Is it true you can't bypass the Behringer UB802's tone controls ?

[Jones_r]

If I can't bypass the tone controls, how can I be sure that they are
really not affecting the frequency response ?. Can I run a loop back
test with the sound card ?, if so, how exactly can I do this ?, won't
the sound card output be too strong to drive the UB802's input ?.

Is there a pre amp with phantom power supply which will be at least as
good as the UB802, but does not have tone controls ?.

Thanks.

[jazzman]

To defeat the EQ on any channel just set the EQ pots to the center detent
position. The EQ is set up for +-15bd of boost/cut, so center is 0dB for
each, or unaffected.

If you worry that just passing the signal through this routing is somehow
bad for you (?), and if you only needed 2 channels and no phantom power, you
could route your input(s) to the Aux Returns. You can also get two more
channels (summed to one stereo pair in the mains or control room outs) via
the Tape-In RCA connections.

Using this method you could achieve 4 separate tracks, or 2 stereo pairs,
with outputs on MainL, MainR, ControlRoomL and ControlRoomR.

So yes, you can bypass the channel EQ easily. Hope that helps.

Jim



"Jones_r" <soren123@walla.co.il> wrote in message
news:c9730561.0308131829.d79acd8@posting.google.co m...
> If I can't bypass the tone controls, how can I be sure that they are
> really not affecting the frequency response ?. Can I run a loop back
> test with the sound card ?, if so, how exactly can I do this ?, won't
> the sound card output be too strong to drive the UB802's input ?.
>
> Is there a pre amp with phantom power supply which will be at least as
> good as the UB802, but does not have tone controls ?.
>
> Thanks.

[Jones_r]

"If you worry that just passing the signal through this routing is
somehow
bad for you..."

Yes, this is exactly what I'm worried about. I fear that by routing my
signal through the tone control, even when the pots are dialed to mid
point, will affect the frequency response.

Only problem is I need the phantom power supply. I thought to connect
my soundcard's output to the UB802's input, and from there to the
soundcard's line-in input, and run a loop back test to see if the
frequency response is affected by the UB802. Only problem is, will the
UB802 be able to take the the soundcard output signal, and run it
through the tone controls as well ?.


> To defeat the EQ on any channel just set the EQ pots to the center detent
> position. The EQ is set up for +-15bd of boost/cut, so center is 0dB for
> each, or unaffected.
>
> If you worry that just passing the signal through this routing is somehow
> bad for you (?), and if you only needed 2 channels and no phantom power, you
> could route your input(s) to the Aux Returns. You can also get two more
> channels (summed to one stereo pair in the mains or control room outs) via
> the Tape-In RCA connections.
>
> Using this method you could achieve 4 separate tracks, or 2 stereo pairs,
> with outputs on MainL, MainR, ControlRoomL and ControlRoomR.
>
> So yes, you can bypass the channel EQ easily. Hope that helps.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> "Jones_r" <soren123@walla.co.il> wrote in message
> news:c9730561.0308131829.d79acd8@posting.google.co m...
> > If I can't bypass the tone controls, how can I be sure that they are
> > really not affecting the frequency response ?. Can I run a loop back
> > test with the sound card ?, if so, how exactly can I do this ?, won't
> > the sound card output be too strong to drive the UB802's input ?.
> >
> > Is there a pre amp with phantom power supply which will be at least as
> > good as the UB802, but does not have tone controls ?.
> >
> > Thanks.

[Mike Rivers]

In article <c9730561.0308140141.54072c26@posting.google.com> soren123@walla.co.il writes:

> Yes, this is exactly what I'm worried about. I fear that by routing my
> signal through the tone control, even when the pots are dialed to mid
> point, will affect the frequency response.

So what? If you think it's affecting the frequency response, turn the
controls so that you like what you hear. That's what they're there
for. You have a cheap Behringer console. Use it to its full
capability. You cannot totally bypass the controls, and mechanical
centering, with all its good intentions, isn't guaranteed to be really
zero cut or boost. If it's a couple of tenths of a dB off, don't
worry. There are many worse things that can happen between the mic and
the speaker.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)

[Scott Dorsey]

Jones_r <soren123@walla.co.il> wrote:
>If I can't bypass the tone controls, how can I be sure that they are
>really not affecting the frequency response ?. Can I run a loop back
>test with the sound card ?, if so, how exactly can I do this ?, won't
>the sound card output be too strong to drive the UB802's input ?.

You can't, and they always will affect things a little bit. Life is
like that.

>Is there a pre amp with phantom power supply which will be at least as
>good as the UB802, but does not have tone controls ?.

How about a Mackie 1202? Pull out of the inserts and you bypass all of
that EQ and routing junk.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Arny Krueger]

"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
news:bhg6e8$22v$1@panix2.panix.com
> Jones_r <soren123@walla.co.il> wrote:
>> If I can't bypass the tone controls, how can I be sure that they are
>> really not affecting the frequency response ?. Can I run a loop back
>> test with the sound card ?, if so, how exactly can I do this ?, won't
>> the sound card output be too strong to drive the UB802's input ?.
>
> You can't, and they always will affect things a little bit. Life is
> like that.
>
>> Is there a pre amp with phantom power supply which will be at least
>> as good as the UB802, but does not have tone controls ?.
>
> How about a Mackie 1202? Pull out of the inserts and you bypass all
> of that EQ and routing junk.

Behr UB 802 - $69.95

Mackie 1202 - $399

Here's Behr that has inserts: MXB 1002 - $129.95

[Jones_r]

What about the M-Audio "Audio Buddy" ?, how does it compares to the UB802 ?.
Also, what do you think of the following product ?:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2550574244&category=3278

You think its a cat in the sack ?.

> "Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:bhg6e8$22v$1@panix2.panix.com
> > Jones_r <soren123@walla.co.il> wrote:
> >> If I can't bypass the tone controls, how can I be sure that they are
> >> really not affecting the frequency response ?. Can I run a loop back
> >> test with the sound card ?, if so, how exactly can I do this ?, won't
> >> the sound card output be too strong to drive the UB802's input ?.
> >
> > You can't, and they always will affect things a little bit. Life is
> > like that.
> >
> >> Is there a pre amp with phantom power supply which will be at least
> >> as good as the UB802, but does not have tone controls ?.
> >
> > How about a Mackie 1202? Pull out of the inserts and you bypass all
> > of that EQ and routing junk.
>
> Behr UB 802 - $69.95
>
> Mackie 1202 - $399
>
> Here's Behr that has inserts: MXB 1002 - $129.95

[Jones_r]

Also, what about the Beringer SHARK DSP110 ?. It does ADC/DAC on the
signal, so I'm kind of worried by the artifacts it might produce.

> "Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:bhg6e8$22v$1@panix2.panix.com
> > Jones_r <soren123@walla.co.il> wrote:
> >> If I can't bypass the tone controls, how can I be sure that they are
> >> really not affecting the frequency response ?. Can I run a loop back
> >> test with the sound card ?, if so, how exactly can I do this ?, won't
> >> the sound card output be too strong to drive the UB802's input ?.
> >
> > You can't, and they always will affect things a little bit. Life is
> > like that.
> >
> >> Is there a pre amp with phantom power supply which will be at least
> >> as good as the UB802, but does not have tone controls ?.
> >
> > How about a Mackie 1202? Pull out of the inserts and you bypass all
> > of that EQ and routing junk.
>
> Behr UB 802 - $69.95
>
> Mackie 1202 - $399
>
> Here's Behr that has inserts: MXB 1002 - $129.95

[Mike Rivers]

In article <n-WdncCd2fzaPqaiXTWJhw@comcast.com> arnyk@hotpop.com writes:

> "Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
> > How about a Mackie 1202? Pull out of the inserts and you bypass all
> > of that EQ and routing junk.

> Behr UB 802 - $69.95

> Mackie 1202 - $399

Pardon my crumedgeonness, but anyone who only spends $69.95 on a mixer
has no right to question whether anything in the box affects the
signal quality. Of course it does.

Why not be old skule and modify it? Got soldering irons? Got
schematics?



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)

[Off Hugo]

soren123@walla.co.il (Jones_r) wrote in message news:<c9730561.0308141059.3bc383f7@posting.google.com>...
> Also, what about the Beringer SHARK DSP110 ?. It does ADC/DAC on the
> signal, so I'm kind of worried by the artifacts it might produce.

Um, excuse me for stating the obvious, but.....if you're so worried
about the quality of your sound, buy better equipment. Even without
any "artifacts", the stuff you're using isn't going to sound exactly
world class.

It's like you bought a Yugo and want to make sure it is fast enough to
win races, handles well enough to take turns tightly, has a pillowy
soft ride, is large enough to fit a family of ten and can fit in your
back pocket when the need arises.

It's laughable really. Maybe you should post to rec.audio.comics

So, just go play some music and forget about trying to split hairs on
follically challenged gear.

[Ricky W. Hunt]

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1060879703k@trad...
>
> In article <n-WdncCd2fzaPqaiXTWJhw@comcast.com> arnyk@hotpop.com writes:
>
> > "Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
> > > How about a Mackie 1202? Pull out of the inserts and you bypass all
> > > of that EQ and routing junk.
>
> > Behr UB 802 - $69.95
>
> > Mackie 1202 - $399
>
> Pardon my crumedgeonness, but anyone who only spends $69.95 on a mixer
> has no right to question whether anything in the box affects the
> signal quality. Of course it does.
>
> Why not be old skule and modify it? Got soldering irons? Got
> schematics?

I think the root of the problem is deeper. To the experienced a question
like this sounds dumb because the obvious answer is "well, how does it
sound"? And there's the problem. Most newbies (and sold oldies) wouldn't
know good sound if they heard it. Because to them usually louder/brighter
wins which as you know is a mess when everything is that way and it's
certainly not accurate. That's why I laugh when I see the posts of "I need
you to tell me a mic that costs $100 and sounds just like a xxx" when they
wouldn't know a model "xxx" if they heard it. Experience is the only thing
that will help this situation and you won't get that sitting and reading a
NG.

[Jones_r]

This is not entirely correct. Even though I don't have much experience
in this field, I AM going to know if the pre-amp is good or not (for
my needs), since I'm going to test it in loop back using my sound card
(whose line-in frequency response, measured using RMAA-5, is +0.12db,
-0.06db, from 20hz to 20khz).

Also, it's not correct that I'm trying to accomplish everything for
$70. All I need is a mono pre-amp with a flat frequency response +
phantom power supply. That's it.
I have no need for accurate tone controls, feedback destroying
capabilities, multiple microphone supprt etc.
I've learned a long time ago that more money doesn't necessarilty
means more quality.

> "Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
> news:znr1060879703k@trad...
> >
> > In article <n-WdncCd2fzaPqaiXTWJhw@comcast.com> arnyk@hotpop.com writes:
> >
> > > "Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
> > > > How about a Mackie 1202? Pull out of the inserts and you bypass all
> > > > of that EQ and routing junk.
>
> > > Behr UB 802 - $69.95
>
> > > Mackie 1202 - $399
> >
> > Pardon my crumedgeonness, but anyone who only spends $69.95 on a mixer
> > has no right to question whether anything in the box affects the
> > signal quality. Of course it does.
> >
> > Why not be old skule and modify it? Got soldering irons? Got
> > schematics?
>
> I think the root of the problem is deeper. To the experienced a question
> like this sounds dumb because the obvious answer is "well, how does it
> sound"? And there's the problem. Most newbies (and sold oldies) wouldn't
> know good sound if they heard it. Because to them usually louder/brighter
> wins which as you know is a mess when everything is that way and it's
> certainly not accurate. That's why I laugh when I see the posts of "I need
> you to tell me a mic that costs $100 and sounds just like a xxx" when they
> wouldn't know a model "xxx" if they heard it. Experience is the only thing
> that will help this situation and you won't get that sitting and reading a
> NG.

[reddred]

"Jones_r" <soren123@walla.co.il> wrote in message
news:c9730561.0308131829.d79acd8@posting.google.co m...

> Is there a pre amp with phantom power supply which will be at least as
> good as the UB802, but does not have tone controls ?.
>

Pre: Rane ms1b

jb

[reddred]

"Jones_r" <soren123@walla.co.il> wrote in message
news:c9730561.0308150151.245f54a4@posting.google.c om...
> This is not entirely correct. Even though I don't have much experience
> in this field, I AM going to know if the pre-amp is good or not (for
> my needs), since I'm going to test it in loop back using my sound card
> (whose line-in frequency response, measured using RMAA-5, is +0.12db,
> -0.06db, from 20hz to 20khz).
>
> Also, it's not correct that I'm trying to accomplish everything for
> $70. All I need is a mono pre-amp with a flat frequency response +
> phantom power supply. That's it.
> I have no need for accurate tone controls, feedback destroying
> capabilities, multiple microphone supprt etc.
> I've learned a long time ago that more money doesn't necessarilty
> means more quality.
>

What exactly are you planning on doing with this once you get it?

jb

[Arny Krueger]

"Jones_r" <soren123@walla.co.il> wrote in message
news:c9730561.0308141044.59efe6e7@posting.google.c om

> What about the M-Audio "Audio Buddy" ?, how does it compares to the
> UB802 ?.

Also, what do you think of the following product ?:
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2550574244&category=3278

> You think its a cat in the sack ?.

I have no idea.

However, these are horses of entirely different colors, economically
speaking.

The MXB 1002 has 5 mic inputs for $129.

The Audio Buddy has 2 mic inputs for $79.88

The Art Micromix has 1 mic input for $42-49.

Obviously, these are all bottom-feeder specials, but the Behr is clearly a
lot more fish for the money. Does it stink? I dunno.

[reddred]

"Jones_r" <soren123@walla.co.il> wrote in message
news:c9730561.0308160347.403d125a@posting.google.c om...
> The Rane ms1b seems to be a very good offer. I wish I could buy it,
> but at $150 USD, it's a bit over the top for me.
>
> > What exactly are you planning on doing with this once you get it?
> I'm planning on connecting a measurement mic to it from one end, and a
> personal computer from the other end (via a high quality sound card),
> and measure the frequency reponse of certain spots in different rooms,
> so I could apply digital room correction for that certain spot
> (Please, let's not get into a debate whether what I'm doing is right
> or wrong).
>
> Anyway, I've talked with a computer software engineer yesterday, who
> specialize in audio software tools, and he told me that once I get the
> UB802 (or any other pre-amp, for that matter), I should measure its
> frequency response, and I will be able to correct any frequency
> response anomalies that the measuring software will find in the
> pre-amp, using several software tools which are on the market
> currently.
>
> He said that it is more important that the pre-amp will be quiet and
> have good SNR (since nothing can be done there using softwares), but
> the frequency response of it is not so important, if I chose to use a
> personal computer as the test tone generator and measuring processor,
> since it can simply check the frequency response of the pre-amp, and
> then remove the anomalies from the signal coming from it.
>

He's right, but workarounds are routine in programming, but a royal PITA
everywhere else...

As Scott Dorsey said, you are asking an awful lot for your budget... a good
soundcard is not cheap at all, and the pc being what it is, I'd probably
choose something a little more portable and inherently suited for the job.
You might want to check ebay or military surplus.

If this is something you plan on using a lot, it's worth it to save a little
and put some deep thought into what you really need in the meantime.

jb

[Jones_r]

The Rane ms1b seems to be a very good offer. I wish I could buy it,
but at $150 USD, it's a bit over the top for me.

> What exactly are you planning on doing with this once you get it?
I'm planning on connecting a measurement mic to it from one end, and a
personal computer from the other end (via a high quality sound card),
and measure the frequency reponse of certain spots in different rooms,
so I could apply digital room correction for that certain spot
(Please, let's not get into a debate whether what I'm doing is right
or wrong).

Anyway, I've talked with a computer software engineer yesterday, who
specialize in audio software tools, and he told me that once I get the
UB802 (or any other pre-amp, for that matter), I should measure its
frequency response, and I will be able to correct any frequency
response anomalies that the measuring software will find in the
pre-amp, using several software tools which are on the market
currently.

He said that it is more important that the pre-amp will be quiet and
have good SNR (since nothing can be done there using softwares), but
the frequency response of it is not so important, if I chose to use a
personal computer as the test tone generator and measuring processor,
since it can simply check the frequency response of the pre-amp, and
then remove the anomalies from the signal coming from it.





> "Jones_r" <soren123@walla.co.il> wrote in message
> news:c9730561.0308150151.245f54a4@posting.google.c om...
> > This is not entirely correct. Even though I don't have much experience
> > in this field, I AM going to know if the pre-amp is good or not (for
> > my needs), since I'm going to test it in loop back using my sound card
> > (whose line-in frequency response, measured using RMAA-5, is +0.12db,
> > -0.06db, from 20hz to 20khz).
> >
> > Also, it's not correct that I'm trying to accomplish everything for
> > $70. All I need is a mono pre-amp with a flat frequency response +
> > phantom power supply. That's it.
> > I have no need for accurate tone controls, feedback destroying
> > capabilities, multiple microphone supprt etc.
> > I've learned a long time ago that more money doesn't necessarilty
> > means more quality.
> >
>
> What exactly are you planning on doing with this once you get it?
>
> jb

[Scott Dorsey]

Jones_r <soren123@walla.co.il> wrote:
>This is not entirely correct. Even though I don't have much experience
>in this field, I AM going to know if the pre-amp is good or not (for
>my needs), since I'm going to test it in loop back using my sound card
>(whose line-in frequency response, measured using RMAA-5, is +0.12db,
>-0.06db, from 20hz to 20khz).

Sure, but how does the sound card SOUND? It's easy to make digital
converters with flat response. It's hard to make them sound good.

>Also, it's not correct that I'm trying to accomplish everything for
>$70. All I need is a mono pre-amp with a flat frequency response +
>phantom power supply. That's it.

That's asking for an awful lot.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Henry C-G]

> If it's a couple of tenths of a dB off, don't
> worry. There are many worse things that can happen between the mic and
> the speaker.

.....like running everything through a Behringer... ;-)

-Henry C-G




> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)