On Sun 2012-Oct-28 21:18, Marc Lewis writes:
ML> I can add a few comments here, Richard, as I work for Quantum
ML> Technologies, Inc. (parent company of Hear Technologies) as the
ML> technician/service manager.

ML> Hear Technologies makes the Hear Back personal monitoring
ML> system.  The basic system consists of a Hub and from one to 8 Hear
ML> Back Mixers.

YEp knew you'd be able to throw out something relevant.

The product that generated the thread that spun me off on
this tangent as I think I noted is one that one could
control with an iPhone iPod or iPad.
I note one significant thing I'm curious about.  YOu wrote:
ML> Each mixer (in its standard configuration from the factory) has 6
ML> individual and 1 stereo pair sets of controls plus a limiter
ML> control.  It has 2 independent headphone outputs and 2 line
ML> level outputs (left - right) as well as a line level input.

ML> There is an optional modification offered where the mixer loses the
ML> Limiter and becomes a full 8 channels.  The stereo 1-2 input becomes
ML> channel 1 and the limiter becomes channel 2; the rest of the
ML> channels remain unaffected.

  I hope you folks recommend against that one, I can
understand offering it, but ... I never run headphone or
in-ear monitor (those little earbud) mixes without a
limiter. But then, to me that's a safety issue.

ML> In the service department I see lots of them (there are many tens of
ML> thousands out in the field.) The come from lots of
ML> churches, recording studios, educational institutions and
ML> individuals.

I'm curious how many of them you see where they've used that modification.

ML> Multimedia churches and recording studios comprise a large chunk of
ML> the client base, as do live performance sound reinforcement
ML> companies.  They all seem to love the flexibility of letting
ML> individuals control what they hear in their own monitor mix, without
ML> having to have an additional person sitting FOH to try and
ML> "administer" the monitor mix.  The compact in-ear headsets (ear
ML> buds) seem to be the favorite.

ML> The fact that all this is done over one cat 5 cable from the main
ML> mixer is a big plus.

OH yeah, it sure would be.  See our recent thread on digital snake for remote
truck .

ML> I'm going to defer to my colleague Charles Snoddy for further
ML> comment from the recording studio/performance standpoint... once he
ML> gets a few minutes in his crowded schedule to write his
ML> views. 

Remember a lot of my work back in my live sound
reinforcement days was mixing monitors.  I recall when I
first read the phrase "friends don't let friends mix
monitors."  I've found though back when I was doing it that
performers who knew you were being diligent about getting
them what they needed to perform well did indeed thank you
for it.  i actually enjoyed it more than not.  When I didn't it was suually
working with less than professionals who
engaged in the volume wars all during the performance.

ML> Hopefully this will give you a little more understanding of the
ML> hardware end of at least the Hear Back version of the personal
ML> monitoring system.

I've sued one but only in the studio, and only in someone
else's.  ONe time, and this was years ago, producing an
album project for some people who were less than
professional.  I'm comfortable in my own skin getting a
blend of what I need to hear whether on stage or in the
studio, but my encounters with personal mixing stations were doing
producer/engineer, hence the other side of the glass.
MOst of the performers picked up on the concept and could
work with it, but one in particular couldn't quite wrap his
head around it.  I finally hooked a paralleled set of cans
up, set his mix up and told him to leave it alone from that
point on so we could finish the foundation tracks .


Regards,
           Richard
---
 * Origin:  (1:116/901)