# Yamaha LS9 vs 01v96



## jkowtko (Nov 23, 2007)

Looking ahead to a Yamaha digital board purchase, I was wondering if someone could summarize very briefly the most notable benefits of using an LS9-16 over an 01v96 for theater usage. Street price it looks like the LS9 will be about double the 01v (and comparively the LS9-32 vs a pair of daisy-chained 01vs also about double the price) ... so are the additional features and capabilities worth it?

Thanks. John


----------



## avkid (Nov 23, 2007)

You can extend the LS9-32 to 64 channels in two layers.

01V692 has a total of 20 mix buses
LS9 has 16 Mix Buses, 8 Matrix Buses, Plus Stereo and Mono Buses with LCR Mode
LS has a Full color display
LS has 6 segment LED meters on each input channel

Get the LS, you won't regret it.


----------



## mixmaster (Nov 29, 2007)

01v only has two effects processesors.
LS9 has 8 slots that you can fill with whatever effects you want to use. 

01v has 4 band eq on inputs and outputs
LS9 has the same BUT you can also put 1/3 octaves in your some of your Effects slots

LS9 can be locked and coded with a USB key so access to certain settings and programs can be restricted to people who know how to use them

On the other hand, if space is a concern, the 01v is rack mountable and weighs next to nothing. 

I have worked with the 01v with a band before. For a small format digital mixer it's a great tool. I am currently putting together a project that will include an LS9 so I've been doing a lot of research. Either one is a good board. If you have the money, I'd say go for the LS9.
Best of Luck


----------



## jkowtko (Dec 12, 2007)

I ordered the 01v96 this week -- got a really good deal -- but as I'm probing into the capabilities and seeing all of its limitations, the LS9 is looking better and better ....
Sure, it's a lot more money, but you only live once ... so I'm tempted.
Does anyone know where I can get a good price on an LS9-16? The place I bought the 01v96 from unfortunately doesn't carry the "commercial audio" line. I've found a quote for just under $4500 ... can I get this board for under $4k anywhere?
Thanks. John


----------



## museav (Dec 13, 2007)

I think you sort of stumbled onto one of the differences in addressing the "commercial audio" line. The O1V and O2R were really developed as recording/production consoles. That doesn't mean they can't function as live consoles and many people do use them that way, but the routing, interface, etc. are really designed for recording and production applications. On the other hand, the LS9 and M7CL are the opposite, they could be used for production but were really developed to be live consoles.


----------



## jkowtko (Dec 13, 2007)

I know -- can't they make a friggin' product that does all the right stuff ...?!!
I downloaded both 01v96 and LS9 editors and have been poking around.

- The 01v96 EQs are really nice, but the LS9 EQs are even cooler 

- The USB features (recordings and audio track playback) on the LS9 are great.

- And the LS9 editor windows appear to be even more user-friendlier than the 01v96 editor windows.

However the one thing that makes the LS9 less appealing to me is it's limited number of onboard inputs ... you basically get 16 )plus the digital coax) and they're all XLR. So, not only do I have to convert all of my cables from TRS to XLR, but I'm pretty limited on the number of input channels I can really use (and still have god mic, CD player, etc hooked up) before I'm forced into the ADAT expansion. You actually get fewer inputs on this board than you do on any other cheapo commercial 16 channel mixer.

If there was an LS9-24 (that's one really appealing thing about the Mackie TT24 ... too bad the quality isn't there), or if the LS9-16 had the additional 16 (or even 8) TRS inputs, or if they had a version with no onboard inputs and all ADAT, I dont' think there would be any doubt in my mind that this is the board to get. But with the LS9-32 at double the price, and the LS16 slightly lean on inputs, seems like there is a hole in the sweet spot ... which makes we just want to stay with the 01v96 for now until some more new products are introduced.


----------



## avkid (Dec 13, 2007)

John, youre the perfect candidate for an RSS (Roland) V-Mixing system.
http://www.rssamerica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=257

I had a short time with it at AES back in October, and I believe it will eradicate TT24's in the marketplace. 
I am a huge design snob, and I had an Electronic Designer from an International manufacturer and another gentleman that works for him with me.
We are all hardcore analog guys, and in spite of that fact we found this to be well designed and quite easy to navigate.

To clarify hardcore analog, the designer makes powered enclosures with completely analog circuitry(which is practically unheard of in high end devices right now) and the other guy just dropped $30K on a brand new analog console.
I've just had horrible experiences with several pieces, so much so that I don't care to touch anything digital under $10K


----------



## jkowtko (Dec 14, 2007)

Hmmm ... this doesn't look to be cheap. I had a hard time finding pricing anywhere, the only one I could find was over $10k. If I'm going to spend that much I would probably just get the LS9-32. I was hoping for something in the $4k and under range that would fit the bill. The DM1000 looks like a beefed-up 01v96 and is probably in that price range, but it doesn't look as appropriate for live productions as the LS9 or TT24.

Anyway, my 01v arrives today so I'll get to play with it some this weekend, and maybe get it hooked up at the theater before the weekend shows are finished.


----------



## museav (Dec 14, 2007)

As it was explained to me, the Roland V-Mixer is also offered in packages including their digital snake, so verify whether what you are seeing is just the console with the local I/O or if it includes any snakes.

What I saw of the V-Mixer did make it seem pretty easy to use and after a brief introduction, the interface made sense. But I saw and heard two things I did not like. The first is that there is no labeling. The faders work in banks with 4 banks, I believe they are Inputs 1-24, Inputs 25-48, AUX/DCA and a User bank. The User bank is nice in that it lest you create a bank that is a combination of specific inputs, auxes and DCAs. The problem is that there is no labeling. You have a fader that could be Input 1 or Input 25 or Aux 1 or who knows what and the only identification is which bank you are on. That may even work for fader #1, but quick... grab the kick drum or the lead vocal on your User bank. It's there somewhere. Some labeling would be nice.

The second issue related to presets and scenes. From what they told me, you are fairly limited in what you can safe when saving or recalling a preset. I was told that you can exempt patching, preamp gain, a channel, etc. but not specific settings within that channel. If this is true, it could be rather limiting for some applications.

While not relevant for many, I also don't believe teh V-Mixer supports LCR, which could be a consideration for some theatrical applications.


----------



## Andy_Leviss (Dec 23, 2007)

You do know you can get additional input cards for the LS9, right?


----------



## jkowtko (Dec 24, 2007)

Yeah I know -- I just wanted to avoid mixing onboard and external I/O for small jobs. I think if I got the LS9-16 I would probably buy (in addition to ADAT cards) a MY8/AD24 card to up the onboard input channels to 24 ... that plus the 8 outs and USB record could hold me over very well.

However on the flip side, it might also be nice to run exclusively ADAT so, as in our theater where it may not be 100% secure, you can unplug the board in a sec and store it somewhere safe in between shows. But 16 ADAT input channels is cutting it a bit close on capacity ... would be great if you could set up all 32 this way (and all 64 for the LS9-32).


----------



## SHARYNF (Dec 24, 2007)

the o1v96 has 8 built in adat channels, and with the additional 16 from the option card you can have 24 adat input channels if you got 3 8 channel external preamps
Sharyn


----------



## Andy_Leviss (Dec 24, 2007)

SHARYNF said:


> the o1v96 has 8 built in adat channels, and with the additional 16 from the option card you can have 24 adat input channels if you got 3 8 channel external preamps
> Sharyn



Half that channel count if you want to run at 96k, since you need to go double-channel on the ADAT link (which I highly recommend, since it sounds a whole lot better at 96!). Some have even suggested (and I wouldn't necessarily argue) that it sounds like an entirely different console switching from 44.1/48 to 96.

--A


----------



## SHARYNF (Dec 24, 2007)

I agree with you but I think John was looking at the behringer ADA8000 for inexpensive preamps, so it would be possible to get three of the ADA's and as he was thinking just plug in the adat connections allowing for the easy removal of the 01v96 for security reasons
Sharyn


----------



## jkowtko (Dec 28, 2007)

Yes, for the 01v96 I was looking at getting three of the Behringer ADA8000s to run excluvely on ADAT. 

My comments on the limited ADAT were aimed at the LS9-16 ... which appears to have less I/O capacity than the 01v96.

Andy, can you actually hear the audible difference between 48k and 96k in a live theater environment? I thought the differences were only distinguishable in a studio/recording environment.

Of course, I just took a look at the new DM1000v2 ... it solves the onboard I/O and expansion issue with 16+4 inputs, 12 outputs, and two expansion card slots. Plus the ability to add a meter bridge ... nice package. Unfortunately it still has the recall-safe limitations of the 01v96 ...


----------



## Andy_Leviss (Jan 5, 2008)

I feel that you can hear the difference, especially with effects and EQ, but I haven't done a blind test, so YMMV.

I haven't researched prices, but I'd wonder the price between two 01v96s vs one DM1000. If they're comparable, I'd cascade two 01Vs before I'd use a DM1000 in most (but not all) cases, since it gives you more flexibility, more faders, and gets around some of the recall-safe limitations. Just a crazy thought


----------



## jkowtko (Aug 25, 2008)

Just a quick followup here, on the issue of DCA capabilities --

It looks like the 01v96 has DCA capability (fader group masters) whereas the LS9 does not.

After watching a professional musical run entirely on the DCA fader bank with 100+ snapshots, I'm pretty impressed with the benefit that DCAs provide. I also observed virtually no attention paid to level meters -- another LS9 advantage that must not be as important as I thought. The programming for this show appeared to be so canned and repeatable that the primary issues for FOH to deal with were line-by-line (DCA) fading, minute (DCA) fader level adjustments, and snapshot advancement.

So I'm increasingly happier with my selection of the 01v96.


----------



## thenelsontwins (Aug 25, 2008)

I purchased a 02r96 for a school I was working at and regretted it every day. Although not quite the same as the 01v, we were using 56 channels of desk and it got complicated quite quickly as the interface is quite ... deep. Once you get it, you get it, but the interface on the LS9 is far more clear and the whole desk sounds better as well. 

Had the LS9 been on the market when I purchased the 02r, I would have gladly dropped the extra money on the console. 

Yes the 01v will work, but the better desk is, without a doubt, the LS9.


----------



## Chris15 (Aug 30, 2008)

It seems that one of the key differences between the LS9 and the 01V has been neglected. The 01V does 96k the LS9 (and the M7CL) will only do 48k.

As to price, my retail price list for Oz lists the 01V96V2 at $4499, the DM1000V2 at $8500, the 02R96V2 at $16000 and the LS9-16 at $8000.


----------



## TimmyP1955 (Sep 8, 2008)

LS9 has recallable headamps, the 01V96 does not.

LS9 indeed lacks DCAs, but has Fader Linking, which gets you most of the way there many times.

The Roland looks very interesting, especially if you want to do multitrack recordings (the mLan card does not work in the LS9 - I've not been able to gat a straight answer as to why).


----------



## museav (Sep 8, 2008)

The Roland/RSS V-Mix may be a good choice for many applications but it can be a bit awkward to implement in others, especially in existing systems. Unlike the Yamaha consoles discussed, the RSS M-400 has minimal direct I/O on the console (8 mono analog and a single unbalanced analog stereo for inputs, 8 mono analog and a stereo SPDIF/Toslink for outputs) and relies on digital snakes and stage boxes for all other I/O. This can be great if your system supports having the mic inputs at stage or other locations but not as effective if all your cabling runs to the mix position. Also, only one of the RSS stage box options supports anything other than analog audio and that is limited to AES/EBU digital, there are currently no Aviom, CobraNet, EtherSound, ADAT, etc. options (and since some of these are essentially direct competitors to the Roland digital snake products, it does not seem unreasonable that they may never be supported). Again, that may work fine for some applications and be a problem for others. So like any console, just be sure to consider both the operational functionality and the physical implementation aspects.


----------

