Digital Boards - Sound Quality

C

Chuck Simon

Junior
Jan 19, 2011
332
1
0
Like just about everyone else that hasn't yet gone digital, I am considering it. I have used the LS9 and I like it, but the price of the Personus makes it look very attractive. I have gone most of my life without motorized faders, so that is not a big deal to me. My main concern is sound quality. I have used the LS9 with a system different than mine, so I cannot make an accurate judgement of it's sound quality and I have never used the Presonus in a live situation. So, how does the sound compare between the Yamaha and the Presonus. I would like to hear from those of you who have had the opportunity to compare the two boards in actual use.

I currenty use Allen and Heath consoles, GL2 and GL2200 with my system.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

In the end, it's not going to matter. The increased feature set and convenience over an analog rig with its associated stacks of outboard are going to far outweigh any loss of sound quality.

If you were to listen to the same band on the same rig mixed by both an LS9 and a GL2200 with mediocre outboard, I almost guarantee the LS9 is going to sound better, because all the additional processing in the LS9 is going to allow the engineer to get where he wants to be far, far easier.

Motorized faders are mainly useful when a console has layers. The Studiolive does not have layers, so flying faders would be essentially pointless in most cases.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

I haven't heard the StudioLive in any situation where I could make a subjective quality judgement (was actually playing through it, not running sound), but I have heard from a few folks that it sounds better than low-end Yamaha offerings.

That being said - I agree with Silas in that unless you are used to VERY nice analog gear through the whole chain, any non-junk digital board will greatly improve your overall sound quality due to lack of accumulated noise from outboard gear, better EQ, large numbers of dynamics processors, etc. I would choose the board that has the features you need and weigh that as the most important thing. Both Yamaha and Presonus make workable gear.
 
TJ Cornish said:
I haven't heard the StudioLive in any situation where I could make a subjective quality judgement (was actually playing through it, not running sound), but I have heard from a few folks that it sounds better than low-end Yamaha offerings.

That being said - I agree with Silas in that unless you are used to VERY nice analog gear through the whole chain, any non-junk digital board will greatly improve your overall sound quality due to lack of accumulated noise from outboard gear, better EQ, large numbers of dynamics processors, etc. I would choose the board that has the features you need and weigh that as the most important thing. Both Yamaha and Presonus make workable gear.
Click to expand...

+1

If I can get my hands in a studiolive I'd like to do a comparison between it and the 01v96 along with a some quality analogue gear for reference. I still have KT, BSS, Drawmer, Lexicon etc outboard for a couple picky clients who insist on it, but between nice outboard and a Crest XR mixer and the 01v96 I'll always take the latter because it's what I'm used to (ie I miss certain features if they're not there) and sounds fine.


Posted via Tapatalk app - lower standards may apply.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

You guys have just about defined what I think of a studiolive. That is a great alternative to a gl2200 withassorted low to medium level outboard.At this point, I would rather see the SL when I walk into the room and I am confident it is going to get me where I need to be. At this point, I have no complaints about the dynamics or effects. They are perfectly adequate to the systems/rooms I would expect to be connected to the SL.I also think that it is the patching options and ease of doing monitors from foh that make a ls9 stand out above the SL, not the sound.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

"ease of doing monitors from foh that make a ls9 stand out above the SL, not the sound."

Jay, could you please elaborate on that a little. I often have to run monitors fol, so you got my attention with that statement. So far, my experiences with the LS9 has been with someone else running monitors on stage.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

Chuck Simon said:
ease of doing monitors from foh that make a ls9 stand out above the SL, not the sound.

Jay, could you please elaborate on that a little. I often have to run monitors fol, so you got my attention with that statement.
Click to expand...

The SL has 'sends on encoders' as the only option - you have to click the 'mix' button for whatever mix you want and then adjust the levels per channel on the encoders of each channel. This is a huge pain if you're trying to adjust one input in a bunch of monitor mixes - you'll have to keep hitting 'mix' to select that mix and then adjust that channel encoder again.

The LS9 can do 'sends on fader' or it can also mix any individual channel to all the auxes. The latter option makes it much easier to go through the inputs mixing to a bunch of auxes.

The iLive way of doing auxes makes them both look like a joke, though.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

Silas Pradetto said:
The iLive way of doing auxes makes them both look like a joke, though.
Click to expand...

+1

Just had this discussion with Roland today. At some point this fall, I'm planning on an iLive/Roland listening comparison, same system, same band, system not 'tuned' to either console. If anyone in the Cities area has a Presonus, I wouldn't mind throwing it into the mix. There is an LS9 on site, and there can be a GL2800 (?) likely as well.

Caleb
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

Silas Pradetto said:
The iLive way of doing auxes makes them both look like a joke, though.
Click to expand...

Agree 100% i run an ilive 112 on a weekly basis doing both FOH and monitors from it and it cant be beat. With iLives new lower end models i would definitely look into them as it is very intuitive as far as the analog to digital transition and all of its processing and effects sound really good.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

Silas hit most of the points, but I was focusing on the ease of assigning channels in layers and the options for the output buses in the LS9.

For the small number of auxes in the studiolive, it is quicker to work one mix at a time, working on multiple channels, rather than be on one channel and adjusting it in multiple mixes.

It is not a no sale point for me, and as I said, I am pretty happy to find a studiolive at a show, but the LS9 definitely has more patching options. Actually, it is usually a bit more difficult for me to walk up to a LS9 because I usually have to pause and try to figure out how it is patched.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

Sound quality of the current generation of digital boards is really not something to worry about that much. They're all pretty decent. I do gigs with an LS9 with some very picky musicians (including the guy who brings his own Neumann u89 and Grace preamp), and nobody *ever* complains about the sound of the console.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

Scott Helmke said:
Sound quality of the current generation of digital boards is really not something to worry about that much. They're all pretty decent. I do gigs with an LS9 with some very picky musicians (including the guy who brings his own Neumann u89 and Grace preamp), and nobody *ever* complains about the sound of the console.
Click to expand...

I think the people that don't like the way the LS/9 and M7 sound don't like Yamaha mixers in general. Yammy seems to have a little characteristic coloration that follows *almost* every model and line. As you move down the food chain the mixers seem to exhibit more of "the character." The mixers that don't sound like the rest of the Yamaha world are the PM1D, DM1000/2000 and the 01v96.

That said, Dave Natale still mixes the Rolling Stones on a PM-4000 and I've yet to observe anyone discerning what console he's mixing on based on what arrives at the audience's ears.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

A local band came through with a Studiolive. They had QSC Kw rig. Pair of 12s and with the 18 subs.
I thought it sounded fine. No real difference between it and my 01v96. That being said the speakers being used will give the greatest change in sound.
I have not heard an 01v96 and Studiolive used on the same sound system at the same gig so its hard to say for sure. I'm sure they sound "somewhat" different but both will do the job and sound fine doing it.
The 01v96 is more of a swiss army knife. Loaded with a lot of extra features. If you don't want or need them then the Studiolive may be ok for you.

Douglas R. Allen
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

I spend a lot of time with Yamaha consoles and to me the 01v96 sounds different than the M7 (which sounds more like a PM-4K). I use DM-1000 and LS/9 on corpy AV gigs and the DM sounds better than the LS/9 (which sounds like an M7). We got an AVID SC-48 earlier this year and as I've spent more time with it the more I appreciate the relative transparency of it, but I really like being able to muck it up with some choice plug in processing :D

With the KW rig, would one notice a difference that could be definitively attributed to the mixer? Probably not. The choice of mixer has more impact on work flow than audio quality as heard by the audience.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

Tim McCulloch said:
I think the people that don't like the way the LS/9 and M7 sound don't like Yamaha mixers in general. Yammy seems to have a little characteristic coloration that follows *almost* every model and line. As you move down the food chain the mixers seem to exhibit more of "the character." The mixers that don't sound like the rest of the Yamaha world are the PM1D, DM1000/2000 and the 01v96.

That said, Dave Natale still mixes the Rolling Stones on a PM-4000 and I've yet to observe anyone discerning what console he's mixing on based on what arrives at the audience's ears.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
Click to expand...

I really dislike the sound of LS/9, M7, PM5D but would not say I don't like the sound of Yamaha mixers in general. The PM5000 sounds amazing. It is clean but not harsh. I also had a DM1000 and thought the mic pres and converters sounded quite good. What I can't get past on any Yamaha digital console are the dynamics. I cannot make them do anything that is pleasing to my ears.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

"The choice of mixer has more impact on work flow than audio quality as heard by the audience."

I think that is my answer!
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

I carried around great analog gear for tours and went to an LS9 about a year ago for the same reasons of having some more portable and flexible. I have great sounding shows on the desk, but I had a massive improvement once I started clocking the desk externally with a Big Ben. With each new release of StageMix there's more remote functions available.. I don't even pull a snake anymore. I leave the desk on the stage and mix from the iPad. I don't need to have my hands on the faders to feel like I am getting results. Being mobile is more important to me.

The other thing to consider is cross rental, is there a chance that someone will ever call and will they rent what you purchased. I felt like I had a better shot of someone cross renting my LS9 over something else.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

Kip Conner said:
I carried around great analog gear for tours and went to an LS9 about a year ago for the same reasons of having some more portable and flexible. I have great sounding shows on the desk, but I had a massive improvement once I started clocking the desk externally with a Big Ben. With each new release of StageMix there's more remote functions available.. I don't even pull a snake anymore. I leave the desk on the stage and mix from the iPad. I don't need to have my hands on the faders to feel like I am getting results. Being mobile is more important to me.

The other thing to consider is cross rental, is there a chance that someone will ever call and will they rent what you purchased. I felt like I had a better shot of someone cross renting my LS9 over something else.
Click to expand...

So Kip, using Smaart or TEF, did you do any before/after measurements of the desk? I won't name the band or tech, but I spent 20 minutes of precious sound check time with a BE that swore up and down we were hearing a major improvement in an M7 with his external clock.... except the desk was still running on the internal.

So as JR often says, if we can hear a difference we should be able to measure a difference. I'm looking for someone who has MEASURED *audio* differences between internal and external clocking. That we've not seen any after years of assertions means either the difference is unmeasurable "secret sauce" (i.e. we aren't measuring the right things) or that the placebo effect is running 100% wet.

I'm certain you "hear" a difference, I'm just looking to quantify it.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom