{ "numMessagesInTopic": 23, "nextInTime": 418, "senderId": "mxJ18FH9n9RtOrl5JiYnDorL1gry9jHGnTghogAwnLb46qbxHnwbmiNWoNQT649gAuhsrwKrulDIVwApA1WBeWQFWDv2mmy3UGQTDsRJ7NsM", "systemMessage": false, "subject": "Re: [01v96] Re: Automation within Logic...and more", "from": ""Ronny Morris" <digitakmastering@...>", "authorName": "Ronny Morris", "msgSnippet": "... Thinking is good for you. Have a good Sunday, Dean. :O) Ronny", "msgId": 417, "profile": "ronnymorris2001", "topicId": 391, "spamInfo": { "reason": "0", "isSpam": false }, "replyTo": "LIST", "userId": 136810499, "messageBody": "
> >Thinking is good for you. Have a good Sunday, Dean. :O)
\n> > Yes, but what application would you need to have two mixers on,
\n> with the source coming from neither?
\n> >
\n>
\n> The only reason that I thought of for a signal chain as described
\n> would be if the setup were such that you needed to chain the ADAT
\n> I/O's between pieces of equipment, but this could lead to "gotcha's"
\n> in gain-staging as described in this whole thread if the two sets of
\n> faders were MIDI sync'd.
\n>
\n> As I said, maybe I just think too much, especially on Sunday
\n> morning. :)
\n>
\n
\n
> --Dean
\n>
\n>
\n>
\n>
\n> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
\n> 01v96-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
\n>
\n>
\n>
\n> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
\n>