guitar) but I am competent on rhythm guitar (not just barre chords). I didn't know it when I was younger but I have very analytical ears. I grew up around a brother who played guitar and my ears were picking up the intricacies of lead guitar parts. Any of the good amps from the 70s and 80s he had them, and my ears were collecting the intricacies of amps - Fender, Marshall, Mesa/Boogie, et al. When I was learning to play guitar that made me dangerous. I learned to appreciate the power of dynamic expression of guitar just from the fingers.

 

Not dissing keys, they do awesome things guitars cannot do but tonal variation and expression?

 

In the hands of a master, yes they can in their own way. As long as you're not trying to sound like a guitar. On the contrary, guitars do awesome things that synths cannot do.

 

Guitar is capable of a vast range of both, spontaneously, no buttons, no knobs, no sliders, just hands on strings. Touching the actual note generator is a powerful magic.

 

No argument there. Try as I might - and I've been doing sound design since 1981 - I have given up trying to emulate the expressiveness and dynamic of overdriven guitar. Samples don't cut it, and I haven't been successful with synths. It is much easier to play a guitar.

 

Same with saxophone. Tenor and alto sax can be ridiculously dynamic and there's no way to emulate that on a keyboard, even with a breath controller.

 

I will also say that in a certain sense, modular synths, guitars-effects-amps and mics-mic-preamps-eq-compressors have a lot in common. The order of the hookup sequence changes the sounds and the variations may take us out into the weeds but that's why it's FUN!!!!! Cheers, Kuru

 

The permutations are endless. And on the guitar side, variations in speakers and cabinets raise the permutations even further. For guitar amps I chose various amp heads to mix with various cabinets, and I get a lot of mileage in tonal variety just from them. They can be a real eye (ear?) opener.

[Markyboard]

Ok, I deserve a flogging for my poorly chosen words. I"m not quite sure how to convey this but 'expression' was not what I meant and I agree with your points.

 

 

Let"s try this. No matter what instrument, electronics (internal or external to the instrument) allows and invite experimenting to find cool sounds. Or sounds that work best with other sounds. Or inspiring expressive sounds. Or duplicate sounds of the past. Or....

 

 

How this is achieved is probably more driven by each instrument"s historical practices, habits and the available products themselves.

 

The ability to experiment on self contained synths is immediate from within the machine. Of course you can also take this further by plugging into external amps and effects, swap the order etc. Just like a guitarist with an expansive pedal board. Or the guy with a vintage Rhodes or Wurlie. It"s just that most keyboardist don"t unless they"re after a very specific sound. Maybe too much experimenting?

 

Guitarist could also opt to run every conceivable guitar, foot pedal and amp into a patch bay for a more permanent type setup. One with patch memory and the ability to reconfigure via a simple button push or mouse click. But they don"t afaik. Why?

 

Because then they"d have to make a block diagram.

[KuruPrionz]

Cool stuff... deleted because complicated

/quote]

 

Fully agree on saxophone, also violin and most instruments where the player is in physical contact with the note generator.

 

Agree on amps, speakers. I've owned many tube amps over the years, still have a couple I don't gig with. Let's not overlook "tube rolling"!!! Finding the best sounding tube for V1, making sure the phase inverter has matched triodes (and seeing which sounds better - 12AT7 or 12AX7 etc) can all change the tone of an amp for better or worse. Matched output tubes (or not) can change things and the choice of manufacturer and/or tube type for the output section makes a difference. Last but not least, if there is a tube rectifier changing that can make quite a difference. My Clone Fender 5D3 sounds very different turned up when I swap in a 5Y3 or 5U4. As you say, the variations are endless!!!

[KuruPrionz]

Ok, I deserve a flogging.

 

Because then they"d have to make a block diagram.

 

 

NO flogging but here is my block diagram for my current gig rig. I've played many gigs without ever consulting the diagram, go figure.

I do have the amp programmed and the Katana setup is pretty awesome. There are 8 presets, stepping on the far right footswitch in any of those presets turns the rest of the switchboard into a pedalboard for that specific program. I can turn distortion on/off, any effects - chorus, octave, autowah etc. I use preset 1 for 95 percent of the gig and preset 3 for the rest of it. Attached, there you go!!!

[Mike Rivers]

I believe that one reason for planning out studio wiring and interconnection is so that you can walk up to any instrument or microphone in the room and without doing much more than pushing up a fader or un-muting a channel on a mixer, hear and/or record that source. This is fine if you have a reasonable number of instruments set up and ready to go. This is a convenient situation for the one-person or one-band studio that, while playing several different instruments in a session, basically does the same thing every time.

 

In my case, I don't know what I'll be doing tomorrow (sometimes I don't know what I'm doing today) so I want my studio configured in a way that it's easy to do whatever comes along without a lot of fooling around. My mixer and patchbay are the heart of my system. The 24-track recorder inputs are normalled to the the mixer's direct outputs, and the recorder's outputs are normalled to the tape returns. I have one reverb input on the patchbay normalled to one auxiliary send on the console, with its output normalled (through a level control) to the main mix. I can use this for monitoring while tracking, and also when mixing. Other signal processors have their inputs and outputs on the patchbay, but nothing is normalled to anything else - for instance, I don't have a "standard vocal channel" that has the preamp output wired (or normalled) to the input of my favorite vocal compressor, which is normalled to a reasonable equalizer, which can be patched with a single cable (or 2 for a stereo track) to whatever tape track I want to record it on.

 

It's what works for me.

 

Oh, and if you don't know about this "normalling" stuff, there's an article about patchbays on my web page here (PDF).

[Markyboard]

Kuru -Your block diagram is awesome. You should make it your avatar.

[Markyboard]

I believe that one reason for planning out studio wiring and interconnection is so that you can walk up to any instrument or microphone in the room and without doing much more than pushing up a fader or un-muting a channel on a mixer, hear and/or record that source. This is fine if you have a reasonable number of instruments set up and ready to go. This is a convenient situation for the one-person or one-band studio that, while playing several different instruments in a session, basically does the same thing every time.

 

In my case, I don't know what I'll be doing tomorrow (sometimes I don't know what I'm doing today) so I want my studio configured in a way that it's easy to do whatever comes along without a lot of fooling around. My mixer and patchbay are the heart of my system. The 24-track recorder inputs are normalled to the the mixer's direct outputs, and the recorder's outputs are normalled to the tape returns. I have one reverb input on the patchbay normalled to one auxiliary send on the console, with its output normalled (through a level control) to the main mix. I can use this for monitoring while tracking, and also when mixing. Other signal processors have their inputs and outputs on the patchbay, but nothing is normalled to anything else - for instance, I don't have a "standard vocal channel" that has the preamp output wired (or normalled) to the input of my favorite vocal compressor, which is normalled to a reasonable equalizer, which can be patched with a single cable (or 2 for a stereo track) to whatever tape track I want to record it on.

 

It's what works for me.

 

Oh, and if you don't know about this "normalling" stuff, there's an article about patchbays on my web page here (PDF).

 

I've explored using a patch bay many times. I do alternate patching at times from the back of my mixer which is certainly not as convenient. However the mixer is on a sliding shelf so it's not nearly as bad as crawling around behind equipment. I think we're all in agreement - whatever works.

 

Btw I remember your excellent article from years ago - maybe back when I subscribed to Recording?

[KuruPrionz]

Kuru -Your block diagram is awesome. You should make it your avatar.

 

 

LOL!

 

I'm fond of the "lonely chairs" photo. I took that at a dress rehearsal for a burlesque show, a minute later it all got crazy.

The calm before the storm. Completely subjective of course.

 

Thanks for the kudos on the block diagram, I realize now that I left out the Whirlwind IMP2 that is often plugged into the Line Out to go to the PA.

The Katana has the best sounding DI I've ever heard in an inexpensive amp, I turned the power amp off (another great feature) one time and the tone coming out of the PA was as close to identical to the sound of the speaker from the amp as you would ever want or need. Amazing, even the speaker emulation was spot on.

 

Still, it is an accurate schematic for many gigs. Pre-Covid we played lots of small clubs and a reasonable stage volume was all that we needed most of the time.

Yes, I only take one guitar. Locking tuners make string changing very fast, so far I haven't broken a string on stage in years.

 

In the studio, I've got 8 inputs in my interface. I only allow 2 players to record at once, maximum. It's a small space, mostly I am an Army of One.

I plan on dedicating channels and am slowly getting that worked out. One of the reasons I've added 4 mic preamps is that they all have switchable DI so I can dedicate more channels than just 8 and switch in and out as needed. That's kept me from needed an outboard mixer so far. In the "Box" I can build racks, no cords, no connectors. Ahhh....

 

If, when I get it pretty well sussed out and setting marked on boxes (Sansamp Bass Driver DI comes to mind), then I might make an actual block diagram.

Still figuring out what goes where, literally. Just last week I moved the desk, rack, mic iso box, all the window coverings etc. I like the new positions better, hopefully I am getting closer to establishing the simplest possible workflow space for me and my needs.

[Dr Mike Metlay]

I have the odd problem of block diagrams actually slowing me down. I have a studio notebook from my early days of making mistakes left and right, and it's packed full of diagrams of all the different ways I hooked stuff up and then immediately changed. As I got more fluid with my setup and learned rules to make stuff work quickly, I found that chunks of the block diagrams actually lived in my head and could be accessed as needed.

 

This has also been aided by the massive downsizing of my studio over the past ten years. My dear friend Nick Rothwell once explained to me the idea of being able to fit your studio inside your head. You needed to be able to look around and know exactly how everything fit together, without being paralyzed with anxiety about the bits and pieces that aren't quite pinned down yet. To that end, I have simplified massively, and can now look around and know exactly what is going where. When I contemplate further expansion of capabilities, it is always combined with some level of further simplification, so my headspace doesn't overflow.

 

I should also note that in my days of young procrastination, making diagrams over and over again was one of the ways I avoided actually writing music and recording anything. I suppose it's amusing in retrospect, until I consider the fact that I released a grand total of one solo EP in the period between 1986 and 2002...

[Markyboard]

No one need justify why they need or don"t need block diagrams. I feel like a teacher asking where"s your homework?

 

 

I should also note that in my days of young procrastination, making diagrams over and over again was one of the ways I avoided actually writing music and recording anything. I suppose it's amusing in retrospect, until I consider the fact that I released a grand total of one solo EP in the period between 1986 and 2002...

 

I was with you (even impressed) up until this point. I would state the above as 'while I was procrastinating I"d fill the time with things like making block diagrams'. To me your version rings similar to the often stated 'I"d rather spend my time practicing' when discussing some synth programming topic .

[Dr Mike Metlay]

No one need justify why they need or don"t need block diagrams. I feel like a teacher asking where"s your homework?

 

 

I should also note that in my days of young procrastination, making diagrams over and over again was one of the ways I avoided actually writing music and recording anything. I suppose it's amusing in retrospect, until I consider the fact that I released a grand total of one solo EP in the period between 1986 and 2002...

 

I was with you (even impressed) up until this point. I would state the above as 'while I was procrastinating I"d fill the time with things like making block diagrams'. To me your version rings similar to the often stated 'I"d rather spend my time practicing' when discussing some synth programming topic .

Precisely. Getting rid of my bad habits took decades, but I got there eventually, and I am more productive every year now. It's still embarrassing. :-p

[Claus H]

I have only recently (in the past 3 years or so) managed to find "my path" regarding having what I want as an audio-head, and what I am happy with as a musician for home recording.

The two don't always agree ð

It wasn't until I got the short working rack where everything fitted, that I started feeling I had some comfort and control, in terms of being able to walk in and record, and also having convenient, yet minimal patching.

 

My main recording rig is an aging Tascam 2488, bypassed in every sense except for the recording/editing abilities, I have external pres, a two-channel external HHb Radius tube eq and a matching external tube compressor.

(I await the new Tascam Model 12 on Friday; it will have the 2488 MIDIed to it for extra tracks if needed.)

 

It all fits in the small rack, the Tascam on top at working height, with pre-amps, eq, compressor, rack fans, a one-row patch bay further down, Furman at the bottom.

 

The pres are hardwired to line in on the Tascam, the effects loops are hardwired from the Tascam to the comp/eq and back,

 

My digital piano next to the rack goes through a stereo DI into 2 channels on the patch bay and is wired through 2 channels on my 4-pack pre-amps.

My bass "lives its own life" though a DI and a DBX 286 channel strip into its own channel on the Tascam.

 

That leaves acoustic guitars/vocals/percussion mics to be plugged in as needed.

 

Overall, this works for me. The patch bay has enough simple routing abilities to suit me, and everything else is pretty well wired and ready.

 

(The only gear left that keeps me awake at night is a high-quality spring reverb....that's the only effect I feel I need to complete the setup. One day...)

 

C,

[Dr Mike Metlay]

Wow, good to see this thread light up again!

 

My current rig is based around the fact that my studio is designed not only for music composition and performance but also for me to host a weekly radio show. When I host, I want a very simple setup that doesn't have a lot of extra stuff to mess with... but I often play a live improv as part of my show, so I can't just have a setup with a mic and nothing else. So my rig is "nested" for dual purposes.

 

The main setup is a Yamaha AG06 mixer, with five of its six input channels in use: my main mic, a stereo signal that's a mix of two iPads (more than enough to do an hour-long improv!), and a stereo signal that serves multiple duties as needed. (Back to that in a second.)

 

The AG06 is a very good interface with up to 24-bit/192 kHz support and very low noise on input and output, and can feed a pair of speakers and a pair of headphones; it has easily accessible volume controls (vital for broadcasting), a quickly set-up gain structure for the mics, and not a lot of froufrou beyond that. I turn it on, connect and boot my iPads, and I'm ready to do a show.

 

That last stereo channel is currently the linchpin of my "nested" system. When I'm doing an instructional video, I can plug that one instrument into that channel and work with it easily. When I want to add one instrument to my radio rig easily, I can plug it in with no trouble. And when I want to fire up my entire studio, I can cascade the stereo output of my big mixer into it. It's two sets of gain stages rather than one, but the result is still quite quiet and I'm pleased with it.

 

You'll note that all my computer interfacing is in stereo. I have always worked this way, and generally haven't found it to be much of a limitation on the kind of music I do. However, I recently obtained a good-quality multichannel USB2 interface and I'm going to be experimenting with it to see if wiring my studio for multitrack recording is now a viable thing. It'll be interesting to record stuff that way for the first time in many years, since I elected not to install a reel-to-reel tape recorder in my first home studio (35 years ago!) and took the step of focusing on stereo recording.