Speaker input mix

[Casual77]

I bought the Denon Axis speakers and was having a play around with them last night. The tops are particularly powerful and I was thinking I could possibly get away with using a single speaker for small gigs like kids parties. The speaker has two inputs and a button that allows you to mix the signal from inputs 1 and 2. So my question is... would it be acceptable to run left and right stereo feeds from my mixer into the two inputs on the speaker and mix them to create a stereo output from a single speaker, or is there some technical reason I shouldn't do this?

[Benny Smyth]

I bought the Denon Axis speakers and was having a play around with them last night. The tops are particularly powerful and I was thinking I could possibly get away with using a single speaker for small gigs like kids parties. The speaker has two inputs and a button that allows you to mix the signal from inputs 1 and 2. So my question is... would it be acceptable to run left and right stereo feeds from my mixer into the two inputs on the speaker and mix them to create a stereo output from a single speaker, or is there some technical reason I shouldn't do this?

You can't create a stereo output from one speaker.

[Casual77]

You can't create a stereo output from one speaker.

Yes I think perhaps I worded that wrongly.

What I meant was could I get the speaker to output a mix of the right and left output from my mixer? I'm aware that if I just sent either the left or right channel from the mixer to the speaker that I would potentially lose important sound content of songs that haven't been recorded in mono.

[funkymook]

Yes I think perhaps I worded that wrongly.

What I meant was could I get the speaker to output a mix of the right and left output from my mixer? I'm aware that if I just sent either the left or right channel from the mixer to the speaker that I would potentially lose important sound content of songs that haven't been recorded in mono.

If it has two inputs I don’t see why not (though why it has a button to mix them I can’t work out - what scenario would require one input to be turned off?).

Most mixers have a mono output as well, might be worth checking to save running two cables.

Just seen a picture of them on FB - nice looking system.

[Excalibur]

The Alto 10s I used to use had just this arrangement, ie two line inputs ( or mic if you kept going past twelve o'clock ). I've used one in this way for ceremony music with no problems, and also the Maui 5 is configured in a way which makes it perfectly acceptable to use one on its own.


- what scenario would require one input to be turned off?).
.

Use of microphone without music, or vice versa.

[Excalibur]

If it has two inputs I don’t see why not (though why it has a button to mix them I can’t work out - what scenario would require one input to be turned off?).




Use of microphone without music, or vice versa.

Ignore that answer, it's way off, ah say it's way off, Son. ( I love Foghorn Leghorn. :D )

According to the manual I found ( eventually. I couldn't find a simple download anywhere, I had to read it on a dedicated manual site ) the button has absolutely, totally and utterly no effect on the inputs.


It does however have an effect on the LINK/THRU XLR. Denon's cunning plan is that you play two stereo channels into the first cab. When you press the mix button, both channels are routed to this, enabling speaker number two to play exactly the same thing as number one, and so on with three, four, five etc, the one thing the Maui 5 cannot do.

For the life of me though, I can't see why you'd want to run two channels into a cab, but not run both of them into subsequent ones. :confused:

[Casual77]

Just seen a picture of them on FB - nice looking system.

It is a very nice looking system in the flesh. The jury is still out on the performance though because one of the subs is faulty and is having to be sent back.



For the life of me though, I can't see why you'd want to run two channels into a cab, but not run both of them into subsequent ones. :confused:

I can only think that they may consider one cable to look neater than two and that it means that you can carry less cables with you on gigs.

I think perhaps I should spend a bit of time reading through the instruction manual because I had no idea that was the purpose of that button. If that doesn't effect the inputs then I should be ok mixing the two signals through inputs 1 and 2 then. I suppose I wasn't sure if combining the signals might lead to some kind of flanging issue that would negatively effect the quality of the sound.

[Nakatomi]

It is a very nice looking system in the flesh. The jury is still out on the performance though because one of the subs is faulty and is having to be sent back.




I can only think that they may consider one cable to look neater than two and that it means that you can carry less cables with you on gigs.

I think perhaps I should spend a bit of time reading through the instruction manual because I had no idea that was the purpose of that button. If that doesn't effect the inputs then I should be ok mixing the two signals through inputs 1 and 2 then. I suppose I wasn't sure if combining the signals might lead to some kind of flanging issue that would negatively effect the quality of the sound.

FWIW, since I got my new mixer I run mono all the time now anyway, combining left & right channels. For why? A lot of older stuff is hard-panned stereo & sounds awful.

[Excalibur]

For the life of me though, I can't see why you'd want to run two channels into a cab, but not run both of them into subsequent ones. :confused:



I can only think that they may consider one cable to look neater than two and that it means that you can carry less cables with you on gigs.
.

I think you're missing my point. I can see no reason why you'd run two signals into a cab, but only one signal (channel ) out. :confused: Thus, I believe the switch to be unnecessary.

[ckpr2]

I have been doing that in about 39 years of DJing.
I just mix left and right channels into a mono power amplifier then drive two speakers with the same signal.
It clearly cant make that much difference as in all that time no one has mentioned it to me that it didn't sound right.

I am old enough to remember pre stereo days with vinyl that was mono !

[Corabar Steve]

I've run mono for the past 10 - 12 years with no issues.

In recent months I have been either running a patch lead from the signal out of my MAUIs back into it's other input, or using an XLR splitter to run into both inputs. There has been a noticeable increase in both volume & sound quality. Still sending a mono signal to both, but feeding both inputs.

[DazzyD]

The advantage of outputting mono rather than stereo is that everyone in the room hears the same thing no matter where they are positioned. Stereo sends different sounds to L/R speakers so it depends where you are in the room as to what you actually hear. For example, on a lot of older, for example 60s, stuff, they, imo, overused the stero effect and some tracks have mostly vocals on one channel and mostly music on the other. The effect this has on us, when outputting stereo, is that people sitting at one side of the room hear mostly vocals while others sitting on the other side of the room mostly hear the music ("I wish he'd turn this up! I can't hear a word they're singing!!" :eek: ). The optimum position to be is pretty much in the middle of the room but not everyone can sit there, can they?

So mono combines both signals and outputs the same signal to both left and right channels so both speakers output the same same audio and everyone hears the same thing. It's simple really. I think the only problem with some DJs is that they've been forced fed through their lives that "Stereo" is better quality. It is if you have your headphones on and gives audio depth no not in a function room scenario.

[Nakatomi]

I'm glad I went mono. It wasn't so much rigidness of my own mind making me stick with stereo but my gear & playout.

Mind you til fairly recently I'd assumed all club systems were stereo too. They're not, generally, apparently.