# Are Yamaha & Peavey Bad?



## stjc15 (Nov 14, 2006)

I have heard many people say that both the Yamaha and Peavey brand mixers are junk. I happen to work with both. I was never able to get an explanation as to why they are so bad, but I would kind of like to know if they are, or if it is just personal preference. I would also like to know what you think are the best brand out there.


----------



## Eboy87 (Nov 14, 2006)

Yamaha isn't what I'd consider crap. After all, they do make some of the most widely used digital desks, PM1D, PM5D, M7CL, the list goes on and on. Some of their smaller boards may not be as "professional" as say a PM3500, but they'll get the job done. Same thing for Peavy, there's better mixers out there, but if it'll do the job, by all means use them.


----------



## soundlight (Nov 14, 2006)

For schools, small rental companies, small colleges, community arts centers, and everyone who can't afford the big guns, the mid-size peavey and yamaha analog consoles mean reliability. The EQ isn't extraordinary, the pre-amps aren't pristine, but they get the job done, and they'll do it over and over and over again. On the other hand, Yamaha's range of digital mixers is absolutely superb and peavey's higher-priced speakers are built to bombproof standards and can REALLY move some air. They aren't Vertec arrays, mind you, but they'll do just fine for smaller venues or high schools.


----------



## PhantomD (Nov 15, 2006)

Question: Are Yamaha & Peavey Bad?

Answer: No

Explanation: They are perfect for what they are designed for. We have a Peavey head here that is about 20 years old and it is still one helluva amazing power amp (with a repair or two rather recently).

We use Yamaha analogs (one 16-channel powered, one 24-channel unpowered) as our main mixing desks and they do a superb job. The EQ is OK for a touchy person like me.

However our brand new 24-channel Yammie developed a problem with the right-hand channel not working within a week of being delivered. Bad solder joint probably.


----------



## kovacika (Nov 15, 2006)

While peavey's are not my favorite, for small events they work beautifully. Yamaha's I love. While not my favorite console (Thats reserved by the Midas Heritage 3000) they work like a dream under any situation and are hard to break. I've seen any number of Yamaha desks on tour's where they got the crap kicked out of them. And they still worked.


----------



## tenor_singer (Nov 15, 2006)

I've actually watched a Peavey mixer/amp unit bounce down a flight of 12 stairs, get plugged in and work... with the exception of a small crack in the wooden handle. Granted this was back in 1982... (crap... did I just age myself?)

I think with everything you'll do just fine if you maintain it and don't use it beyond what it was spec'ed to do.


----------



## mbandgeek (Nov 15, 2006)

My school has a 12 yr. old yamaha pm1200 mixer. It works really well, never have had any problems with it. Whearas almost every week i read a post saying people have had problems with mackie mixers. never seen anything about a yamaha.

If it were my money, i wouldn't buy a yamaha board, for the simple fact that there are better boards for the same price, ie. Allen and heath, soundcraft, mackie, etc.

I have had no experience with peavey.


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 15, 2006)

Interesting perspective
why when you have not had any problems with your Yamaha would you not select it for your self? I think the future is much more digital, and in a school setting making the move up to a digital setup has a lot of advantages 


In the analog low end mixers, I would tend to not go with Yamaha or anyone, because IMO you can get a lot more mixer and flexibility if you move up to digital with the 01v96 there are many pro sound companies that use these for their low end rigs. I see a lot of A&H speced for schools, some soundcraft, Midas verona etc but I think looking to the future and the most for the least price with a quality product DIGITAL is the way to go. 

If you look at the cost of the mixer and then add in the rack gear that you should have (compression eq delay etc etc flexible routing) the analog mixer + rack winds up costing more than the Digital not to mention recall etc. Again just an opinion, in the 2 grand catagory Yamaha 01v96 is hard to beat.

Sharyn


----------



## soundlight (Nov 15, 2006)

But many High School programs do not have the time that is required to learn a digital console. I know that if a digital console of the same price as our soundcraft analog board was put in, my old crew (now the heads of the new crew) would have no idea what to do. In my opinion, digital mixers are better for college level and up. We do actually have a RAMSA DA-7 in the theater here, which is used for musicals and such out at the mix position.


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 15, 2006)

I guess I would agree to disagree

IMO high school students have the same technical learning ability as College, maybe not the time and interest to learn the theory but the ability to learn a digital surface is the same. I think if that perspective were universal than in lighting high schools would all be back with simple NSI 7xxx level controls.

Young people today don't have the technophobia or the years on ingrained experience of how it should be done in an analog world.

Any way just an opinion. On technical ability to learn I would never underestimate a high school student.

Sharyn


----------



## Eboy87 (Nov 15, 2006)

Darn, you beat me to the light board analogy. It's not that hard to learn a digital board, especially the smaller Yammi boards. I think learning to program on a Strand light board is more complex than the 01, or hell, even the M7CL.


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 15, 2006)

Strand uses a form of what in computers would be called reverse polish notation. It comes out of writing code for early computers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_Polish_notation

Sharyn


----------



## mbandgeek (Nov 15, 2006)

SHARYNF said:


> Interesting perspective
> why when you have not had any problems with your Yamaha would you not select it for your self? I think the future is much more digital, and in a school setting making the move up to a digital setup has a lot of advantages
> In the analog low end mixers, I would tend to not go with Yamaha or anyone, because IMO you can get a lot more mixer and flexibility if you move up to digital with the 01v96 there are many pro sound companies that use these for their low end rigs. I see a lot of A&H speced for schools, some soundcraft, Midas verona etc but I think looking to the future and the most for the least price with a quality product DIGITAL is the way to go.
> If you look at the cost of the mixer and then add in the rack gear that you should have (compression eq delay etc etc flexible routing) the analog mixer + rack winds up costing more than the Digital not to mention recall etc. Again just an opinion, in the 2 grand catagory Yamaha 01v96 is hard to beat.
> Sharyn



Because for a little more money I could step up to a soundcraft mixer, I don't need the delay, effect or compressor, limiter. I learned how to mix sound without these, and it saves a lot of hassle. Sure, IF and when I go to buy a mixing console, i would probably shell out the money to buy a nice digital console.


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 15, 2006)

So what will the Soundcraft give you that you do not have today? It is interesting that you look at the digital features as hassle and learning how to mix without them. I am not talking about gimic type stuff but as you get more experienced you will see that compressors, limiters and gates for instance can allow you the tools to get the sound you want. Delays and advanced eq reverb are all tools that make a hugh difference. Auto scene recall is a massive help in a complex setup.

If you look at a pro rig setup it is not just the mixer it is the outboard that makes the difference. Todays modern mixers have subtle differences in how they sound, the noise level, layout etc. but much of what you hear at a professional production comes from the outboard. There really is a reason why all the major suppliers are all adding more onboard digital

Using a lighting analogy, you could have the latest ETC board, but if you only had one type of instrument you would feel limited. The add ons for audio are like you gobo's gels' and different instruments.

It is easy to just look at the "badge" on the equipment, but it really is the system that makes for the more usable effective operation. 

Sharyn


----------



## tenor_singer (Nov 16, 2006)

I know as a high school director I would love to have a digital sound board for my students to use. Unfortunately their cost is fairly prohibitive. A lot of small high schools simply do not have the funds to buy them. Especially in today's times where schools being forced to exist as a non-inflationary entity within an inflation model. The struggling public is voting "no" on operating levies and drama programs will be lucky to have the funding to stay in existence, let alone purchase a mixing board that costs a couple of grand.


----------



## avare (Nov 16, 2006)

IMHO the only valid complaint I have heard about Peavey is that their products are so durable that you never have the excuse of it becoming unreliable to justify buying new equipment. 

Andre


----------



## dvlasak (Nov 16, 2006)

As an employee of a school district & working in a high school, I agree that the funds just aren't there to get a digital desk. I had to pull teeth to try to upgrade from a 24 channel to a 36. Even then the district didn't buy it, the high school musical account paid to go from the 8 or 9 year old Mackie SR 24.4 to a Soundcraft LX7 32. Granted, it is not a fabulous board, but it was the best I could get for the money that they had!!

Dennis


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 16, 2006)

Just a personal opinion, but the SOUNDCRAFT Discounted sell for about 2400, and the 01V96 for 2000, and a lot of the low end pro systems are extending the inputs by adding a Behringer (one of the few recommended things they make) ADA8000, so the pricing is just about the same

When most people think of digital desk they think of the high end systems, but again a lot of the pro's on the smaller rigs are going with the yammy. 

Sharyn


----------



## Eboy87 (Nov 16, 2006)

Heck, back home, at the Fox theater, I've seen some of the tours come through, and those that don't have a Cadac at FOH usually submix the pit on a DM1000 (might have been a 2000). You can definitly still be professional and mix on a smaller digital desk.


----------



## mbandgeek (Nov 16, 2006)

as i read these posts, i am noticing that you have turned this post into a dispute over digital vs. analog consoles.

As for the topic of bad things about yamaha and peavey, the only thing that i haven't heard yet, is that all boards regardless of brand, these boards have their advantages and disadvantages. there isn't really a bad board, but there are some that are better than others. if you are willing to spend the money then go for it, but if you are on a budget, yamaha, peavey, and even behringer sound good for the money. Every sound tech I've ever talked to has a grudge about behringer, but i know for a fact that you can't find a better 36 channel board for under $500.

that's all i've got to say about that.


----------



## audioslavematt (Nov 16, 2006)

mbandgeek said:


> Every sound tech I've ever talked to has a grudge about behringer, but i know for a fact that you can't find a better 36 channel board for under $500.
> that's all i've got to say about that.


And there's a **** good reason that it costs under $500. Have you ever touched or even heard one? Those boat achors are the noisiest, nonmusical pieces of silicon and plastic I have ever heard. Invisible Mic Pres? Yeah, invisible because they're inside the case. If you have to go with a budget mixer, at least get an original design with a Mackie or Peavey. The reverse engineering is what sound techs have against Behringer.

Regarding outboard, compressors, gates, and effect units are the staples of SR. Learn to use them or don't expect to last long in the industry. Plain and simple. 

Oh yeah, my dad bought a bunch of Peavey stuff back in the early '80s. All of it still works to this day. Yamaha makes pretty good stuff too. The SPX990 is God's gift to SR (except maybe the SM58), other than the physics that allow sound to travel as it does. 

My apologies to anyone I have offended. <off to bed following a three hour long performance of _Fiddler_ behind a Midas>


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 18, 2006)

A thread on Behringer could go on for ever

Basically if you talk to people in the pro side of things typically the following points come up.

First was that in a number of instances they simply took another companies design and copied it. TOTALLY, at the time some engineers actually put in parts of the design that had no use except to prove that if it was copied it was a "rip off". Mackie's stuff was copied this way, there were court cases etc etc. So there is still a negative feeling based on past ethical issues.


Second is design build quality. There is no question Behringer drove prices down in the marketplace, they did designs in Germany and built the products in China. There are good and bad products manufactured in China, typically the thing that makes a big difference is the quality of the production line quality assurance. If you have your own people checking and signing off on products before shipment. Behringer was lax in this area and there were many infant mortality issues, poor build quality etc.

Another has been reliability. Most people use these products in a real time critical environment, where failure during a show is a real issue. If you are using it at home or in a non critical situation where failure or delay or switching to an alternative is an option, this is not as major factor. There are many horror stories where at a critical point of an event a piece would die and the user would be in a very embarrassing and difficult situation . This for instance was a problem with Behringers alternative to the DRIVERACK pa, where based on a poor design/insulation situation, the pc card would short out and cause a frying sound. The product when it worked was great, excellent value for money but failure of this critical piece in the audio chain could be a real disaster. Some brave souls decided to get back up units, but by the time you did that you could have gotten the alternative.

The other things that really plays a role here is the support staff that comes along with the artist. Due to the fact that many groups don't travel with all their gear, these artists have riders. They tend to be conservative in the riders, tend to simply state that certain manufactueres are un acceptable, So if for instance you have a PAC and you want to attract these type of acts they are going to demand a level of gear and manufacturer or they will not perform or be extremely unhappy.

So as an individual looking at maximizing their hard earned money to buy the most features for the least money, is very different from an organization that needs to maintain a reputation, and has to deliver a level of reliability . 

One major failure during a key event can cause far more financial damage either immediate, in refunds or long term where the reputation suffers and the facility or organization gets in essence black listed

Anyway just some thoughts

Sharyn


----------



## PhantomD (Nov 18, 2006)

This thread is about Yamaha vs. Peavey, not Behringer!!!

Although I agree with the above. Always use the best equipment you have to hand.


----------



## stjc15 (Nov 19, 2006)

PhantomD said:


> This thread is about Yamaha vs. Peavey, not Behringer!!!


When I started this thread, I was looking for the opinions of the people in this forum about Peaveys and Yamahas. I also asked if people had any suggestions. Even though this thread has talked about anything from Digital boards to Behringer, it has been very helpful.
Some of you have stated that digital mixers are a good way to go for High Schools. I will have to disagree with you, and this is why. Schools are under financial stress, as also mentioned earlier, and digital boards are not cheap. If you come from a small school, like I do, you know money is not expendable. Buying anything of major value takes months of research and bid finding to make sure what you are getting will work properly and be of the best value. There is no room for error. Because of this, high priced digital mixers are usually out of the question. Also, in general, high schools do not need or use everthing that a digital mixer has to offer. With what a typical high school uses, an analog board, an equalizer, amp, and a peamp or two (maybe), are all that is needed. The sound system is not used so extensively that compresson, feedback detectors, etc, are needed. Add the cost together, and the price is far less. I admit, this is very frustrating, for the simple fact that being a tight wad on money makes it very hard to find what you want. But that is the situation schools are in, especially small schools.
Thank you every one that has inserted their opinions. I hope I get to read more.


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 19, 2006)

With the caution that advice is worth what you pay for it, let me add some additional comments, with the spirit of putting forth a perspective.

It is interesting some of the negative comments re: this thread is about Yamaha and Peavey, and the implication of why are we talking about Behringer and Digital.

Sometimes, especially on forums such as this one, someone may ask a question but for some of the more experienced it gives the impression that they are really only asking part of the question or maybe the wrong question. Sort of like asking the doctor if you have lung cancer, he says no, but neglects to say you have colon cancer, because you failed to ask if you have cancer. Poor analogy but I think makes the point.

The mixing equipment that is available today is divided in to various levels


At the bottom end there are what some professionals might term cheap poorly constructed, supported and designed products. Do they have a place in the market, sure since they do continue to sell, but it is one thing to make the purchase decision based on blind faith and ads and another to make the decision fully understanding the potential and likely issues.
IMO in a school environment these products are not good purchases, because they tend to break down, have poor quality, and don't last long, so since schools tend to be a "hard on equipment" environment, and also one that tends to keep things for a long time, the cost of the item over its life is a factor. Lower level "cheap" products have performance factors but also reliability and longevity factors.

If you are looking at the lower end based on a question as open ended as are Yamaha and Peavey bad, begs for some expansion, and at the low end anyone familiar with these price points, Behringer is a major player. To a certain degree Carvin is also in this price level.


Today the entire mixing market and soundesign space is well along in the digital vs analog discussion. People tend to bring impressions to discussions and many times they are based on quite outdated information.

Today if you look at pricing in the lower end but not absolute bottom end of the market, the analog prices and the lower end Digital prices are pretty much the same. Reason is pretty simple, analog, hardware based solutions have a cost of components, manufacturing, physical connectivity etc, vs a digital mixer where much of the functions are done in software. So to make a statement re digital are more expensive is not true anymore.

Since this forum has a lot of students, I think it is worth raising points that some people might think are not the best way forward from a learning experience.

One is it is easy, but dangerous to approach an area where a person might not be all that experienced, and make statements as to what is needed and not needed in a dogmatic fashion. There is an old saying the wise man knows what he doesn't know. It would be like saying to a classical piano teacher that they don't need a proper piano and that a casio keyboard from walmart is all that is needed. Fact is the decision process is a lot more complex.

The other dangerous point is to take a position that properly justifying a buying decision is not worth the effort. Sure School districts have tight budgets, and they are frugal with the funds, but that is why it is even more important to adequately research and document, and justify what you really need. Again in a educational setting, students should learn to research and justify and documents their hypothesis etc. In my experience if you go to any school district believeing that you are not going to get something, and are not willing to justify why you need what you are requesting, you run the risk of always coming up short on what you really need.

Mixing equipment in a High School environment is a learning tool. It offers the students the opportunities to learn, and can be a part of the curriculum. The skills learned, are extremely valuable, and the effective use of various digital tools are an important part of the learning experience. Again when we were talking about digital equipment that was many times the cost of the analog solution it was one thing, that is not the case anymore. For instance if you were looking at the very bottom end Behringer offers a digital solution. It certainly brings along all the Behringer issues, but it does provide for the digital function. 

It is interesting in the threads that some the people with considerable experience point out the importance of the tools, vs some of the people with limited experience point out that they are not needed.

Obviously people make decisions based on needs, budgets and personal preferences, if there were only one correct answer there would only be one system being sold. 

I do agree never settle for anything less than excellence!

Sharyn


----------



## stjc15 (Nov 20, 2006)

SHARYNF said:


> It is interesting in the threads that some the people with considerable experience point out the importance of the tools, vs some of the people with limited experience point out that they are not needed.


I will agree with you that I have a limited experience. Seeing as I have had to teach myself everything I know, I can guarantee that there are some holes in what I should know. Thus, the reason I joined this forum. I made the statements that I did because I have gone for years without some of the tools you use everyday. For instance, my church doesn't even have an eq board! I really appriciate your input. It is very frustrating to work with half the equipment you should, and then get bashed down when you ask for it because 1. we haven't needed it for years and 2. I am only a student and can't poosible know what we need. I am the only person in the district who has any incling what is going on, and they won't listen!

I understand that there are things that I don't know, and those are the things that I am trying to learn. It is just very aggrivating when people think that you don't know what is going on because of your age. I don't know everything, but I do know a lot.


----------



## avkid (Nov 20, 2006)

PhantomD said:


> Question: Are Yamaha & Peavey Bad?
> Answer: NoWe have a Peavey head here that is about 20 years old and it is still one helluva amazing power amp (with a repair or two rather recently).


Same here, M3000 Power Amp in almost perfect condition minus a small XLR connection fix a year ago.


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 20, 2006)

HI JC
Did not mean to pick on you. Personally I think is is really sad when older less experienced people tend to ignore the wisdom of the young.

I guess the advice I would give you is to hold firmly to your beliefs, if you think something is needed, do the research, document it and learn to campaign for it. You might not win, but eventually you at least get to say I told you so. There is a tendency for some young people to get frustrated and give up too easily. Basically as you go on thru a career in what ever you decide, being able to persuade people to your viewpoint is a very valuable skill. There is a tendancy on some organizations to very clearly take the position, we did not have it in the past, we don't need it in the future. In some cases the rapid deployment of pc's has weakened this argument.

I do hear and understand your frustration, but and I know this is probably hard to take, you simply cannot give up until you have presented your case as well as you can.

Many times people in your situation find that seeking out some outsider that endorses your position can also work.
GRANTED at the end of the day, some organizations are not going to change , and that is sad, but the skill you learn in arguing for your case is valuable.
Sadly no matter how experienced you are or now long your list of credits is, some people are not going to listen.

Sometimes a way around all this is to have a situation where perhaps some of the needed additional equipment could be rented, and then the "proof is in the pudding" might work. Of course some people simply don't want to listen ever.


Anyway, not to pick on you, I think there is a subtle point of "I know and can justify and have done so but they still have not changed" is different than they will not listen so why bother even trying. 

Sharyn


----------



## JSFox (Nov 21, 2006)

JC, Yamaha and Peavey are not bad. In a school environment you have to look at overall quality and longevity and that where I think in general Yamaha is a much better option. Most of their stuff holds up very well in tough environments. Thats not to say that Peavey, Behringher, Midas, A&H, or Mackie won't hold up in this environment as well, but for my money I'd go Yamaha.

As you're preparing for asking for the money you need to get all of your ducks in a row. Talk to other local schools to see what they have so you can use them as a possible example ("every other school in the state has upgraded their sound board since electricity was invented!"). How will this equipment benefit the school (better sound quality for assemblies, plays, parent nights as well as the learning opportunity it will afford students). Students who learn good sound engineering can use it for a wide range of good career choices including sound engineer (FOH, Mons, Studio, TV, Film, etc.), equipment design engineer, etc. 

A good theatre program is a magnet for attracting good students from other schools (if you're open enrollment) and theatre students are generally good students from a GPA and discipline standpoint. These are the kinds of people you WANT in your school. Theatre also teaches self-discipline, project management, poise, and self-confidence among a host of other good attributes.

And as so well put above - Don't Give Up. But, be respectfull.


----------



## CURLS (Nov 21, 2006)

JC great question! 
I'm going to attempt to keep my answer short and concise.

Both _companies_ offer great products ranging from consoles which this discussion is about to watercraft, motorcycles, backline equipment, and well most of you got the point of that sentence.

With that said my main point is:
Yamaha:
-Had great analog boards that are still legends today before midas had it's big upspurt, who was the king before xl4? the pm4k!
_Very intuitive and to the point mixers.
_*however* one of there biggest downfalls are grounding problems and noise floors. if you have ever operated one of the old analog yahmahas your grinning right now.
-in digital thot look who is the new road king of this last summer the 5d cheap and indestructable all over riders

Peavey:
_Very solid backline gear translates to good electronice componets in there mixers. 
_ I believe that if i was buying a quality product from peavey i would have to choose a powered mixer or a very small below 12 ch. mixer they are durable for small productions. Thats where there strong suit is.
_Although i remember when i went to ldi a few years ago they came out with a church series geared towards first time/volunteer users that looked very intuitive.

HOPE THIS HELPS

TURKEY DAY IS RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER!!!


----------



## BNBSound (Nov 22, 2006)

The thing I never liked about either the Yamaha or Peavey consoles of any size is the lack of headroom. And even in the larger Yammy desks the EQ's aren't particularly useful.


----------



## avkid (Nov 22, 2006)

CURLS said:


> _Although i remember when i went to ldi a few years ago they came out with a church series geared towards first time/volunteer users that looked very intuitive.


Their sanctuary series is quite intriguing.
http://www.sanctuary-series.com/


----------



## mbandgeek (Nov 22, 2006)

the last few posts proved my point very well. Yes behringer does copy other companies products, and yes i will give you they do sound pretty bad, but for a school scenerio, $500 is a good investment when it is either a old yamaha 24 channel where 10-12 of the channal don't work, or a new behringer. in a school setting sound quality is not that important. And plus if it breaks within a couple of months, you can convince the school board to go with a mackie, or allen and heath, midas, or whatever.

i also agree that this post isn't about behringer, but i have the right to defend myself.

Don't get mad at me because of my views.


----------



## audioslavematt (Nov 22, 2006)

mbandgeek said:


> the last few posts proved my point very well. Yes behringer does copy other companies products, and yes i will give you they do sound pretty bad, but for a school scenerio, $500 is a good investment when it is either a old yamaha 24 channel where 10-12 of the channal don't work, or a new behringer. in a school setting sound quality is not that important. And plus if it breaks within a couple of months, you can convince the school board to go with a mackie, or allen and heath, midas, or whatever.
> i also agree that this post isn't about behringer, but i have the right to defend myself.
> Don't get mad at me because of my views.



So what you're saying is you want to go back to the school board or who ever approves your spending and say "We're sorry, that Behringer mixer we bought a few months ago was a bad investment. Can we spend $1000 on a mixer that will actually last after we wasted $500?" Good luck finding anybody in power that will buy that one. This is why you save your money and go for quality. Making wise investments builds your credibility in the long run.


----------



## tenor_singer (Nov 22, 2006)

I'd like to interject here that the Behringer mixer that I purchased back in 1995 is still going strong with only one minor little problem. I do, though, send in all equipment over the summer for routine maintenance and cleaning.

For a school like mine whose drama program was virtually destroyed, that performed in a gym, had no sound system and had an administration that was loath to give any starting money for proper equipment, my $499.00 24-channel, 4 bus mixer was very appealing.

You do what you can with what you have. Just care for it properly and you shouldn't have any problems.


----------



## cutlunch (Nov 22, 2006)

I agree maybe Behringer did do some copying of products which they shouldn't have. But I doub't they aren't the only ones. Look at some of the boards of the last 25 years and you will find some look quite similar in layout and features. Who came first soundcraft or mackie or yamaha? Which was the first manufacturer to add sub groups? You can't tell me that some engineer didn't see a feature he liked on another manufacturer's board and designed into his.

While we are on the subject of copying, unless you have a genuine IBM computer all the PC's were copied from them. This was done initally in a highly dubios manner. Why don't people complain about all these computer companies?

I agree that sometimes Behringers products may fail but then so do mackie, yamaha, soundcraft. I don't believe you would find any manufacturer who has not had a sound desk fail under warranty.

One thing behringer has done is make audio equipment more affordable to more people. We now have people who can have a home studio which they couldn't afford before. Yes it won't be studio quality but when you talk about the difference of $1000 for 32 chanels compared to $20000 for a studio grade 32 chanels. In some situations such as broadway where a show runs for years yes you need a board that can handle daily wear and tear. In a school situation you don't need to spend that much when it may only do a few shows a year. You obviously don't want it failing to soon but this also has a lot to do with how it is looked after. Don't take care of the expensive board and you are likely to see it fail too. A cheaper board that is well looked after may outlast it.

The aim should be no matter how expensive our equipment that we teach people how to look after it. What's the old saying " a craftsman never blames his tools".

Yes if you have the money and can afford better equipment go for it. But in some cases I would rather see a cheaper 32 channel board purchased then a more expensive 16 channel board that will soon be out of capacity for what you do.

I was talking to a couple of guys who do sound for movies, one of which a large number of you will have seen. We were discussing different brands, as you do. I mentioned Allen and Heath and they rubbished it. So I thought I would stir the pot and mention Behringer. I was thinking well if they don't like A & H they won't like Behringer but no, they turned around and said some of the behringer gear is good.

Sorry for the rant but I just get sick of this constant Behringer bashing which is not always based on facts. Also sometimes I think brand elitism comes into this. I bet I could go to some places with really good gear but the sound is lousy because of the operator. In reverse cheaper gear but great sound because the operator knows what they are doing.

When I look at electronic products to buy I tend to enter the product name into google with the word "review" and read what people have written. I find this is better then forums at times because they tend to be more lists of pro's and con's.

Let's try not to setup people to fail by saying you can't get great sound from cheaper equipment.


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 23, 2006)

Some interesting points
Behringer was taken to court re blatant copying and lost the case.

It is one thing to copy the design, it another to simply take the unit apart, strip down the pc boards layer by layer and photographically reproduce the same exact board, down to specifically placed non functioning layout placed there solely for detection.

Be careful of online reviews, many of the manufactures both place positive reviews of their gear, and negative reviews of the competition.

Anyone is certainly free to accept or decline any advice, and advice is worth what you paid for it. 

Anyone is free to buy recommend or use what ever they please. Quality is something that cannot be tested into a product, and basically it comes down to a trade off of quality interms of performance and reliability. 

Behringer has carved out a market section for themselves. Some of their products have found some acceptance, some of the amps, and initially when it came out the dsp system. Over time a number of people have had problems, and have had to have the unit replaced. If you are in a non time critical situation, this might work just fine. If on the other hand the system dies during a performance it might be different.

Maintenance does help improve the longevity of products, but that is true of any product. An experienced design person can open up a product and look to see how the quality of the assembly is done, the selection of individual components, and point out where corners have been cut. 

Using the product every night, in many cases helps it to last longer, it is just the occasional use, stored in the closet taken out once in a while that some of the cheaper products tend to fail.

Many of these products don't have any real ability to be maintained, sliders and pots are sealed, so it is not a "Maintenence" issue or item. I think just dismissing negative opinions on a product as product or vendor bashing misses the point. People asked for opinions, and they were given. Obviously if no one ever bought Behringer gear they would have gone out of business years ago.

Personally I think a high school environment is a pretty harsh environment, and that ruggedized gear is the way to go vs gear that is more designed for a bedroom studio, but again that is just an opinion. 

If you were to talk to hundreds of professional sound people, with experience on the lower end of the equipment scale, people who are in a closely related a space as a school environment, I believe that you would find on the analog side of things most people today recommending the Allen and Heath Gear. Main reason is that A&H has implimented an excellent support organization and that their mix wiz and gl 2400 series has proven to be an excellent value. On the digital side of things Yamaha 01v96 has received the same level of high support, AND many of the people are using the Behringer ADA8000 mic preamp units with it so it is not a no Behringer no way deal. This is looking at equipment budgets typically in the under 2500 dollar range. Many people had and do continue to use Mackie, most have found that as they age they have become problematic, have a major problem with RF noise and a design problem with the ribbon cables, and Mackie is expensive to fix, BUT there are still alot of 1604,24-4,32-4 out there, when asked what they are upgrading to , the two above solutions tend to be recommended. The new Mackie Onyx line is still a bit early to tell, some people seem to be impressed. Soundcraft had a good reputation, had some products that had issues and were dropped and has been competing on the lower end with A&H.

Peavey has been making in roads on the smaller line array side of things, they bought Crest a while back, but never seemed to be able to break into the mixer business in a major way, I think Mackie was too strong. Carvin entered this area also with small step up from Behringer type of an offering, and again the experience has been "mixed"

Once you get on the upper end, for the most part it is Yamaha and Midas domininated, some soundcraft, digico etc et.

Yamaha has been focusing on filling in the digital market quite well from the 01v06 and up.


I think some of my comments were mis interpreted. Personally I believe today that a digital mixer offers the best combination of price performance and function, and as a learning experience gives the person using it a wide range of tools to learn and use to bring out the best sound performance possible. 
The comment about a workman never complains about his tools is usefull but not always relevant to this space, mainly because it assumed he had the tools, a workman being given the task of planing a large board probably would complain if he were only to have a hammer and a screwdriver.

So I an not saying that unless you have the finest SSL console in the world with millions of dollars worth of the finest outboard gear are you able to get great sound, but it is easy to dismiss the array of tools that DO make a difference in the sound that are too expensive on an individual basis, but in a digital mixer setup can become affordable and available. You only need to look At the digital recording setups today with software plugins available to see just how effective and useful these tools can be.

But again, its horses for courses, each purchase decision can be made on its own merits. No one on this site is selling anyone anything, simply attempting to offer the best advice they can based on their experience.

It is like buying a car, you can read the adverts, look at owner comments, read magazine and tv program reviews or talk to the mechanics that fix them. Sometimes they all agree, many times they don't. It is up to the potential buyer to decide what opinions and information to pick and choose from. Since this is primarily an educational forum I think it is useful to have extended discussions, if nothing more than for a learning experience. 

Sharyn


----------



## cutlunch (Nov 23, 2006)

Sharyn I do agree with some of your statements. I disagree with your reference to my craftsman quote. I think you took it to the extreme. Maybe if you think of the difference between having digital effects and not then yes. I think more of it like a craftsman having to use a plane brought from Walmart as opposed to from a specialist tool store. The walmart plane might take longer to do the job and need sharpening more often. He might have to sand out more marks but the finished product can be just as good.

What I am worried about is that people might get so negative an attitude about certain products. This then might lead to that if they have to use them they don't try and get the best out of them. For example the sound doesn't quite sound right but they have heard these boards are so awful so much they think this is the best it gets. This is instead of maybe spending time trying to get the EQ better.

I agree digital boards are coming along but I would like to know from you full time sound people what percentage of events yo do use a digital board. Are we past the 50% or 75% mark yet. I doubt the usage would be anywhere this high at school or community venues yet.

Could someone please tell me which digital boards can be run in manual mode purely the same as analouge board with manual knobs for eq, gain etc? 

I think it better for a student to learn on an analouge board. This is because they have to undertake each step of the process instead of pushing a cue button. I believe this because sound has more chance of going wrong and they need to know how to correct problems on the fly. Especially at schools where someone may take the wrong wireless mike in a changeover. Or an actor keeps changing their voice level from performance to performance.

How many people first learned to do sound on a digital board and if you did then you had to use an analouge board how easy was it for you?

I think it's a bit like getting your drivers licence. Some people only ever drove an automatic to get their licence. Then when they have to drive a manual for work they don't know how. (A Buffy the Vampire quote is floating around my brain at the moment). But the person who got their licence in a manual can normally adjust to driving an automatic fairly easily. Just as an aside here in NZ it use to be illegal to sit your licence in an automatic. They dropped this a while back but are now considering whether a persons licence should be marked that they can only drive an automatic.

I do agree schools need value for money ( which some digital boards maybe) but also I believe even in the theatre there should be a goal of teaching their students the basics.

Sharyn please don't take this as a personal attack on your ideas. I agree with you these issues need to be discussed. It is a lot easier to do it on this forum then some other forums where it would have descended into a flame war by now.


----------



## mbandgeek (Nov 23, 2006)

well anyway bacl on topic. I think it has been proven that no board is absolute junk, even behringer. It all depends on the money that you have to spend.
If you have a yamaha or peavey that works and sounds good to you, i believe that you shouldn't shell out some money to replace it. The investment would never be worth it. you will always be comparing your new board to your old one.

I am sorry for stealing your post, it wasn't my intention. my intention is to say that even behringer sounds decent compared to nothing.


----------



## CURLS (Nov 23, 2006)

Well ive already posted on this whole topic now i just want to paraphrase on what cutlunch was asking about in regards to digital boards and there usage.

Depending on the group and the type of concert and the rider is dependent on the choice of board first of all.
I would have to say that the fulltime touring groups are easily above the 75 percent mark. Side note I could easily say that was almost a year ago. 
Having said that the touring groups that pick up regional sound are still budgetarily using analouge boards at 90 percent analougue one off shows. 

Hope that answers that question and on the second note. Yes, I think most highschoolers don't need a digital board in there high school. I have NEVER met a high schooler that knows enough about how analouge sound works in the first place to be wanting a digital board. 
I remember when i did sound all through high school there was no way in hell i knew all about the possibilites of analouge to even be able to take on the grasp of digital.
I will stand behind that comment!

Ohh and since i lastly forgot, i dont think i have run across a single digital board where you can keep the analouge feel suggested by manufactures big digitals or small. You really have to revert your thinking sometimes! But, i will say like i did in another post stay away from the mackie tt24 i think there analouge line is great but there digital line has been the most troublesome at the last company i worked for. 

Happy TURKEY DAY!!!


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 24, 2006)

Before we beat this thing to death
Production riders tend to ask for the top brands, midas, yamaha, soundcraft some will accept A & H many will include a statement no Mackie BEHRINGER OR PEAVEY. Many will on small productions allow for the use of the Yamaha digital famliy 
The high schoolers that you have met based on your comment were never taught properly. To dismiss a high school students ability to learn and use a piece of equipment IMO is a serious mistake

If we took that same approach we would have to also say they could never learn to play a musical instrument, write a computer program, develop a game, design a web site, fix a car, fly a plane, etc. do ld for show, record a cd etc.

The way forward is definitely digital, the feel has been improved all the time, and if you want to train the person for the future, learning the digital approach provides a much simpler reverse implimentation back on analog than the transition from analog to digital. High school students today are totally capable of learning menu strutures, navigation, and also the theory and practice behind sound design. It is a serious mistake to take ones own personal experience and what they were or were not capable of accomplishing and transfering it over to others coming along behind. The when I was in high school I know i could not do it, therefore no one else can is simply not a valid argument. 
Sharyn


----------



## jbeutt (Nov 24, 2006)

I understand the progression of discourse, but I think this thread has been seriously hijacked by people with a bit of an agenda. I think the original question has been slightly overlooked, but I'd like to chime in anyway.

No, it isn't a _serious_ mistake to universalize personal experience. It's an efficient one. 

It's just as bad to take examples of good students who were quick learners and apply that universally as it is for bad students.

We're talking about high school. Apply the concept you're talking about to chemistry. They do not request nor are they expected to have advanced nor even very current equipment or facilities.
High schools just don't accommodate people's specific interests. They operate by giving a similar education to all students and exposing them equally to different subjects. They have to make each of those subjects accessible to all the students as well, which certainly hurts the ones with specific interests in a topic, but is an easier system to implement.

Let's get real. Audio is a specific field with far fewer participants than there are musicians, programmers, mechanics or even pilots. Those with interests in it work independently to find out more and get educations in it.
It's certainly disappointing to those with a biased interest in it, but schools cannot be expected to pay for nor maintain a quality _theatre_, let alone audio program.

Digital is obviously the future, but just as with chemistry, english or any other subject one learns, there are unchanging fundamentals that are necessary to understand _in order_ to learn the current techniques or applications in said field. You can get as many digital components as you want, but ultimately live sound starts and ends analog. For a long while still, audio will consist of many analog components.

I think, sharyn, you're being hypocritical. Not nearrrrrly every theatre, hall, club, or rider has a digital board. Just because it's what _you_ use, or what people _should_ be using, doesn't mean that's reality. I can not picture an audio program that doesn't first teach analog systems putting out knowledgeable students. I think it would be leaving out major components and may produce techs _only_ able to work on digital systems.
I do think, though, digital technology helps those with better visual learning capabilities and understanding. Whether audio is the best place for visual people, I don't know, although I'm one of them so I shouldn't talk. 

I think a better question is not how able are people to learn, but how motivated. The reality of many high school theatre programs is that they're seen as obligatory by the school and the administration. They always consist of students with, at best, a passing interest in theatre. I, for one, think that public schools are about the worst place for anyone who wants an education. I think students of every type with any interest are hurt by the bland equality and consistency between subjects that are forced on them.


----------



## Chris15 (Nov 27, 2006)

I shall at this point say that I waas talking to someone the other day who said that he would not touch a Yamaha with a 10 foot pole, the reasoning being that it was cheap and that you get what you pay for. (As a side note, he was at the time mixing on a Euphonix, recording for broadcast.)

Each and every product has its pros and cons, it is a case of balancing all of these things to choose what is best for the application.


----------



## PhantomD (Nov 27, 2006)

Chris15 said:


> I shall at this point say that I waas talking to someone the other day who said that he would not touch a Yamaha with a 10 foot pole, the reasoning being that it was cheap and that you get what you pay for.



I vehemently disagree. Yamaha mixers are reliable workhorses.


----------



## Chris15 (Nov 27, 2006)

Now I did say that it was not me who held that opinion. It was the audio engineer for ABC TV's Outside Broadcast...


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 27, 2006)

I think Chris' comment just serves to show that everyone has their own opinion and the answers will vary all over the lot. Sometimes the off hand comment from someone such as ABC might refer to a specific model, or might have been based on personal experience. Someone who has been let down with a failure at a key point in a production will tend to have a less than thrilling view on a piece of equipment.

This thread has brought out alot of opinions, and that is a good thing, and not everyone will have to agree with any position.

I made my comments from a very specific perspective, and really had little to do with what equipment I use personally.

I do tend to try to look to the future, what direction technology and products are taking, and what will offer the most function, quality at the best price.
I don't agree with comparing theater and audio programs in High Schools to chemistry. My comments re digital as being a favored solution was based on what I see in the industry.

A few years ago, people would have said perhaps that to teach video editing you needed to teach a dual tape with vision mixer and stand alone titler system, TODAY most people would agree I believe that Non linear editing computer based solutions are the way to go

A number of years ago people would have talked about analog tape recording and tape splicing etc as the way to teach audio production, yet today the dramatic drop in prices and increase in functionality briings even the power of pro tools at a very attractive price point.

I believe that the functions learned on a digital mixer are a superset of the analog mixer, and that they are not mutually exclusive and that there are no functions that are learned on the analog mixer that are lost on the digital. The interface is different, but at the same time manufacturers are striving to provide as easy an interface as possible, many times duplicating the analog inerface on a channel basis.

I believe that in a rapidly changing technology area such as audio and video that it is a mistake to take ones personal difficulty with a specific technology and use that in the vein of "I know when I was... I could not have done it"

I think that it is very common to confuse lack of experience and youth with the inability to learn a more complex system. In my experience the learning ability for technology difference between high school and college is not all that great. Classes that are based on pervious experience and knowledge might be different, but again IMO learning an analog desk and learning a digital desk with todays teen's technical orientation is not all that great as might be assumed.

There certainly are different opinions, and perspectives, and I think a great advantage of this forum is the ability for various people with various backgrounds to argue their case.

My "argument" would be that in todays market, the advances in technology on a software based digital solution, have allowed for significantly more technolgy to be included in a product at a price point where in the recent past a analog solution was only possible. From a learning experience there is little to be lost by going with a digital solution, and a lot to be gained

Sharyn


----------



## Chris15 (Nov 28, 2006)

I do agree that digital is the way forward. Further I do agree that an individual's preference is based on a number of factors and as a result of this, everyone has their own opinions. People tend to form opinions easily and it is rather hard to change opinions once they are formed. People are stubborn. One bad experience, be it with an early model or whatever can be put you off a product for life. There is also the issue of linking products and purposes. What is most suitable for one application can be very difficult to use in another. That is why they make monitor and FOH mixers as different products.


----------



## PhantomD (Nov 29, 2006)

Chris15 said:


> Now I did say that it was not me who held that opinion. It was the audio engineer for ABC TV's Outside Broadcast...



Who cares. I vehemently disagree.


----------



## Andy_Leviss (Nov 29, 2006)

This is the problem with casting a wide net. Yamaha makes some crappy consoles, some alright ones, and some great consoles. You can't dismiss them all together, nor can you say they're all great. Take each on its own. Give me an M3000, I'll laugh at you. A PM3500 or newer, or one of the higher end digitals, and I'm cool. Not a Midas, but there's a time and a place for each, and given that an XL8 isn't a viable option in most situations, in circumstances where the benefits of the digital console outweigh the better sound of the Midas, I'll happily take the Yammy.


----------



## Chris15 (Dec 2, 2006)

PhantomD said:


> Who cares. I vehemently disagree.



And that is your right. If everyone agreed on everything we would have a very boring world.


----------



## PhantomD (Dec 2, 2006)

Chris15 said:


> If everyone agreed on everything we would have a very boring world.



I vehemently agree.  

I must admit though, we do have a new Yamaha 24-ch unpowered mixer, and after its first trip in a road case the right-hand channel ceased working on the output.


----------



## Chris15 (Dec 2, 2006)

PhantomD said:


> I vehemently agree.
> I must admit though, we do have a new Yamaha 24-ch unpowered mixer, and after its first trip in a road case the right-hand channel ceased working on the output.



Sounds like a ribbon cable that has come loose to me... The sad fact is that it is not a manufacturer specific problem. Something like thing can happen in any mixers (expect I guess for those ones that use a single PCB, but that creates far more problems in my opinion.


----------



## SHARYNF (Dec 2, 2006)

Look for a ribbon cable as mentioned or a bad solder joint on a connection. One of the problems in recent years is that the manufacturers are being forced to switch over to lead free solder based on EU toxic waste directives. The new solder is harder to work with, but more importantly harder to tell visually a good or bad solder connection. Problem is if your board is made with the new solder, it is totally incompatible with your standard home solder etc, so it gets trickie to fix it. I also suggest that it is well worth the small price to order the service manual.

Sharyn


----------



## Chris15 (Dec 5, 2006)

SHARYNF said:


> One of the problems in recent years is that the manufacturers are being forced to switch over to lead free solder based on EU toxic waste directives. The new solder is harder to work with, but more importantly harder to tell visually a good or bad solder connection.



Don't you just love it when people come up with good ideas and don't consider the knock on effect that they might have? I think I also heard that the lead free solder tends to dry joint more easily than the old stuff, so I can see that problems are going to start being more prevalent. Sadly this will affect people at all levels, from high end manufacturers right down to low end.


----------



## SHARYNF (Dec 5, 2006)

Not to steer this thread into yet another direction, but the implications for our industry is really dramatic.

One is that it is not easy to determine with equipment built around the time of the change over which type of solder was used, but also that the new solder connections in many cases look like cold joints

If you mix the two solders you have problems

A bit more subtle problem is that manufactures have a choice of either re engineering a product, or how to repair a product with spares, and in many cases the easier choice is to just drop support. In general the new directives encourage a move away from using sockets, and to surface mount devices. This then reduces the needs for components that are in more traditional "packages" that can be socketed, or more easily replaced, and with the low quantities of parts for the audio and video/ lighting industry some of the semiconductors are likely to rapidly become obsolete.

Anyway, I agree with Chris, it was a decision that on the surface to some people could have looked like a good idea, but is likely to have very negative consequences for our industry. Even though it is coming out of the Eu since most products are designed for world wide distribution, it has consequences for all of us.

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/aug2005/tc2005089_9729_tc_215.htm

Sharyn


----------



## PhantomD (Dec 6, 2006)

Meh easier to pull the manufacturer's service tech out of their way to fix the problem.

Each Yamaha desk is hand crafted with a serial number, so if there are a number of problems from the one assembler guy, then they can get onto him and fix the problem instead of a nightmare production line situation.


----------



## herr_highbrau (Dec 15, 2006)

My 2p worth now, as a person who works on pro audio, but is known to help those with less budget out.

Basically when it comes to Yamaha and Peavy, its a matter of cash. If you have shedloads, go Midas, D&B, Lexicon, or someone like that.

If you don't, then Yamaha's low end stuff and peavy are perfect 

High end stuff is nice. If I had the choice between a peavey and a D&B, I'd go D&B. But often, you don't get the choice.

It's easy enough to make Peavy and Yamaha equipment sound good. You just need to know what you're doing. No matter what kit your using, whether its an MC7L or an EMX2000 (an early 90s yamaha powered mixer ), you still have to set up the system correctly - ring out, set delays if need be, use proper mic placement, just generally get things right.

I learned on an 8 channel powered mixer hooked up to a pair of 8" full rangers, for my 200 person church. I still use what I learned there, no matter how big or important the gig.

So overall, Peavy and Yamaha are not bad, if you use it correctly


----------



## PhantomD (Dec 17, 2006)

There's an article on Hartley Peavey in CX magazine.

Seems like quite a great and knowledgeable guy for sure.


----------



## nicsim (Oct 3, 2008)

Not really.

My venue, has quite alot of Yamaha mixers. The pre-amps are good or should I say more "musical" sounding. A good choice for bands, vocals

Peavey on the other hand has Hi-Z inputs on their mixers, which makes it useful for guitars.

All in all, It depends on how you use the mixer.


----------



## What Rigger? (Oct 4, 2008)

Does Peavey suck? I don't think sooooooo! And neither does Ted Nugent, so there!

I've beat the living H3ll outta my Peavey 1x12 bass combo for 8 years now over thousands of miles of transport, playing indoors, outdoors, and my neighbors garage (scarier than it sounds) and it is BOMBPROOF!

Yamaha makes nice mixers, really good bass guitars (if you're not a snob, you Zon players!), and even better dirt bikes. Doug Henry forever!


----------



## FMEng (Oct 4, 2008)

A well made analog console will always be more reliable than a digital one, and far easier to repair when they do break. An analog console is more likely to develop a problem where most of the functionality remains and the problem can be worked around. If you lose one input channel, or the right channel of the stereo main bus, the show can still go on. The digital console is more likely to lose a large chunk or all of its functionality all at once. It's just inherent in the architecture.

The service department at your local sound shop can fix any analog console. Unless the problem is with the power supply section, or a broken jack or control, that digital wonder box will likely have to go to the manufacturer. 

Long term parts availability for any digital audio product is questionable. The problem is that the semiconductor companies don't keep the current DSP chips in production for very long. All the equipment makers can do is warehouse the quantity they think they will need for supporting the product for a reasonable number of years. If they guess wrong and that part fails more frequently than they expect, they run out of parts and can no longer support the product. In the analog world, op-amp chips are fairly interchangeable, and older varieties are still in production.

And then there is sensitivity to bad power. That analog console may bark a little with really nasty AC power, but it'll run. The digital console.... well, "we apologize to our audience for having to pause the show while we reboot our audo board."

I'm not anti-digital consoles. They have their places, but they also have their limitations and you have to understand what they are. Choose the right tool for the right job.


----------



## Pip (Oct 6, 2008)

Yamaha: No, absolutely not. they obviously have a wide range of desks, from amateur designed to professional designed. I am currently mixing on a Yamah M7CL and it is hand down the best digital board I have seen. They nailed the UI (in general, of course. There are a few complaints, but that's a given) because they went to ETC for help on it. It's the closest feel to mixing on an analog that I have ever felt on a digital, which is huge coming from me, I used to be pretty anti digital basically because of UI. We actually have 2 M7CLs, one for FOH and one for monitor mix, and I love them. I log into my user account and my user-definable softkeys are what i've set them to for the shortcuts I commonly make use of, my shows are all there... it's a great board. In short - Yamaha makes great equipment, definitely usable in the professional sound world.

Peavey: Not BAD, but you're a lot less likely to see Peavey equipment in professional installations. Their equipment is great for amateur mixing, smaller churches, etc. But they're generally thought of as non-full professional use. This is similar to Mackie - they're fantastic boards, they're what I grew up on, but I've seen many tours say that you can't host them if you have a Mackie desk. They're great boards, but they lack some features that are very commonly used in the professional world. As an example: Matrices. youd on't see matrices on Mackie boards, and they're commonly used for recording live gigs - hence the touring groups rejecting them.

Anyway, I think you probably get my point... Sorry that got so long-winded.  Hope I helped!


----------



## Chris15 (Oct 6, 2008)

A well regarded Television audio director down here uses either Studer or a pair of Yamaha DM2000s. Yamaha consoles, particularly towards the higher end of the range are well regarded. The PM series of analog boards weren't quite Midas, but were still a well regarded board and still are for those who don't favour digital.

As to dodgy power, well having shares in a UPS manufacturer is probably not a bad move...

Analog audio gets hums and buzzes or gets quieter. Digital clicks or just doesn't work at all...


----------



## Pip (Oct 6, 2008)

Chris15 said:


> Analog audio gets hums and buzzes or gets quieter. Digital clicks or just doesn't work at all...



Good point. Same issue between analog clipping and digital clipping... Digital can be bad news lol


----------



## jdandreas09 (Oct 9, 2008)

asking about brands is like asking about politics. my advice is to mix on what you know how to fix, so when it does sompthing wierd you dont have to look like a idiot infront of the othor staff. reputation is all you have and is what gets you jobs.


----------



## Pip (Oct 9, 2008)

jdandreas09 said:


> asking about brands is like asking about politics. my advice is to mix on what you know how to fix, so when it does sompthing wierd you dont have to look like a idiot infront of the othor staff. reputation is all you have and is what gets you jobs.



AHaha good point.


----------

