# What sound mixer should I choose



## sounddad (Jan 26, 2013)

I'm trying to buy a sound mixer to my daughter. I went to a dealer with some specs, and he advised me to buy a Midas Venice. When I got the mixer, my daughter told me it was too heavy to carry for her concerts.
So, I returned it, and looking for digital sound mixers, as they are lighter.

The main use for this is:

Live mixing
Support multichannel recording

Since I'm new to this, I would like some advice. Here are some of the specs I would like to have:

16 channels (minimum)
Support for saving "scenes" (usually requires Motorized faders)
Support for multichannel recording/playback to/from a PC or a digital recorder (minimum 16 channels)
Good pre-amps and sound
Sound effects are optional since I may get a external one (like Lexicon)
Easy to use (intuitive, user-friendly interfaces)

I already found some possibilities, like Yamaha LS9, Roland RSS M300, Soundcraft Si Compact series, and more. But I'm not sure if all have the features (Soundcraft), and some require extra equipment (like Roland). I also found the Yamaha complex to use, although I've never used it.

I really appreciate your help.


----------



## museav (Jan 26, 2013)

I moved this to the Sound forum as that is a much more appropriate place for it.

Two basic questions to start. First, do you have a budget in mind? Second, how quickly do you need to purchase something? You happened to have posted right as NAMM is occurring and the last couple of days have seen a number of new mixer products introduced that might fit your needs and at a lower cost, but many of those will not be available for at least a few months. But if you can wait then new products such as the Soundcraft Si Expression series, Roland M200i and Behringer X32 Compact might be options to consider.

On some details, a Midas Venice 160 weighs 36.2 lbs. while a Soundraft Si Compact 16 weighs 26 lbs. and an LS9-16 weighs 26.5 lbs. So a digital mixer may weigh less but by the time you add a road case, etc. it is not like you are looking at the difference between a 100lbs. mixer and a 20lbs. mixer. If 16 inputs is all that is needed and weight is really that much of a factor then maybe something like Mackie DL1608 | 16-Channel Digital Live Sound Mixer or Behringer: DIGITAL iPAD/TABLET MIXER iX16 would be appropriate.

On the other hand, is 16 inputs sufficient? You did not note the type of bands or venues that may be associated but many situations can use up inputs quickly and most people do not want to spend money on something that will limit them right from the start or that they might quickly outgrow. And if you add external effects how do you plan to do so and might that affect the input and/or output requirements?

How many and what type of aux sends are required? Do you want subgroups or mute groups or DCA capability? What about wireless control or offline configuration software?

Is this for more hobby or personal use or is the intent to provide services and/or equipment to others? There can sometimes be a difference between what works best for personal use and what works best or can be easily sold to others.

What is you daughter's experience and what might she consider "easy to use"?


----------



## sounddad (Jan 26, 2013)

Thanks for your reply.
My price range could go up to 10k.

The suggestions you are making are in the lower end mixers.

I was looking for a higher quality mixers


----------



## Aman121 (Jan 26, 2013)

sounddad said:


> Thanks for your reply.
> My price range could go up to 10k.
> 
> The suggestions you are making are in the lower end mixers.
> ...



What exactly is your daughters profession, and what exactly will this be used for? If you could answer that and some of Brad's questions we could better answer your question. As for your pricing comment, the best mixer for your use might just happen to fall in a lower price point. You can say that you want to spend $10,000 on a banana, but the fact of the matter is that even the best tasting banana ever simply doesn't cost $10,000.


----------



## sounddad (Jan 26, 2013)

What You are saying is not true. I know some mixers that cost way above 10k. Midas pro2 is just one example. An Allen & Heath GLD can cost over 15k.


----------



## Aman121 (Jan 26, 2013)

sounddad said:


> What You are saying is not true. I know some mixers that cost way above 10k. Midas pro2 is just one example. An Allen & Heath GLD can cost over 15k.



That's not the point, of course there are consoles above 10k. The point is that the best console for your situation migh not end up costing as much as you think.


----------



## sounddad (Jan 26, 2013)

Regarding the use for the mixer, it is for other family members too. If you really want to know here are some info. My wife is a professional singer and performs with medieval grous. Her concerts are not amplified but I would like to record her concerts using 16 channels, as her groups don't have more than 16 members. I have another daughter that plays viola da gamba, and plays in chamber groups, also not amplified performances. The daughter I told you about previously has a Folk music group that requires amplified sound and each musician uses several mics.
The reason I want more expensive mixers is I would like to have excellent quality sound and flexibility for all situations.

Finally, I would like to get help in the selection of the right gear.


----------



## drummerboi316 (Jan 26, 2013)

sounddad said:


> What You are saying is not true. I know some mixers that cost way above 10k. Midas pro2 is just one example. An Allen & Heath GLD can cost over 15k.



And you could get a Venue Profile system for 60k+, but that's not the point. What he's saying is if you give us a better understanding of the application that the console will be used for, we can better suggest the most appropriate product. In this industry expensive does not necessarially mean better. If you are looking for specific requirements you may be suprised to find those in a cheaper console, one that isn't necessarially "high end". What I mean by that is, when you tell us more about this venture, we might be able to suggest a Mackie or Behringer product that would certainally fit your criteria and be an amazing console for you, saving you lots of money from going out and buying a less flexible Midas or Soundcraft consloe just because it is "better".

/My 2 cents


----------



## Aman121 (Jan 26, 2013)

drummerboi316 said:


> And you could get a Venue Profile system for 60k+, but that's not the point. What he's saying is if you give us a better understanding of the application that the console will be used for, we can better suggest the most appropriate product. In this industry expensive does not necessarially mean better. If you are looking for specific requirements you may be suprised to find those in a cheaper console, one that isn't necessarially "high end". What I mean by that is, when you tell us more about this venture, we might be able to suggest a Mackie or Behringer product that would certainally fit your criteria and be an amazing console for you, saving you lots of money from going out and buying a less flexible Midas or Soundcraft consloe just because it is "better".
> 
> /My 2 cents




Exactly. Plus, you mentioned wanting to make good recordings. The cost of goo microphones will add up quick, so unless you already have good mics, it would make more sense to dump cash into mics than a console, as they will have a much bigger effect on the final product.


----------



## sounddad (Jan 26, 2013)

Thanks for your information. I know what you are saying, and I have good mics and I'm going to buy more. But that is a different topic. Right now I' m selecting a mixer, not mics.


----------



## avkid (Jan 26, 2013)

If you only need 16 preamps and can wait a bit to purchase I would seriously consider the Behringer X32 Producer.
Behringer: DIGITAL MIXER X32 PRODUCER


----------



## sounddad (Jan 26, 2013)

Regarding your suggestions, the Mackie does not support 16 track recordings. I could not find if any of your suggestions support saving "scenes". They may support, but I couldn't find this in the overview of the product info. Another thing I don't like about the Mackie is that it requires an iPad, and this type of dependency is a no for me.


----------



## sounddad (Jan 26, 2013)

avkid said:


> If you only need 16 preamps and can wait a bit to purchase I would seriously consider the Behringer X32 Producer.
> Behringer: DIGITAL MIXER X32 PRODUCER



Now here is something I'll have to look into. It looks like a good suggestion.
It would be nice if I have other choices and if possible, comparisons between them. 

Thanks for this one


----------



## aldenf (Jan 26, 2013)

Hi sounddad.

You ask this question at a really interesting time in console (mixer) technology...

I'm assuming you purchased a Venice Hybrid model (VeniceU or VeniceF). If you could share exactly which model, that would help us greatly in making suggestions that meet your requirements. For example: A VeniceF 32 weighs 82 lbs. While a MidasU 32 is 30 lbs. lighter at 52 lbs. Remember that a road case will add approximately 50 lbs to the final carry weight.

At your upper price range, is a Midas Pro1 at 47 lbs. and just under $10k. To record with it, you'll have to spend an additional $900 for a PCIe Lynx AES50 interface for DESKTOP computer (PC, MacPro or MacMini with a $1400 interface). My theater has a Midas Pro2 ($22k) and I can't say enough good things about it. The Pro1 shares the same basic technology.

Midas Consoles | PRO1


At around $3k, 45 lbs, and perhaps the best bang for your buck, is the Behringer X32. Behringer just announced the X32 Compact. But it has not actually been released yet. And, although smaller than the X32, I have yet to see actual size and weight specs. Even the web brochure excludes this info. I have used the X32. It is an incredible mixer for the money. It probably has everything your daughter will need *built-in*. The word on durability is still out. I know several sound contractors that have been running X32s for over 6 months now, trying to beat them into the ground. I have yet to hear of one failing yet. I am replacing my old Venice 320 with an X32.

BEHRINGER: Mixers


What I think is most important is the functionality of the console:

-How many Aux Sends/Busses/Outs does your daughter need? How many monitor mixes, etc.
-What is the primary purpose of the console? Live reinforcement, recording, playback, etc? A compromise on size might be fine for a recording console. But for live reinforcement, the extra surface space and faders can be priceless. Example - A Midas Pro2 is a very nice FOH console for small to medium size venues/acts. The Pro2c (compact version) makes mixing a rock band or musical theater show much more difficult as it has 8 fewer faders for control. The Pro2c is a great monitor mixer though.
-Do you need multi-track out of the computer or just in, like the Venice Hybrids? The X32's Firewire interface allows a simultaneous 32 channels in each direction (32x32).
-How many inputs do you need at the console? Example: The X32 has 32 mono mic inputs on the console. The X32 Compact only has 16. You'll have to spend another $1k on a S16 digital stage box to increase it to 32. And your daughter will have to carry an additional piece of equipment mounted in a rack case to her gigs.
-The ability to record scenes is awesome. This pretty much limits you to a full digital console. Hybrids do not record scenes. This leaves practically all sub-$3000 consoles out of the running.

Besides Midas and Behringer; PreSonus, Soundcraft, Allen & Heath and Yamaha make affordable, reasonable sounding digital mixers. Ask 10 different designers/engineers which sounds best and you'll get 7 different answers... 

-The Soundcraft Si Compact series you mention are great sounding consoles. Personally, I hate the surface and would not want to mix anything live on it, especially on the fly. it also doesn't have built-in recording abilities. An additional MADI interface would be required. There are others here better able to explain what is needed.
-The Yamaha LS9 series... I don't want to start an argument here. I don't like the sound of Yamahas. I think their mic pres are terrible. Others love them. I also don't like the LS9 interface. If you're considering an LS9-32, please look at the Pro1 as well.
-As for the Rolands... Read the forums here and elsewhere. Most of us would not recommend Roland for professional level gear. Of course, prior to the X32, none of us would have recommended Behringer either.
-The PreSonus StudioLive 24.4.2 at 30 lbs and $3k is another option. Also a great bang-for-your-buck console. I would personally recommend it over the three above series. At 50 lbs and $4k, the 32.4.2AI is also a good choice but probably too heavy for your daughter. PreSonus | Products - Mixers
-Allen & Heath have the GLD-80 at 35 lbs and $9k. It only has 4 mic inputs on-board. So the GLD-AR2412 stagebox is required for an additional $2200. It sounds great. Beyond a stereo interface, optional recording interfaces are required. GLD-80 | ALLEN & HEATH // WORLD CLASS MIXING


In my humble opinion, you have the Behringer X32 or PreSonus 24.4.2, both at around $3k. The X32 probably gets the nod here as a more complete, versatile solution.
I do not see things getting significantly better until you reach the Midas Pro1 or A&H GLD-80. With recording solutions, the Midas falls around $10-11k while the A&H falls at $12-13k.

There are distinct advantages at $10k+ over $3k. Will a far majority of people be able to tell the difference in sound during live situations? Unless your daughter is using $60k worth of speakers, amps and processors, probably not. Differences in recording? The Behringer and PreSonus will only record at 48KHz sample rates. The Midas and A&H network and record at 96KHz. If your daughter is using SM58/SM57 microphones, little difference will be heard. What ten grand gets you is: better microphone pre-amps, better built-in effects, 96 KHz sample rate.

Personally, I'd go with the Behringer and spend the remaining $7000 on better speakers and mics (the MOST important parts of a sound system).

Your daughter will have to decide if the size/weight advantages of a compact console outweigh the increased functionality of it's slightly larger brethren. 50 lbs is not that heavy and allows for some really good choices and fewer compromises.

Hope this helps.

~Alden

Alden Fulcomer
Associate Production Manager
Audio Supervisor
Bucks County Playhouse


----------



## sounddad (Jan 26, 2013)

Thanks for your feedback.
It is good to have this type of reply.

But let's go to the point.


aldenf said:


> I'm assuming you purchased a Venice Hybrid model (VeniceU or VeniceF). If you could share exactly which model, that would help us greatly in making suggestions that meet your requirements. For example: A VeniceF 32 weighs 82 lbs. While a MidasU 32 is 30 lbs. lighter at 52 lbs. Remember that a road case will add approximately 50 lbs to the final carry weight.



I was recommended to go with the Midas Venice F24. I still have it with me, but since I have a 30 day money guaranty. I'm going to return it.
I weighs 30.5kg / 67.2lbs.

So we decided we wanted a lighter mixer that could weigh up to 20Kg / 44 lbs, but if if weighs less, it would be even better.

Regarding recording I though on using Allen & Heath ICE-16 that has a firewire interface. I know there are others like multitrack Roladn R-1000, but it is too expensive (5000 USD) and can record up to 48 tracks which I don't need.


aldenf said:


> At around $3k, 45 lbs, and perhaps the best bang for your buck, is the Behringer X32. Behringer just announced the X32 Compact



The Behringer choice looks really a good choice, and I'll have a look at it.


aldenf said:


> -How many Aux Sends/Busses/Outs does your daughter need? How many monitor mixes, etc.



Regarding the output lines, is also something important, as you mention. 2 main output, around 6 AUX outputs, 4 subgroup output lines, It would be nice to have . I don't really need all, but if it could have 8, would be great. (4 for monitoring, 4 for send and receive (I have a Lexicom MX400), 2 for recording in a stereo device (CD)).

Regarding buses, there is no special requirements, but most of the mixer come with a few that are more than enough for what I will ever need. But since you requested, let's set for a minimum of 6 buses.


aldenf said:


> -What is the primary purpose of the console? Live reinforcement, recording, playback, etc? A compromise on size might be fine for a recording console. But for live reinforcement, the extra surface space and faders can be priceless.



As for the mixer, it has 2 main purposes: Live mixing, and mastering the recorded concerts or recording sessions and playing them back.
There is something that I may need which I assume is supported in any configuration. I may want to use this like a studio where I can record 1 track at a time and mixing/editing later. So the players will need to playback tracks and record, in a different track another musician, synchronously.
So, regarding your question if I need also playback, the answer is obviously yes.


aldenf said:


> -Do you need multi-track out of the computer or just in, like the Venice Hybrids? The X32's Firewire interface allows a simultaneous 32 channels in each direction (32x32).



I think I already answered this one, and it is yes. 16 channels for recording and playback.


aldenf said:


> -How many inputs do you need at the console? Example: The X32 has 32 mono mic inputs on the console. The X32 Compact only has 16. You'll have to spend another $1k on a S16 digital stage box to increase it to 32. And your daughter will have to carry an additional piece of equipment mounted in a rack case to her gigs.



From the console I would need 16 input lines, that support independent phantom power per line.


aldenf said:


> -The Soundcraft Si Compact series you mention are great sounding consoles. Personally, I hate the surface and would not want to mix anything live on it, especially on the fly. it also doesn't have built-in recording abilities. An additional MADI interface would be required. There are others here better able to explain what is needed.
> -The Yamaha LS9 series... I don't want to start an argument here. I don't like the sound of Yamahas. I think their mic pres are terrible. Others love them. I also don't like the LS9 interface. If you're considering an LS9-32, please look at the Pro1 as well.
> -As for the Rolands... Read the forums here and elsewhere. Most of us would not recommend Roland for professional level gear. Of course, prior to the X32, none of us would have recommended Behringer either.
> -The PreSonus StudioLive 24.4.2 at 30 lbs and $3k is another option. Also a great bang-for-your-buck console. I would personally recommend it over the three above series. At 50 lbs and $4k, the 32.4.2AI is also a good choice but probably too heavy for your daughter. PreSonus | Products - Mixers
> -Allen & Heath have the GLD-80 at 35 lbs and $9k. It only has 4 mic inputs on-board. So the GLD-AR2412 stagebox is required for an additional $2200. It sounds great. Beyond a stereo interface, optional recording interfaces are required. GLD-80 | ALLEN & HEATH // WORLD CLASS MIXING



So far I found the following to be interesting:
- The Soundcraft Si Compact series. The disadvantages are: An additional MADI interface would be required (and more material, as the multitrack recorder does not support MADI). Don't think scenes are supported.
-The Yamaha LS9 series. Looks too me the user interface is complicated. It looks like a standard, but I don't seem to fancy it.
-As for the Rolands, I looked to me a good option, but does not have enough lines on the console, and requires extra equipment. And if you say that most pros don't like it, that is a good sign to have it removed from my list.
-The PreSonus StudioLive, Looked to me an excellent option, but unfortunately does not have motorized faders, so, I cannot completely save scenes.
-Allen & Heath GLD-80, also requires additional gear that I would like not having. Same problem as Roland.
-Tascam DM3200 you didn't mention on your list, but could also be another option.



aldenf said:


> Unless your daughter is using $60k worth of speakers, amps and processors, probably not.



Regarding the speakers we are mentioning, they cost me around 2000 USD, so they are not that expensive.


aldenf said:


> If your daughter is using SM58/SM57 microphones, little difference will be heard. What ten grand gets you is: better microphone pre-amps, better built-in effects, 96 KHz sample rate.


Regarding the mics, they are good. Some cost 300 USD some 2000 USD. For example, for the Viola da Gamba I have 2 mics, from AKG that were advised by AKG engineers. For live voice I have Sure Beta 87A. I have 2 senheiser MD441, and Neumann SKM 140, and more.

Regarding the sample rate, I have a Lexicon MX400, that has effects processor, and uses 44KHz sample rate.
There are equipments that use 192 kHz sample rate.

Thanks again for your feedback.
I just wish you can comment further so that I can use your opinion for my decision.


----------



## Footer (Jan 26, 2013)

Any console that is in the upper reaches of your price range is going to weigh too much. I have an X32 in the gator case and me and another one of my guys can easily move it around without thinking about it. Hell, I have flipped and uncased it by myself without issue. 

Here is the thing... none of these options are going to sound as good as the Venice. The Pro1 _should_, but after you put that thing in a flight case it is going to get you back up in the 100# territory. The sound of the X32 is decent, but it is no venice or heritage. We use it as a monitor desk and for that it is fine. I try to avoid using it FOH unless I have to. It sounds better in my opinion than most of the Yamaha stuff out there, but it is just not as warm as the analog stuff we have (Allen and Heath GL2800 and Heritage 1k). Granted, it sounds great, but don't expect it to sound like a Heritage or even a venice. I have never heard the A to D's in the Venice so I can not comment there. 

If you want "best" sound quality in a small format digital desk, your choices are the Digico SD11 or a Pro1. Both are VERY good consoles. I have heard both the Pro 2 and Pro 6 and they are excellent, I'm sure the Pro 1 is as well. In my view, Digico has the best sounding digital desks out there without question... but even the SD11 will set you back at least 15k. 

So, you either need to raise your price range to the true pro level gear or buy and X32. It sounds better than anything else in the class. Personally, I would keep the Venice and invest in a rolling pelican and a gym membership. You will not beat the sound quality of the venice for the price... period.


----------



## justind (Jan 26, 2013)

I just purchased a soundcraft si compact and it is a very nice console. if you have up to 10k i would definitely consider going with something like this or perhaps a yamaha LS9. I realize you may have some external processors, but getting something that has all of those capabilities onboard is really nice. like others have said I'm not sure you are going to cut down on weight too much with any of these higher end options, but you can reduce the number of individual components that are needed for a system. There is also an iPad interface which I have yet to use, but I imagine there would be some value for you there as well.

oh and behringer has always been a dirty word around the sound guys I know. I guess there have been some good reviews of the x32, but I've heard too many stories about behringers working fine one day and the next they are a $3000 paperweight. YMMV.


----------



## Footer (Jan 26, 2013)

justind said:


> oh and behringer has always been a dirty word around the sound guys I know. I guess there have been some good reviews of the x32, but I've heard too many stories about behringers working fine one day and the next they are a $3000 paperweight. YMMV.



Used to be true... not anymore. I have A/B the X32 against the LS9 and sound quality wise the X32 blows the LS9 out of the water. Going anything Yamaha would be a step back.


----------



## AlexDonkle (Jan 26, 2013)

Just to add my 2 cents.

If you want to master songs laters, then one requirement of any mixer is that it should have the ability to work as a "control surface" for whatever program you're mixing in (Pro Tools is a standard for pros, but software like Audacity, Digital Performer, Adobe Audition, Garage Band, etc. all have their advantages and many are much cheaper or free which is likely fine unless you're bringing the files into a professional studio to finalize any mixes). Many sound boards are designed around either live sound, or a control surface for studios, but there are a few that do both well. Makes sure that the mixer has drivers already available for control surface features, and not just "coming soon" (my school got into trouble with that, as Yamaha claimed they were working on control surface plug-in for control surfaces for their DM2000, but 8 years later it's still not released). 
Motorized faders shouldn't be a "suggestion" for a control surface either like they are in live sound boards, I would require them. Here's some examples of control surfaces
Mixing Control Surfaces | Sweetwater.com


----------



## aldenf (Jan 26, 2013)

Footer said:


> Personally, I would keep the Venice and invest in a rolling pelican and a gym membership. You will not beat the sound quality of the venice for the price... period.



Kyle makes a great point. I have used my Venice 320 HARD. It still looks, works and sounds great. The Venice series has always been the best sounding compact desk. I've recorded over two dozen commercial CDs with the Venice. I can record directly into RME interfaces today that I would match against $60k digital consoles... You can move to the VeniceU series. It's simply a slightly more compact version of the F series. In fact the U series looks more like the original Venice. Midas specs the VeniceU 16 @ 35 lbs and the 24 @ 44 lbs. It might be your best sounding choice under $10k. But it is not a digital console. It is a "hybrid". In Midas' case, you are limited to a 16 channel configuration (8 out x 8 in). The AD/DA converters are nice. The Venice series will also not allow you to record scenes, VCAs, Mute Groups, etc. It's "digital" capabilities are simply limited... Midas Consoles | VeniceU

The X32 seems to be the best compromise under $10k. It's small, light, sounds good, is a true digital console (with almost all things that "digital" means) and probably strikes the best balance between reinforcement/recording if you really want the "digital" features. If you wait for the X32 Compact or Producer editions, things will lighten up further.

In my previous post, I tried steering you toward the Pro1. The only compromises you would be making with it is price ($10-11k/complete) and weight (47 lbs.). It would pull both live and recording with aplomb and sound GREAT doing it. It would also be as much of a learning curve as the X32. The VeniceU has little to no learning curve.

Just My 2 cents.

~Alden


----------



## aldenf (Jan 26, 2013)

Footer said:


> Used to be true... not anymore. I have A/B the X32 against the LS9 and sound quality wise the X32 blows the LS9 out of the water. Going anything Yamaha would be a step back.




Agreed, completely.


----------



## aldenf (Jan 26, 2013)

adonkle said:


> If you want to master songs laters, then one requirement of any mixer is that it should have the ability to work as a "control surface" for whatever program you're mixing in... [/url]



adonkle makes a good point. The X32 does just that by sending both HUI and Mackie Control data along with I/O. Though we might be getting a bit advanced for the OP. Heck, I don't have a control surface for my DAW. I certainly would if I was recording/mastering 60 hrs/week. But for the occasional project, why bother?


----------



## museav (Jan 27, 2013)

sounddad said:


> As for the mixer, it has 2 main purposes: Live mixing, and mastering the recorded concerts or recording sessions and playing them back.
> There is something that I may need which I assume is supported in any configuration. I may want to use this like a studio where I can record 1 track at a time and mixing/editing later. So the players will need to playback tracks and record, in a different track another musician, synchronously.
> So, regarding your question if I need also playback, the answer is obviously yes.


Okay, so we now know that the purpose primarily recording, apparently to record the rough tracks in the field and then edit and mix down everything in a studio setting as well as for studio use. It also sounds as though you would like some form of virtual soundcheck (playing back a multichannel recording as though it was the group performing) while the live sound aspect actually appears limited to your daughter's folk group.



sounddad said:


> Regarding the output lines, is also something important, as you mention. 2 main output, around 6 AUX outputs, 4 subgroup output lines, It would be nice to have . I don't really need all, but if it could have 8, would be great. (4 for monitoring, 4 for send and receive (I have a Lexicom MX400), 2 for recording in a stereo device (CD)).
> 
> Regarding buses, there is no special requirements, but most of the mixer come with a few that are more than enough for what I will ever need. But since you requested, let's set for a minimum of 6 buses.
> 
> From the console I would need 16 input lines, that support independent phantom power per line.


Perhaps some confusion. Four monitor sends and four effects sends would usually require at least eight aux sends. Those eight aux sends plus four subgroups plus main left/right also seems to mean a minimum of fourteen mix buses are required, sixteen if you want separate mixes for live output and the two channel recording. And apparently along with the 16 mic inputs you would apparently need at least four effects returns plus you might want to account for some other music source(s) for live applications. So now knowing this and your budget that indeed does push you out of many of the ultra-compact mixers.

You might also get deeper into the details. For example, you might want the monitor sends to be before and channel EQ or compression. You may also want to be able to select the recording signals to be before any channel processing. That would require looking in detail at where the aux and FireWire/USB (for recording) signals can be derived in the signal chain. But it can often be such details that may make one product a better choice than another.


It initially sounded as though your daughter was the operator but some of the comments make it sound like she is performing rather than mixing. Who is going to be running the mixer and what is their experience? It's great to have nice tools but a decent sounding mixer used to its maximum may result in better recordings and live sound than a poorly applied great sounding mixer. This also gets into the "easy to use" factor as someone with limited experience with digital consoles and/or mixing in general may find some of the consoles like the DiGiCos a much steeper learning curve.


----------



## sounddad (Jan 27, 2013)

Well Adonkle, you have to help me here, as it is the first time I hear about "Control Surface" what is the difference between Sound Mixer and "Control Surface"?


----------



## sounddad (Jan 27, 2013)

Here is another great comment. Thanks for your contribution.

museav said:


> Okay, so we now know that the purpose primarily recording, apparently to record the rough tracks in the field and then edit and mix down everything in a studio setting as well as for studio use. It also sounds as though you would like some form of virtual soundcheck (playing back a multichannel recording as though it was the group performing) while the live sound aspect actually appears limited to your daughter's folk group.



This is correct.


museav said:


> You might also get deeper into the details. For example, you might want the monitor sends to be before and channel EQ or compression. You may also want to be able to select the recording signals to be before any channel processing. That would require looking in detail at where the aux and FireWire/USB (for recording) signals can be derived in the signal chain. But it can often be such details that may make one product a better choice than another.




I believe most sound mixers have the capability to route the sound to the firewire from dry or wet channels. So I didn't think this was an issue.


museav said:


> It initially sounded as though your daughter was the operator but some of the comments make it sound like she is performing rather than mixing. Who is going to be running the mixer and what is their experience? It's great to have nice tools but a decent sounding mixer used to its maximum may result in better recordings and live sound than a poorly applied great sounding mixer.



My daughter is a performer, not a sound engineer. They will be using a sound engineer.


museav said:


> This also gets into the "easy to use" factor as someone with limited experience with digital consoles and/or mixing in general may find some of the consoles like the DiGiCos a much steeper learning curve.



Definitely the ease of use is important. For live concerts, if you need to access some function that is embedded in many menus and submenus, it will not work. That is something that Soundcraft Si and Presonus are very good.

Regarding DiGiCos I have no idea which model fits our needs.

Thanks


----------



## AlexDonkle (Jan 27, 2013)

sounddad said:


> Well Adonkle, you have to help me here, as it is the first time I hear about "Control Surface" what is the difference between Sound Mixer and "Control Surface"?



If you've ever used Audacity, Pro Tools, or any other audio editing program you've likely seen "virtual faders" shown on the computer monitor. You can drag these up and down with a mouse to mix songs, and there are also play, pause, fast forward, buttons on the screen as well. A control surface is basically all of those same faders and controls, but built-into a physical sound board in front of you (looks nearly identical to live sound mixing board). The advantage is when you're mixing songs in a studio, riding real faders is commonly faster and easier than mixing with a mouse. 

aldenf made a good point though, that since your primary focus is the live sound recording aspect, the control surface is definitely a secondary priority, and possible to exclude entirely (it's pretty easy to mix using just a mouse and keyboard if you're not on tight deadlines with 40+ tracks to mix on a regular basis.


----------



## museav (Jan 27, 2013)

sounddad said:


> I believe most sound mixers have the capability to route the sound to the firewire from dry or wet channels. So I didn't think this was an issue.


If you look at the line diagrams for digital mixers you will note that there are often different, and in some cases multiple, options on where in the signal chain sends can be taken off or effects inserted. Some mixers are more flexible than others in this regard. But I was really trying to make the point that it is often preferences regarding such technical details or specifics of the mixer workflow that lead to people to prefer a specific mixer model.


sounddad said:


> My daughter is a performer, not a sound engineer. They will be using a sound engineer.


Sorry if I misunderstood the comments about the mixer being too heavy for your daughter to be indicating that she would be the primary user. If you know who would be mixing then it might be valuable to get their input. If you don't know or if that person may routinely change then you may want to consider sticking with a mixer that is more likely to be familiar.


sounddad said:


> Definitely the ease of use is important. For live concerts, if you need to access some function that is embedded in many menus and submenus, it will not work. That is something that Soundcraft Si and Presonus are very good.


But you also noted right from the start the Scenes were a requirement and Scenes on the PreSonus are more limited than with most other digital mixers, something that may or may not matter depending on how you use the Scene recall functionality. And while it is not generally a practical issue for live performances or recording, some people, often those used to working at 96kHz or 192kHz in a studio, do not like that the PreSonus StudioLive and Behringer X32 are limited to a 48kHz sample rate. It greatly comes down to what you feel are are the right tradeoffs and priorities in your applications.

I will offer that my personal view is that with three repeated by likely quite different uses I would see a mixer with full Scene recall, flexible routing and electronic scribble strips as an advantage. Being able to recall a Scene/Show with all the routing and patching assignments, channel labeling, gain/trim, channel processing, etc. would make it very easy to go from one use to the other.


I had the same general thought as others and wondered if you might be worth considering separating the recording and live mix functionality, putting together a dedicated recording rig and a simpler live sound system and perhaps splitting the mics when both would be used. The determining factor there may be how much of the site recording is to get clean tracks laid down for later production versus actually trying to create a live mix.


----------



## sounddad (Jan 27, 2013)

museav said:


> Sorry if I misunderstood the comments about the mixer being too heavy for your daughter to be indicating that she would be the primary user. If you know who would be mixing then it might be valuable to get their input. If you don't know or if that person may routinely change then you may want to consider sticking with a mixer that is more likely to be familiar.



You didn't. When I first bought the Midas mixer, the idea was for my daughter to be the primarily user. And the moment we got it, she told me she couldn't use it unless she had help from someone to carry it. She tells me that most of the concerts she does, people already have all equipment, but occasionally they don't. And then, she has to carry it, and here is when the problem starts, and since the other member of her group live far and don't have a car, she will have to take it.


museav said:


> But you also noted right from the start the Scenes were a requirement and Scenes on the PreSonus are more limited than with most other digital mixers, something that may or may not matter depending on how you use the Scene recall functionality.



This is correct, and that's why I trying to get away from Presonus.


museav said:


> And while it is not generally a practical issue for live performances or recording, some people, often those used to working at 96kHz or 192kHz in a studio, do not like that the PreSonus StudioLive and Behringer X32 are limited to a 48kHz sample rate. It greatly comes down to what you feel are are the right tradeoffs and priorities in your applications.



But here is something for you. I have a Lexicon, that works at 48 kHz max. And it is a good effects equipment.


museav said:


> I had the same general thought as others and wondered if you might be worth considering separating the recording and live mix functionality, putting together a dedicated recording rig and a simpler live sound system and perhaps splitting the mics when both would be used. The determining factor there may be how much of the site recording is to get clean tracks laid down for later production versus actually trying to create a live mix.



You may be right on that, but, I don't want to spend money on 2 mixers. When or If she starts making real money from the concerts, perhaps she may be able to buy everything for herself. Right now I'm just trying to give her a starting push.


----------



## FACTplayers (Jan 31, 2013)

Maybe this was answered already, but why/how do you have "good" mics and know nothing about soundboards? Just curious.


----------



## museav (Jan 31, 2013)

sounddad said:


> You didn't. When I first bought the Midas mixer, the idea was for my daughter to be the primarily user. And the moment we got it, she told me she couldn't use it unless she had help from someone to carry it. She tells me that most of the concerts she does, people already have all equipment, but occasionally they don't. And then, she has to carry it, and here is when the problem starts, and since the other member of her group live far and don't have a car, she will have to take it.


Maybe use some of the budget for the mixer to purchase them a car! 

If I understand correctly, two of the intended uses are recording live perfomances where no reinforcement is involved. A third use is potentially for recording and live sound reinforcement but apparently most of those performances have others providing the reinforcement systems. And a fourth use might apparently be in the 'studio' for production. Thus the majority of the use appears more related to recording and production than to live sound. Since it seems that the vast majority of the potential use relates to recording and production, which makes me wonder if you might be better served by a DAW based recording and production system than by a traditional live sound mixer.

Three other points:

It is not clear if the goal of the field recording is a live production or more to get the rough tracks down for later production.

It is not clear who would be operating the mixer in the various situations.

It is not clear how you envision this system integrating with any live reinforcement systems provided by others.


----------



## deck (Jan 31, 2013)

Try the X32. It is compact, and features 32 channels and is expandable to more than 32. Motorized faders, and scene memory's like you asked. A nice feature is that you can hook up to the Berhinger axiom like system through a built in card out for another 2500$. The X32 is extremely portable, and has great MIDAS preamps with Klark Teknik processing. The X32 does sound great, and can record. It is reliable, and easy to navigate. It costs 2999, but in all honesty, is better than most 8,000-15,000 dollar consoles.it does have built in FX of course, and is a good concert board. I would advise pursaching this and the monitor system instead of buying an overprice MIDAS console that does not have better quality. I also think the SI is a pain to navigate, and not a good concert board overall with its 4 layers


----------



## deck (Jan 31, 2013)

Also, a digico is not particularly well known, so the house engineer will have a problem figuring it out. Your daughter would love the monitor system, which allows the performer to mix their own monitors from a onstage small box. Really great for the price.


----------



## chausman (Jan 31, 2013)

deck said:


> Try the X32. It is compact, and features 32 channels and is expandable to more than 32. Motorized faders, and scene memory's like you asked. A nice feature is that you can hook up to the Berhinger axiom like system through a built in card out for another 2500$. The X32 is extremely portable, and has great MIDAS preamps with Klark Teknik processing. The X32 does sound great, and can record. It is reliable, and easy to navigate. It costs 2999, but in all honesty, is better than most 8,000-15,000 dollar consoles.it does have built in FX of course, and is a good concert board. I would advise pursaching this and the monitor system instead of buying an overprice MIDAS console that does not have better quality. I also think the SI is a pain to navigate, and not a good concert board overall with its 4 layers



If you can wait, there are also two new versions of the X32 that have all the same features, but are smaller and lighter. They were just announced though, so I don't know how long you'd have to wait for them.


----------



## Footer (Jan 31, 2013)

deck said:


> Try the X32. It is compact, and features 32 channels and is expandable to more than 32. Motorized faders, and scene memory's like you asked. A nice feature is that you can hook up to the Berhinger axiom like system through a built in card out for another 2500$. The X32 is extremely portable, and has great MIDAS preamps with Klark Teknik processing. The X32 does sound great, and can record. It is reliable, and easy to navigate. It costs 2999, but in all honesty, is better than most 8,000-15,000 dollar consoles.it does have built in FX of course, and is a good concert board. I would advise pursaching this and the monitor system instead of buying an overprice MIDAS console that does not have better quality. I also think the SI is a pain to navigate, and not a good concert board overall with its 4 layers



The card slot on the X32 is a USB interface, not the ultranet interface. The ultranet (axiom like system) is built into the console, no card needed. I'm not sure where this "2500" number comes from, the P16 remote costs about 250 a unit... 

And for the sound quality, it does not have the sound quality of the Midas digital console. Its good, its better than most, but it does not sound as good as the Midas stuff. 


deck said:


> Also, a digico is not particularly well known, so the house engineer will have a problem figuring it out. Your daughter would love the monitor system, which allows the performer to mix their own monitors from a onstage small box. Really great for the price.



Depends who your engineer is... and this is the main question. There are guys out there that have only touched digico for the last few years... there are guys out there who have never touched them. 

Without having a clear view of who will be operating it we can't really go any further.


----------



## museav (Feb 1, 2013)

chausman said:


> If you can wait, there are also two new versions of the X32 that have all the same features, but are smaller and lighter. They were just announced though, so I don't know how long you'd have to wait for them.


They may all have the same underlying foundation and a lot in common but there are definitely differences between each model. However, the different versions of the X32 being introduced seems to reinforce the point of there potentially being different needs and priorities for different applications.


deck said:


> The X32 is extremely portable, and has great MIDAS preamps with Klark Teknik processing. The X32 does sound great, and can record. It is reliable, and easy to navigate. It costs 2999, but in all honesty, is better than most 8,000-15,000 dollar consoles.it does have built in FX of course, and is a good concert board. I would advise pursaching this and the monitor system instead of buying an overprice MIDAS console that does not have better quality.


Some obvious misunderstandings as the X32 does not have Midas preamps or Klark-Teknik processing. As they are now all part of The MUSIC Group, Behringer has taken advantage of some of the technology and technical resources available from Midas, K-T and Turbosound, who are in turn taking advantage of some of Behringer's financial and manufacturing resources. However, they are also being careful to maintain brand differentiation, thus the preamps in the X32 are apparently based on a Midas design and had input from Midas but they are not the same preamps used in any Midas products.

And to clarify, the X32 cannot record without external devices or media. You can record or playback two channels using the integrated USB port and a USB thumb drive. The X32 also has an integrated 32x32 USB 2.0/FireWire interface to connect to ASIO based external recorders or computer recording systems. And the X32 provides MIDI DAW remote control emulating HUI or Mackie Control but apparently currently allows only using the 8 DCA faders for the DAW.

Finally, $2,999 may be MAP for the X32 but many people seem to be getting them for well under that now that the initial rush is past. Being 'better' than consoles costing several times as much is open to debate as there are numerous objective and subjective factors that could enter into such an assessment.


Since it has been brought up, Solid State Logic | Music | AWS is an example of a higher end controller and audio interface for a computer based Digital Audio Workstation. Mackie - Mackie Control Universal Pro is a similar concept but just a controller and toward the other end of the price scale.


----------



## sounddad (Feb 2, 2013)

Thanks all for you feedback.

I finally made the decision and ordered the new sound mixer. I hope it was a good choice.

For you guys, let me explain why I chose this:
- Has 16+ channels
- It is expandable (you buy modules as you grow that extend your basic channels)
- Has Scenes and motorized faders
- Can record 16+ channels simultaneously (must use an option card)
- Has good quality (I hope)

The option was the Allen & Heath GLD-80.
I already ordered it and expecting to get it next week.

Thanks all


----------



## museav (Feb 2, 2013)

The GLD-80 is a very nice console but to get the minimum sixteen inputs you apparently wanted would require at least one expansion box and you are apparently also getting one of the multichannel audio cards as well which seems to make it more than the $10k budget. It would also be at least as large and heavy as the Venice that was supposedly too large and heavy, especially once you add a rack for the expansion/stage box and a road case for the console. And while you will likely find it fairly easy to operate in typical use, the initial setup and configuration can be a steep learning curve. So a nice console, but also a seemingly curious choice given some of the previous comments.


----------



## TimmyP1955 (Feb 3, 2013)

GLD-80 is a good unit. Another choice would be the upcoming X32 Compact or Rack.


----------



## sounddad (Feb 3, 2013)

museav said:


> The GLD-80 is a very nice console but to get the minimum sixteen inputs you apparently wanted would require at least one expansion box and you are apparently also getting one of the multichannel audio cards as well which seems to make it more than the $10k budget. It would also be at least as large and heavy as the Venice that was supposedly too large and heavy, especially once you add a rack for the expansion/stage box and a road case for the console. And while you will likely find it fairly easy to operate in typical use, the initial setup and configuration can be a steep learning curve. So a nice console, but also a seemingly curious choice given some of the previous comments.



Well, the total amount was under $8000, and included, Console, 24 Input Stage Box AR2412, Heavy duty Carrying case, and Snake, so, it was under $10k.

Regarding the weight, it weighs 35 lbs (mixer). the Audio Rack, weighs 7 lbs. So, even with everything included, we are talking 42 lbs.

I was fancying Soundcraft, but, comparing with Allen & Heath, it is more limited in the number of channels. In Si Compact, you only have the options of 16, 24 ch. If you want to expand later on, you can't. If you want to record the sound in a multi-channel recorder, you will need to use MADI expansion card, + converter from MADI to USB or Firewire. For this, you have to pay 2x the price of the MADI card. With Allen & Heath, you buy DANTE Card, and nothing more. The Dante Card, will allow you to record up to 64 Channels, (I won't use so many channels though). But if the music ensemble expands, I'll have a console that will fit their needs.

Regarding the simplicity for operating, it is more complex that the Si Compact (I think) or the Presonus, but still easy enough.

It was never the first choice for me, I thought also on waiting for the X32, but the supplier told me, they didn't know when it would become available. I also asked him if I could buy in the next few months, and his reply was no. If that happened, they would now. The supplier is a large one, and I'm sure they would now this.


----------



## museav (Feb 3, 2013)

sounddad said:


> Well, the total amount was under $8000, and included, Console, 24 Input Stage Box AR2412, Heavy duty Carrying case, and Snake, so, it was under $10k.


Sounds like a good deal since MAP on just a GLD-80 console and GLD-AR2412 expansion box is more than $11k.


sounddad said:


> With Allen & Heath, you buy DANTE Card, and nothing more. The Dante Card, will allow you to record up to 64 Channels, (I won't use so many channels though). But if the music ensemble expands, I'll have a console that will fit their needs.


There are other devices required in order to record via Dante. The Dante card will come with one license of Audinate's Dante Virtual Soundcard that can be run on a computer with a network port and you can then use an ASIO based recording software such as Nuendo, Reaper, ProTools, Cubase, etc. to record on that computer. So a computer and software required for a computer based recording approach. If you want to record to something other than a computer that device will have to have a Dante input or you will need to use Dante compatible interfaces such as RedNet | Focusrite.


sounddad said:


> It was never the first choice for me, I thought also on waiting for the X32, but the supplier told me, they didn't know when it would become available. I also asked him if I could buy in the next few months, and his reply was no. If that happened, they would now. The supplier is a large one, and I'm sure they would now this.


If you are addressing the new Producer, Compact, Rack or Core versions of the X32 then those are not yet available and may not be for some months but the original 'standard' X32 seems to be readily available.


----------



## sounddad (Feb 3, 2013)

From what Allen & Heath told me, the software to record the channels are free of charge. I didn't check this, and just assumed it is true. I may later read the several tracks, possibly using the mixer (or ProTools) to record on a CD.


----------

