The cable you posted still doesn’t solve the problem. Unless you believe it would be reasonable to use 8 channels on my mixer for 4 voices for just panning.
I’ve also explained that these splitter cables aren’t really a solution either as I end up with a lot of noise. This was a huge issue with my AR MKI with it’s outputs and ext in.
Just use one XLR of each (of 4) y adaptor (surely that much was obvious) or make your own or get a TRS to dual TS jack out and cut off one side (the ring side, to avoid confusion) and you have an unbalanced mono track out - you ain’t gonna get impedance balanced outs from the A4 no matter how much you may want it (nor do I expect elektron will reverse the phase of one side) -
the noise thing is just a distraction - for short runs there’s no reason to overplay it
anyway - it’s about making the best of what you find in front of you now, I’m out
I’m not asking for impedance balanced outs in this case as the hardware is set. I can’t just use one side of the y adapter because the adapter isn’t summing mono it’s splitting the stereo. Meaning I’ll get -3db out of one side, and if there is any panning automation I’ll loose the signal. And sound browser/manager/preview/sound locking will all still be messed up because it’s all panned center.
There is a simple software solution that resolves this problem. That’s all I’m asking for. Then I can continue to use the cables I HAVE and while I won’t have the benefit of balanced, I still have shielding and the magnetic regection of star quad which matters for reducing noise.
The only real alternate cable solution would be a summing cable with an inline resistor to match impedance.
duh
It kind of sounds like you don’t want help unless it’s exactly what you want to hear.
@sezare56 genuinely wants to help you, you have had a moderator, CS/tech from Elektron chime in and give you suggestions/alternate options but it comes a time when you simply have to find a creative solution that fits your needs even if it means selling the machine
I’m not sure if I’ve ever encountered anyone feeling restricted in a live performance setting because of a stereo individual output vs a mono summed output but this forum keeps surprising me all the time 
Hope you get it sorted! I would just hard pan my tracks, take advantage of the limit and maybe use the oscillators hard panned individually to achieve even more complexity.
or you can just buy a few of these http://www.radialeng.com/mix21.php
It kind of sounds like you aren’t reading my replies if that’s what you think.
If he truly wanted to help me he wouldn’t be so antagonizing.
I think the piece of the puzzle you’re missing is I’ve tried all of these things before when this problem came up early last year when I was trying to use the direct outs and ext in on the Analog RYTM MKI. Using a Y cable raises the noise floor and splits the signal. Panning would work if I was using only one sound per voice and never going into the sound browser or manager. If it were just a matter of panning the voices once I wouldn’t be posting so much. But with this problem I can’t preview sounds in the browser or manager because they are all panned center. When P/locking sounds I can’t hear them until I pan them as well. These are all things I’ve mentioned before. It’s not that I’m resistant to getting helped in other ways, it’s that the suggestions people have provided aren’t actually solutions.
On the RYTM, splitting worked because each voice had full volume going to left and right. In this circumstance, according to pan law, the one voice has -3db being attenuated on each side so that you have the full signal in the center. And because there is no grounding in a Y cable at all, the noise floor raises significantly.
I’m not being obstinant for no reason, I have ACTUAL experience with the solutions they have offered.
Your obstinance seems based on the assumption that this is ‘an easy software solution’ and your unwillingness to buy extra cables, so yes I do believe you don’t want to hear any other solutions.
Perhaps you should read my replies. I have splitter cables. THEY DON’T WORK.
Also, in terms of summing you need a special summing cable, which ISN’T ACTUALLY SOLD ANYWHERE with in line resistors so that you don’t overload your mixer.
Edit: I even tried summing in the mixer side but the phase cancellation is actually happening in the cable before it hits my mixer so I can’t do anything there to resolve the issue. Splitter cables work for things like the RYTM as there is two separate signals being sent per channel. When you’re sending one signal panned between left and right, splitting becomes useless because of phase cancellation. Not to mention when you split you cut the ground out of the equation when using a Y cable. I could use the Elektron CV kit (300+ dollars later for 4 of them) to split the signal and maintain a ground in the cable but I still run into the issues with attenuated signal and increased noise floor. (making it not viable to use my preamps to boost the gain as it will also increase the noise) And still some phasing might occur.
It’s not a solution.
I don’t get it why a stereo to dual mono cable doesn’t work in your case.
If you use one of the mono outs in your mixer, letting the other hanging, you should have an unbalanced out with, if I understand you correctly, is more or less what you need… No ?
Still, having the possibility to invert the second mono out (thus offering an unbalanced out) would be cool, I admit.
There are a couple of reasons.
An unconnected connector will be succeptable to adding noise or feedback (ever unplugged or touched a cable that’s unplugged but plugged in on the other side?)
In a TRS system, there is a ground. In a TS system there is a ground. In a Y split TRS system, there is no ground. This adds to the noise floor.
While I’m getting an unbalanced signal anyhow, my current cables are star quad (for those who don’t know what that is https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/q-whats-special-about-star-quad-cable) so the magnetized conductors reject external emi and rfi that unbalanced is normally succeptable to, and it also has a ground.
Since I’ve mentioned pan law a few times I’ll post an article on it here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_law) but the idea is that when a signal is panned to the center there is an increase of amplitude by 6db so to compensate both the left and right channels are reduced by 3db. This means that the left and right channels coming out of a splitter cable will be quieter and closer to the noise floor, so boosting them by 3db on my mixer will result in an increased noise floor stacked on top of the already increased noise floor from being unbalanced, having no ground, and no resistance to emi or rfi.
There was a suggestion for a summing cable, so that the result would be a mono summed signal at the correct amplitude. I could build such a cable, I suppose, I read somewhere you would need 2 resistors at 475 ohm, one for each side, with a 20k resistor at the end so the impedance change doesn’t overload the input. There is no manufacturer that actually makes these cables sadly.
From a customer experience perspective, I would hate for my direct outs to be way noisier than the main outs. It makes me not want to use them at all. I currently unplugged them all because using the direct outs is not viable at this moment. It disrupts my workflow too much. When overbridge drops this will be less of an issue for recording, but means I’ll still have this issue in a live situation unless I bring a sampler or my computer with me.
It may seem like a lot of fuss about nothing, but I already have one really noisy item in my collection (Korg Polysix), and my A4 is kind of my safe haven for thick analog sounds with an extremely low noise floor. Even when overdriven. It’s just REALLY disappointing that there is so much resistance (ha!) to just impliment a software solution to this issue that wouldn’t compromise audio quality while giving people the option to have a mono or stereo output from the direct outs. It kinda makes me want to return the A4 and get the AR to replace it since it has mono direct outs, will have a 2 osc synth in the next update and part of how I’m using my A4 is as a drum machine anyhow.
Edit: Another reason why y splitter cables won’t work is that it would make the entire preset bank useless since there is a ton of panning in the kits and sequences which would be lost in the panning if only one side of the y cable is being used. It would mean I would need to use both cables effectively using 8 inputs on my mixer for the direct outs. This wouldn’t matter for me making my own kits/sounds but using that solution essentially makes all the default content unusable.
Quite a thorough analysis of your problem, and it seems like you have some very specific technical requirements for your setup. Did you read the specs of the machine before you purchased it to make sure it would work within those requirements?
Thank you @kwamensah for your explanation.
It’s crystal clear and I learned something.
I thought you could invert the phase of one of the signal and send a balanced signal, but as the signal may be not centered it wouldn’t work.
Last solution would be to use a DI box, then.
What makes you think it’s can be solved on the software side ? Signal should ideally be routed before the panning (or summed) then inverted so that individual outs are balanced, if I am right.
Would this be possible solely with a software change ?
@panelist I don’t see how your remark make things even slightly better. If you have nothing to bring to the conversation, please let it be.
Why do you see this as an unreasonable question?
4 DI boxes after a split y cable with a still exposed other end would be a lot of money and not a total solution.
I believe that the balanced issue can’t be resolved. Not in software, and doing it in hardware is economically unfeasable. As you had mentioned, flipping the phase of one of the sides would only work if it was only panned hard center, any kind of panning automation or modulation would mess everything up.
It seems my original idea of “mono mode” being an automatic hard pan of everything that’s not fx (so browser, library, sound pool and tracks) to the left channel (or right), leaving the other one empty. It seems that for CV you can set a specific cv channel to be grounded so I wonder if that was possible in the A4 MKI when the CV outputs were combined, and if so, if a similar thing could be done here. Have one of the sides as the voice output, one as “grounded” and then no panning would be required, everything would just come out the left.
I had mentioned earlier that panning the tracks themselves is only part of the solution since if I do that, the sound browser, manager, sound pool and sound locking is all panned center by default so I still don’t hear the auditioned sound or it’s quiet or partially phase cancelled.
edit: actually flipping the phase COULD work in software if you told the tracks to ignore panning information (automation, plocks, modulation) and then flipped the phase.
hmm, that isn’t right. The AR’s individual outputs are not stereo. They are dual outputs containing two mono signals, with a discrete voice from the AR on each channel. They have to be used with a Y splitter cable.
Anyhow this conversation has caused me a great deal of duress so I’m unplugging. @Olle @Ess please consider what has been discussed in this thread and see if there is a software solution to this problem.
Thank you for your consideration.
The external input is a trs stereo input, though.