I would like to suggest a dedicated sub woofer output that could be configured as an output channel with the other outputs in preferences. It should include a sub sonic filter that can be switched in or out and adjustable upper crossover frequency.
Interesting idea. This could be done… the question is, should it be Mixxx’s responsibility to do this?
I like using Mixxx and its convinced me to go all digital. If it had this added functionality, then I would not need any hardware apart from a multi channel sound card, amps and speakers.
I don’t think Mixxx should be dealing with anything what actually belongs on the PA side.
It’s not just adding a subwoofer output, because if this should a truely specialized output we’d also need to provide the cross-over controls (frequency and slope at least). and then why not have that for the L/R output? and so on, and quickly Mixxx would take care of what’s usually done in sound driver config tools or crossover networks (hardware).
If cut-off and slope can be configured on your sub itself you can use the Booth output.
But in general, I assume you want to use the setup for other media players, too, so it would make sense to look for software tools to configure the subwoofer output in the OS, like SUB = SUM(L+R).
maybe look if Jack is good for that.
Thanks for response. I use Mixxx to replace my hardware setup where possible. My old hardware mixer had a dedicated subwoofer output with its own level control and crossover frequency setting. I just thought it might be a useful addition to Mixxx. It certainly would for me. It just means less hardware.
This could be possible if there was a way to route only the booth output to an effect unit, which could technically be done. There would not necessarily have to be a separate output just for this. The booth output could be configured for a mono output.
A proper loudspeaker management system would include parametric eqs, limiters, delay, polarity reversal, different kinds of xover slopes and types and is absolutely outside the scope of what dj software needs to include.
I only wanted a subwoofer output. Not a loudspeaker management system. I am sorry I asked.
@Be0 explained how to do that with the Booth output set to mono.
You want to get rid of gear (splitter, amp) so I assume you have an active sub, and that should provide further config controls.
No, I have passive subs. I use a hardware crossover to provide subwoofer output to a dedicated amplifier. I thought it would be a good idea to get software to do as much of the work as possible. A lot of hardware mixers provide sub output. If Mixxx is intended to replace hardware mixers then I don’t see why it could not do the same.
I explained how Mixxx could be modified to do this. It is not possible presently without routing the output of Mixxx to some other program.
Ok, thanks for that. It was just a suggestion maybe for the future. Mixxx is already a great program and I don’t want to seem ungrateful.
Not a single dj mixer offers subwoofer outputs, and mixxx is dj software, not a daw. MIxxx is not intended to replace live hardware mixers.
Some digital live mixers have crossover replacing capability, but the “sub output” you are referring to is not for subwoofers, but for a separate mix than the main mix.
I get the desire to hobble together something for slightly less hardware complexity, but if your sub is passive, you need a dedicated limiter for driver protection more than you need to simplify a cable or two. Some mixers might have sub outputs, but no true professional uses them. Everyone uses LMS of some sort, whether as a separate unit, or integrated into the amps.
Fx can not be applied to Booth only, but the Booth out has separate gain control at least.
I think you need to check your facts before making bold statements like that. The Behringer VMX1000 professional dj mixer does indeed have a dedicated subwoofer output. Whether or not a professional dj would use it I don’t know.
I do take your point that Mixxx is dj software and not a replacement for a hardware mixer even though it has replaced my hardware mixer.
no professional would use it, no. It’s inclusion is a gimmick and as the mixer costs 200€, I’d really have my doubts about the quality. To put things in perspective, an analog xover from behringer costs about half of that. How good do you think that mixer could possibly be?
Denon, PIoneer, Rane, A&H, Ecler, Formula Sound - no xover, because that is not something that you want a performer to arbitrarily adjust in the middle of a gig.
Arguing over what is “professional” is not productive here. What @Rod_Smart is asking for here is something Mixxx could do and I think it could fit into Mixxx’s design with a minor change simply by letting effects be applied only to the booth output.
Thanks Guys, You have made me more aware of what Mixxx is and how it was intended to be used. I operated a mobile disco for about 10 years back in the 1980s. I used 2 turntables and a cassette deck fed into a mixer and out to the amps. I now use Mixxx instead as a replacement for all the gear up to a crossover before the amps. I don’t really need some of the modern dj tools like beat matching etc. Mixxx already has excellent mixing capabilities for what I do. It’s already got effects built in. Lots of mixers need to send out to a separate effects unit and back. It seemed like a logical step forward to add the extra functionality to the outputs as described. Thinking about one of Mixermans comments, why not include a proper loudspeaker management system at the outputs with all the bells and whistles. Mixxx already seems to do everything else.
I totally get the desire for in all-in-one solution, but designing adequate software for such a purpose is no trivial task. Even some the best dsp enabled amp manufacturers have a hard time with friendly graphic interfaces. You might find the odd software solution that could possibly be routed to using JACK, but I don’t know of anything non-proprietary doing this despite being a live sound engineer for decades and linux geek for ten years. Alternatively, you might be able to JACK around with a DAW and vst plugins.
With respect to MIXXX, I’d rather see precious development efforts go into features usable to a greater percentage of people.