Jump to content

Mono Channel Output.


VSOP
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hey friends!

 

So I'm using 8.01 on a Ppc g5. Apogee symphoney. Da16x. Tryning to route a mono channel to output 1. Only output one. Not 1-2 with a panner. Is there anyway to make logic see mono outs?

 

What if u have logic hooked up to an analog console and you want discrete outputs. Like a multitrack deck....

 

Hope your guys can help.

 

Thanks.

MH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Output objects have a mono/stereo output button, like regular channels. You can create mono outputs by clicking this button.

 

However, you will still have to route the signal to this output by selecting the corresponding pair and panning hard left or right to get the odd or even channel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't belive I didn't find any major bitching on the net about this.

 

If you look hard enough, you'll find major bitchings about anything and everything on the net. There are threads in this forum with people bitching about the look of the new Logic 8 icon. To me, this panning issue is about as important as the look of the Logic 8 icon. What's so complicated about turning a knob to the right or to the left, versus choosing an entry in a menu?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't belive I didn't find any major bitching on the net about this

 

Maybe that's a clue that it ain't such a big problem? :?

 

Panning mono sources out of a stereo pair has been normal practice since I first peaked through the door of a studio over 3 decades ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't belive I didn't find any major bitching on the net about this.

 

If you look hard enough, you'll find major bitchings about anything and everything on the net. There are threads in this forum with people bitching about the look of the new Logic 8 icon. To me, this panning issue is about as important as the look of the Logic 8 icon. What's so complicated about turning a knob to the right or to the left, versus choosing an entry in a menu?

 

Well nothing, but first off it is an extra step, Assign THEN Pan, but seriously People Im not complaining. I said I cant believe I didnt find more bitching cauze I did search this topic. My only point was that if this a functionality of PT, I would have found a thousand threads bitching about the answer to my question..

 

Im not being lazy. David, Thank you for confirming what I had suspected was the case. Thats all I was really looking for. Searches of other posted questiona and answers on this and other forums were unclear.

 

kwakman

 

What are you talking about.. I never said anything about panning to mono pieces of a stereo pair. Were talking about having descrete mono outputs of the logic rig, ya know like a STUDER would? Youve probably seen ona those in that 3 decades right? I guess that 3rd decade of doing this makes you 1 more decade smarter than my 2 so maybe Im the asshole..

 

See this a larger pain than you think.

 

EXAMPLE.

 

I have a 48 channel SSL G Series. Id like to mix my record on that.. not in the box. I have a 36 channel ALL MONO multitrack that Im working with.

 

OK Keep up.

 

If I want to assign each track to a seperate channel on that SSL mixer I have to move thru each channel individually, assign to the correct output pair, THEN pan.

 

Thats all fine by me tho. I under stand good things take time.. What sucks ass is when you client repeatedly says things during setup like y knw Im with you that Logic is the s#!+, in PT you could done that whole action in one click, as opposed to that whole dog and pony show that I had to go thru.

 

I dont care about the 4 minutes of extra work, I just was trying to conferm that it indeed had to be done.

 

Tripets..

 

You dont know me.. How bout I make a statment about you.. Like howsabout "Get$&@+%".

 

All the comments after David answered my question were SOOOO insightfull, Im super glad you had the time to type them into your computer.

 

MH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

decaf? :wink:

 

Haha, Doubtfull. 12 Hours of sessions yesterday.. 12 Hours Today. Pregnant Wife 26 Weeks along at the house, and to quote Big Homie..

 

...and everyday I wake up to more bullshit.

 

Nothing like getting insulted by a bunch of internet posters before Ive even gotten out of bed.

 

Cmon, dont tell me that when Studer came out with the Digital Cal on the the 2 track machines (820 I think) you didnt prefer that to having to use the tweaker all the time. The first engineer I ever worked for told me the key is working smarter, not harder. He was a wise dude.

 

Now in 2008 Im being called Lazy. LOL. If you had to patch up you Multitrack everyday with 24 TT cables patched the same way everyday youd prolly leave them in the bay most nights... Cmon.

 

MH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

decaf? :wink:

 

Haha, Doubtfull. 12 Hours of sessions yesterday.. 12 Hours Today. Pregnant Wife 26 Weeks along at the house, and to quote Big Homie..

 

...and everyday I wake up to more bullshit.

 

My sympathies!

 

I've spent too many times tweeking dolby cards on an old Otari 24 track, cleaned to many heads on dodgy sepmag machines then watched as they broke edits, listened to crackly pan pots and EQ pots destroy a good take, or screw up me up air!... Gimme digits anyday!

I agree, TT patchbays are a device of the devil!

 

Anyways, hope you get some time off soon, and all the best with the baby...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether it is Panning, or using mono I/O inserts you will have to do some tweaking and save as a project template.

 

I am trying this out but I only have a 8 channel interface to send everything to my mixer. I want to start out with about 20 tracks.

 

So my Audio and instrument channels will all be routed to one of the 8 Aux/bus channels. Each Bus output will be set to mono and have a mono I/O for output only (kinda like that tattoo on my ass that says "Exit Only").

 

I am going to do some processing prior to going into Logic and some on the Analog Stereo output mix to a 2 track DAT. Everything else will be done within Logic.

 

I can group tracks, but I am still limited to things like the drums being a stereo pair on output 7/8. The vocals will be on 1/2. So 3/4, 5/6 can be for everything else in mono or stereo. I guess another interface would help. I will see how this works.

 

So for what that is worth...

 

 

(It sux not being rich!!!) :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe in your 20 years of engineering you've never come across a console with bussing like this.

 

You could create a template with mono bus objects, pre-panned to the outputs you wanted them to correspond to. You could name these busses after their corresponding outputs, and then you could do your output assignments with destinations that matched the channels on your 4k...

 

Although that seems like a lot of extra work for someone so reluctant to twist a couple (virtual) panpots.

 

Just saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vsop, youre not alone in thinking this is a huge oversight. ive had this debate here already a couple times, and given up on trying to explain to people that theres a huge difference between panning and bussing to submix to tape etc and being able to just plug the damn multitrack into the console. somehow a lot of people (probably people who havent used a recording device besides a computer before) dont seem to understand this difference.

 

 

bugger it, ill try again.

 

tape machines (by this i include DAWs, HDR's, tape obviously of all formats, etc) DO NOT need to be patched in this ass backwards manner. you take a cord, plug it in and that channel is assigned.

 

mixing consoles often do need to be routed via panning. we understand that. probably better then some of the people who keep blindly repeating it. this should have nothing to do with this topic.

 

what vsop, myself and many others want to do is mix externally. this means treating logic as a tape machine. its not an uncommon practice, that is why real mixing consoles arent all in landfills despite DAWs having built in mixers.

 

with this feature, i shouldnt actually call it a feature cause its just basic routing, we could set the first output to channel 1, click the "ascending" box and have the console patched like in any other system. or for routing multiple channels to one output channel, we could at least do it in one setting per channel.

 

yes, i understand for some dude with 3 softsynth channels this may be a confusing task. for any engineer i know who has recorded and mixed a band, this is basic routing functionality.

 

oh and please spare me the auto logic defense, im a user arent i? i obviously like the program, but this oversight sucks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh, and for everyone who keeps confusing console routing with recorder patching in this argument, i may as well add this- in your misunderstanding of the problem you are basically saying that the quickest way to get individual outputs from a console is to buss and pan them. if you knew what the hell we were talking about here you would realise that if we were to treat recorder patching like console patching, what we are actually looking for here is DIRECT OUTS. unless you know of some 64 buss analog consoles im not familiar with.... which would still be a stupid way to patch individual outs...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you knew what the hell we were talking about here you would realise that if we were to treat recorder patching like console patching, what we are actually looking for here is DIRECT OUTS

 

I would suggest that if you knew what the hell you were talking about, you would know that direct outs are paths from input channels to tape, not multitrack playback access points. What you are looking for are normalled paths from the track objects ('tape' channels) in Logic to your interface's outputs and therefore to your console's inputs. The best way to do this in Logic is to use the I/O inserts. I described another workaround above, but it's nowhere near as direct...

 

Still far more direct than cross-patching channels from tape to reorganize a mix layout for a picky engineer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And BTW, I always mix on consoles. Whether it's Logic or PT, 8 tracks or 48, I can always manage to assign outputs quicker than I can organize my decisions about where I want them, and usually much quicker than I or the assistant can write them out on the board tape. I don't see this as a valid beef.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Although that seems like a lot of extra work for someone so reluctant to twist a couple (virtual) panpots.

 

Just saying.

 

Just Sayin What? You either didnt read the thread, didnt understand the thread, or dont care to understand. In a million years of engineering I have NEVER RUN UP AGANST A MULTITRACK THAT NEEDED THO BE PANNED B4 it HIT THE DESK. 1=1 2=2 3=3 not 1-2 paned left =1 and 1-2 panned Right =2

 

Hell Yea I have run across BUS ASSIGNMENT NETWORKS that worked like that but never a entire desk.

 

READ MY LIPS

 

For the LAST TIME IN THIS THREAD!! I DON NOT MIND PANNING AND SETTING THE CHANNELS OH MY f$@%ing GOD!! WHAT THE FUCKKKK!!!!!!!!!!! Its not hard, just highlight every other track and pan left, repeat for right.....

 

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WASENT DOING THIS WORK ALL FOR NOTHING WHEN A SHORTCUT WAS THERE.

 

Thanks you David for understanding my point.

 

OK..

 

Must chill

 

Marcell may have a point Im Missing.

 

marcell so your saying that the only way is to put a I/O Insert plug at the end of the Insert chain? Is this post fader? Probably not. I would be really interested to hear how you quickly take a 32 mono object logic song and rought each mono channel directly to 32 channels of a mixer thru whatever interface you use that this is so easy. Im just not following what your saying.. Either you dont understand or were not communicationg properly.

 

Please inform me.

 

MH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, I don't worry about this and I don't see it as an issue in my personal workflow. If you do, you could try:

 

Insert an I/O plugin at the end of the insert chain of a mono track object. It is pre-fader, but it has a level control (with 1 dB level increments) built in, and you have another fader at the console to trim with.

 

Or try the bussing thing I described above. Once you have this built into your session template, and you have taken the time to name the busses and route everything to your liking, you may find it feels like what you want.

 

Or, if you are truly going track-for-track (no submixing or stems), just set up a template session with the same number of pre-routed track objects as you have outputs. Record things where you want them to come back, like you would have on a tape deck, making stereo recordings (if you need them) on adjacent mono channels.

 

They're all workarounds, but if you set these kind of things up in advance they'll never slow you down.

 

Helpful?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you knew what the hell we were talking about here you would realise that if we were to treat recorder patching like console patching, what we are actually looking for here is DIRECT OUTS

 

I would suggest that if you knew what the hell you were talking about, you would know that direct outs are paths from input channels to tape, not multitrack playback access points. What you are looking for are normalled paths from the track objects ('tape' channels) in Logic to your interface's outputs and therefore to your console's inputs. The best way to do this in Logic is to use the I/O inserts. I described another workaround above, but it's nowhere near as direct...

 

Still far more direct than cross-patching channels from tape to reorganize a mix layout for a picky engineer.

 

 

goddammit dude do you actually read posts or just skim the keywords and talk garbage hoping something makes sense?

 

let me clarify the bit you quoted seeing as you didnt bother reading it in context.

 

yes, a direct out goes from input channels to tape. my point was pointing out how backwards this discussion has been with everybody going on about panning within busses being a normal setup FROM TAPE. which obviously, its NOT! what i was getting at was that people keep using the buss routing argument in the wrong context, in the wrong part of the chain. so i was trying to explain that to get a console input to a tape input (ignoring submixing here) the fastest path is a direct out, NOT assigning to a buss and panning. therefore, logically, to get a signal FROM tape output to a console input, buss routing and panning is insanely stupid compared to patching from tape out to line in.

 

jesus, why the hell am i bothering to type a clarification of a point i typed anyway but you just didnt bother to read?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so i was trying to explain that to get a console input to a tape input (ignoring submixing here) the fastest path is a direct out, NOT assigning to a buss and panning. therefore, logically, to get a signal FROM tape output to a console input, buss routing and panning is insanely stupid compared to patching from tape out to line in.

 

OK, everybody calm down. As it's been suggested, the I/O utility plug-in is the appropriate tool to accomplish a direct single channel output from a mono audio track. With this arrangement you can shut down all Logic's mix busses and treat Logic as a simple lean multitrack tape machine with direct single channel line outs.

 

This should maintain proper PDC operation for tracks and instruments but bypasses such issues like pan law, etc. In other words, the track audio is transferred at unity to the interface line outs.

 

You can still do prefader sends to internal effects and route the aux returns to to your console in the same way. But be aware that you may have to deal with some PDC issues manually at that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Logic is being used to record just like it were a real world analog recorder. This can be done on any software. What is the point of bitching about how Logic sux if you aren't really using it?

 

If you have enough audio outputs on your Interface, there should be no problem. You are limited to whatever interface you have. If you have 32 tracks and only 8 outputs, you're screwed.

 

For those with the above example, bussing and panning would be the solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK First Off.

 

Day off today. A good night sleep and a square meal and cup of coffee and I have returned to my usual sedate/calm/zen mode.

 

I want to apologize for my rant full of curses from last night. For some reason I saw triplets post calling the new generations of engineer recording with computers lazy and I jus snapped.

 

I have a real problem with the way some people have a tendancy to act like a total douchbags hiding behind curtans of anonymity on audio message boards. Audio Engineering was and remains to be an apprenticeship based carer. As more and more major studios close we lose that ease of moving newbie engineers into a system like this, working side by side with a real session Pro day in day out.

 

Now its more popular to go to a quick school program buy PTLE and hang the shingle out and start you trade. For these people We that have knowledge and experience really need to reach out and help people who need the help. I accept my part in that screaming and ranting is also not a way to carry ones self, but I am not alone in this.

 

Marcell72. Thank you for explaining the way you are using the I/O router plugin to accomplish mono output. Since its the last in the signal chain you automate plugin levels and the output level and all is good in the hood. I realize there HAD to be a way to get mono output. And a simpleway as well. Despite being a workaround this works very well for me. THANK YOU!

 

OK.. Now for Shivermetimberlake. Im not saying or do I think anyone is saying "Logic Sux" I just thought, and continue to think, that no mono output functionality is an oversite. Using the I/O plug provides that functionality so on with the show. While any software can do it none of them come with the unbelievable feature and other Shite that logic is the most kick ass for. I would never say using it as a tape machine is "not really using it".

 

Regardless about number out outputs on an interface, unless you use the I/O plug you are panning and thats a lil lame since Pan Law changes the level of the audio panned.

 

The funniest thing about this thread is the absolute only post needed was my first and Fader 8s post here on Page 2.

 

Woo Sawww....

 

Coolio

 

MH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless about number out outputs on an interface, unless you use the I/O plug you are panning and thats a lil lame since Pan Law changes the level of the audio panned.

 

The funniest thing about this thread is the absolute only post needed was my first and Fader 8s post here on Page 2.

 

Hmmm........ so much for your apology.

 

The Pan law can be changed and is rather irrelevant if left in its panned position. The I/O plug has been around for sometime and is rather useless to most users with a 2 channel interface.

 

So, if I may ask, what are you using (interface) to get all of your channels out of Logic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm........ so much for your apology.

 

The Pan law can be changed and is rather irrelevant if left in its panned position. The I/O plug has been around for sometime and is rather useless to most users with a 2 channel interface.

 

So, if I may ask, what are you using (interface) to get all of your channels out of Logic?

 

First post homie.. Reread the First Post... Tuff Playin ones self like that.

 

I was not really sayin sorry 2 you. I Had thought we were friends...

 

http://www.logicprohelp.com/viewtopic.php?p=112492#112492

 

I havent used the I/O plug before for this type of functionality and as Im NOT using a 2 channel interface, its rather useFULL. But do what you do homie.

 

thanks again Marcel72, David, David A and Fader 2 the mafuckin8. You guys walk the walk.

 

MH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 years later...
vsop, youre not alone in thinking this is a huge oversight.

 

In a million years of engineering I have NEVER RUN UP AGANST A MULTITRACK THAT NEEDED THO BE PANNED B4 it HIT THE DESK. 1=1 2=2 3=3 not 1-2 paned left =1 and 1-2 panned Right =2

 

If it makes you guys feel any better, I ended up on this forum because 12-years after you made posts about this issue I find myself having the same problem. One would think that in well over a decade the people behind Logic could have incorporated a pre-made template into the program for people doing hybrid mixing. I feel like not only this would save people a lot of time, headache, and confusion trying to figure it all out, but it would take the programmers no more than a few minutes to add.

 

I think people forget that no everyone out there has the same level of experience as they do; everyone has to start out somewhere. Without formal training, asking questions on forums is how people learn. There's no shortage of unhelpful answers to posts all over the internet telling people to just use the search feature. The problem that often the people asking questions have already used the search feature and did not find what they were looking for, found outdated information, found people just arguing, or found posts telling the previous person asking the same question to once again use the search feature. I would not be surprised of the first response to the original "Hello, World!" program was "Use the search feature!", but I digress.

 

Anyway, here I am replying halfway through 2020 to posts made sometime in 2008 where other people were experiencing then the same issues that I'm still having now. Could someone here with any pull reach out to the people behind Logic and have them whip up a quick template with all the tracks pre-panned and set for mono for all people mixing on hybrid setups?

 

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...