16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

Loren Jones

Sophomore
Jun 25, 2011
155
0
16
Hampton Roads VA
Hi all,

We will be putting together some upgrades to a small portable system to be used in our church. We are going to need a rackmountable 16 channel mixer and a DSP.

For the mixer I had been planning on A&H MixWiz3 16:2, but also have seen the Soundcraft GB2R 16, and Mackie Onyx 1640. The MixWiz is the standard recommendation from a forum search but it seems the soundcraft is fine too with similar functionality and costs $100 less. The mackie adds 4 groups but is $200 more than the MixWiz and is 26" deep (compared to right at 20 for the other two) if mounted on top of a rack which is what I was planning. So that pretty much rules out the mackie. Are there any others that are better bang for the buck while maintaining the essential channel count (16), eq and routing features of the MixWiz3 and GB2R? Is there any major reason to prefer MixWiz or GB2 one over the other?

For DSP we just need to be able to operate a straight "stereo" top over sub setup. The tops will be operated full range passive. The option to do aux fed subs would perhaps be nice as well. I was planning on the Behringer DCX2496 due to the high feature content for low $$$ as well as some fairly positive reviews here and at PSW. Are there others that would be strong contenders?

Also, any suggestions on affordable equipment racks for a rig like this? I am thinking poly construction is OK, on wheels, pop up top for the mixer, enough space below for 2 x 2 rackspace amps, the DSP, a power conditioner and perhaps a drawer. I was looking at one of the Gator units for this.

Thanks for any inputs,
Loren Jones
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

I like the GB2r way better than the other two options. Not only is it cheaper, it feels, sounds, and operates in a much higher class than the others.

The berhinger DSP is fine. Anything would be better than yet another drive rack PA.

Look at audiopile.net for racks. Don't go with a plastic rack. They suck. Plus they are much larger than a proper case so they take up more real estate in the trailer. The wheels usually suck too.

I've also been satisfied with the OSP racks thatI've bought, but they are not as cheap as they once were.
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

My vote would be the MixWiz (largely because I have two of them that I use very regularly - and am happy with them). Haven't used the Soundcraft, but probably a great board for the money knowing what Soundcraft products are usually like... Not a fan of Mackie, but haven't used that model, so won't say more about that.

Comparing the A&H to the Soundcraft - both have very similar features, 16 "real" mic channels (unlike some 16 ch boards), similar eq sections, direct outs on every channel. What (it appears) that the MixWiz has over the GB2r is the extra fader for the mono/aux sub output, as well as some built in effects (which might be a nice feature if you don't have external effects available). Or maybe I missed something...
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

From a DSP standpoint I am really only familiar with the items that I personally own. However, for the past five years I have been using a Peavey VSX26 for DSP and I have been pleased with it. It offers all of the basic features that you might need and you can use the mic input on the front panel as an additional input in order to be able to have stereo tops and mono aux subs. It has also been rock solid living in a rack in a trailer seeing periods of heavy use and long periods of inactivity. I cannot comment on whether it more or less user friendly than the other potential options but it has always been fairly intuitive in my mind.

+1 to Rainer on the usefulness of the additional mono/aux sub output and fader available on the MixWiz3.
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

My church has the Mackie Onyx 24-4 and it is ok. The 1640i offers firewire interface so if you are interested in recording that might be a feature you might want. Of course it is $500 more than the mixwiz.

Roadready offers some mixer racks.
Audiopile is another.
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

If you'd like to get a bit creative you could always go for a MixWiz 14:4:2 and add something like an Ashly MX-206 or 208. I have a "radio rack" I use for remote broadcast production with a 14:4:2 above 12 spaces. In addition, I have a "hood" which holds the single-space device of my choice. The hood utilizes the butterfly latches of the Grundorf rack and locks on tight. This also gives me a flat surface on top where I can put a computer, recorder or my lunch.

You can bring the expansion mixer in via one of the A/B stereo channels and assign whatever you're bringing in there to any of the 6 auxes and/or the 4 sub-groups. The A/B functionality of the stereo channels lets you keep something else connected on the RCA inputs (CD, iPod, etc) for simple playback of fill music at the push of a button.

I run two Shure SCM410 auto-mixers in the rack below the console. I can either use them as two separate 4-channel mixers input into two board channels or daisy chain them into one board channel.

Above and beyond that, there are still 4 stereo line inputs available. S1 is assignable to Aux 1, S2 to Aux 2 and so on.

All in all, this approaches the functionality of a much larger console (approaching 40 inputs with all the above options) and offers the compact footprint of something like an 01v.

Just thinking........
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

I like the GB2r way better than the other two options. Not only is it cheaper, it feels, sounds, and operates in a much higher class than the others.

The berhinger DSP is fine. Anything would be better than yet another drive rack PA.

Look at audiopile.net for racks. Don't go with a plastic rack. They suck. Plus they are much larger than a proper case so they take up more real estate in the trailer. The wheels usually suck too.

I've also been satisfied with the OSP racks thatI've bought, but they are not as cheap as they once were.

Thanks Tim,

Glad to hear you like the GB2r. Perhaps we will save $100 and go with that. To run aux fed subs with it you would use one of your post fade auxes, and if you needed to adjust the level of the main mix output you would have to adjust the aux 6 master rotary pot the corresponding amount to keep the sub to top balance intact? Which ways do you think it sounds better? Less noise, mic pre's, EQ responsiveness?

I just checked audiopile and those EWI cases cost half of what the plastic case from musician's friend costs. That should work great.

I agree on the DR PA. I haven't used the Behringer but the DR PA seemed pretty lacking in flexibility.

Thanks again,
Loren Jones
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

My vote would be the MixWiz (largely because I have two of them that I use very regularly - and am happy with them). Haven't used the Soundcraft, but probably a great board for the money knowing what Soundcraft products are usually like... Not a fan of Mackie, but haven't used that model, so won't say more about that.

Comparing the A&H to the Soundcraft - both have very similar features, 16 "real" mic channels (unlike some 16 ch boards), similar eq sections, direct outs on every channel. What (it appears) that the MixWiz has over the GB2r is the extra fader for the mono/aux sub output, as well as some built in effects (which might be a nice feature if you don't have external effects available). Or maybe I missed something...

Rainer,

The on board effects and the M fader for aux fed subs are features that might make the mixwiz worth a bit of extra $$.

Loren
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

If you'd like to get a bit creative you could always go for a MixWiz 14:4:2 and add something like an Ashly MX-206 or 208. I have a "radio rack" I use for remote broadcast production with a 14:4:2 above 12 spaces. In addition, I have a "hood" which holds the single-space device of my choice. The hood utilizes the butterfly latches of the Grundorf rack and locks on tight. This also gives me a flat surface on top where I can put a computer, recorder or my lunch.

You can bring the expansion mixer in via one of the A/B stereo channels and assign whatever you're bringing in there to any of the 6 auxes and/or the 4 sub-groups. The A/B functionality of the stereo channels lets you keep something else connected on the RCA inputs (CD, iPod, etc) for simple playback of fill music at the push of a button.

I run two Shure SCM410 auto-mixers in the rack below the console. I can either use them as two separate 4-channel mixers input into two board channels or daisy chain them into one board channel.

Above and beyond that, there are still 4 stereo line inputs available. S1 is assignable to Aux 1, S2 to Aux 2 and so on.

All in all, this approaches the functionality of a much larger console (approaching 40 inputs with all the above options) and offers the compact footprint of something like an 01v.

Just thinking........

Dick,

That sounds quite flexible and all, but for the situation we are talking about here, I am thinking that the KISS principle will be more cherished than creative thinking and flexibility. I doubt we will need to support more than the 16 channels anyway.

Thanks,
Loren
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

Dick,

That sounds quite flexible and all, but for the situation we are talking about here, I am thinking that the KISS principle will be more cherished than creative thinking and flexibility. I doubt we will need to support more than the 16 channels anyway.

Thanks,
Loren

Yes, I'd avoid creative thinking and flexibility in any situation involving a committee.
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

Thanks Tim,

Glad to hear you like the GB2r. Perhaps we will save $100 and go with that. To run aux fed subs with it you would use one of your post fade auxes, and if you needed to adjust the level of the main mix output you would have to adjust the aux 6 master rotary pot the corresponding amount to keep the sub to top balance intact? Which ways do you think it sounds better? Less noise, mic pre's, EQ responsiveness?

I just checked audiopile and those EWI cases cost half of what the plastic case from musician's friend costs. That should work great.

I agree on the DR PA. I haven't used the Behringer but the DR PA seemed pretty lacking in flexibility.

Thanks again,
Loren Jones

I've used all three consoles, but not side by side. My comparisons are just my opinion. The Mixwizard is certainly a decent console, but often I find the EQ filters to be not very effective in shaping the sound the way I want it. Why that is, I couldn't tell you. I also believe that the preamps on the mixwiz are a little "dark" sounding compared to some others. They just don't have the top end transparency that I want. I also have had more than a few problems with mix wizards in the reliability department. Although, they are easily serviceable, that doesn't mean I want to service them all the time.

The GB2r is basically a GB console, scaled down. It has a much better "feel" to everything from the knobs and faders, to the chassis and connectors as well. It does not have effects, but honestly the wixwiz effects aren't anything to write home about. The EQ on this desk is a breeze to use and never sounds bad no matter how much cut or boost you use. The preamps are not as good as old sound craft stuff, but they are quite transparent and don't do anything to call attention to themselves. Which is a good thing in this class of gear. It is easy to get a good sounding mix on this board.

The Mackie is just a toy. It feels cheap and sounds that way too. I don't have a ton of experience with the Onyx series, but I can say that I have not run across any that were broken. Which seems amazing considering how cheap the components look and feel. The EQ section just never seems to work right and the Pre's while being miles ahead of the old jackie stuff, just aren't in the same class as the soundcraft.



If you want subs on an AUX, then use an AUX. It seems pretty simple to me. How often are you adjusting your mains fader anyway? I barely ever touch a a main fader after soundcheck....
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

I've used all three consoles, but not side by side. My comparisons are just my opinion. The Mixwizard is certainly a decent console, but often I find the EQ filters to be not very effective in shaping the sound the way I want it. Why that is, I couldn't tell you. I also believe that the preamps on the mixwiz are a little "dark" sounding compared to some others. They just don't have the top end transparency that I want. I also have had more than a few problems with mix wizards in the reliability department. Although, they are easily serviceable, that doesn't mean I want to service them all the time.

The GB2r is basically a GB console, scaled down. It has a much better "feel" to everything from the knobs and faders, to the chassis and connectors as well. It does not have effects, but honestly the wixwiz effects aren't anything to write home about. The EQ on this desk is a breeze to use and never sounds bad no matter how much cut or boost you use. The preamps are not as good as old sound craft stuff, but they are quite transparent and don't do anything to call attention to themselves. Which is a good thing in this class of gear. It is easy to get a good sounding mix on this board.

The Mackie is just a toy. It feels cheap and sounds that way too. I don't have a ton of experience with the Onyx series, but I can say that I have not run across any that were broken. Which seems amazing considering how cheap the components look and feel. The EQ section just never seems to work right and the Pre's while being miles ahead of the old jackie stuff, just aren't in the same class as the soundcraft.



If you want subs on an AUX, then use an AUX. It seems pretty simple to me. How often are you adjusting your mains fader anyway? I barely ever touch a a main fader after soundcheck....

Tim,

Thanks for the quick reply. As far as effects we probably have an old effects unit around the sound equipment closet that I could throw in there and honestly we rarely use effects much anyway. Point well taken on the aux fed sub use. I rarely adjust the mains fader after soundcheck either. Honestly for the knowledge level of the people who will operate this system I should probably just set it up as simply as possible and just use a standard sub routing configuration.

Loren
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

Yes, I'd avoid creative thinking and flexibility in any situation involving a committee.

Or in any situation where the system will be operated by the very kind but very inexperienced guy from the church singles group who fancies himself a bit of a DJ and relishes the opportunity to get to operate a sound system. I can't grudge him that because all of us like to play with cool toys that aren't usually our day to day thing, but simplicity is probably best. As mentioned above, this argues against aux fed subs also.

Loren
 
Last edited:
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

Honestly for the knowledge level of the people who will operate this system I should probably just set it up as simply as possible and just use a standard sub routing configuration.

Loren

If I may add my perspective on this, don't design your system around the lowest common denominator. Get what you need to do the job right, and then train people to use it correctly. Perhaps all your volunteer needs is the proper equipment and quality training and you will be set.

Yes it is important to be "volunteer friendly", but not at the sake of compromising what you need and within reason. Obviously the budget determines a lot of what we choose to use, but we are also to be good stewards of the money spent. Get the best that you can within your budget.

As a volunteer, having the church tell me that "they didn't get what they needed because they didn't feel I was able to operate it" versus "the equipment we got is more complex than previous, therefore training will be required in order to use it properly" have two different connotations.

Just my 2cents
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

Jared,

I completely understand your perspective and it is a point well taken. I would have to carefully consider whether there was enough potential upside to aux fed subs to make it worthwhile. On our main system it isn't as much of an issue because the crossover point to the subs can be fairly low and we have sweepable HPF on each input channel. But on this smaller system the crossover to the subs will be up around 100 hz and there is just a fixed HPF on the desk inputs at 100hz or whatever the case may be. So, the aux fed sub idea may be worth training everyone involved on the concept.

Loren

If I may add my perspective on this, don't design your system around the lowest common denominator. Get what you need to do the job right, and then train people to use it correctly. Perhaps all your volunteer needs is the proper equipment and quality training and you will be set.

Yes it is important to be "volunteer friendly", but not at the sake of compromising what you need and within reason. Obviously the budget determines a lot of what we choose to use, but we are also to be good stewards of the money spent. Get the best that you can within your budget.

As a volunteer, having the church tell me that "they didn't get what they needed because they didn't feel I was able to operate it" versus "the equipment we got is more complex than previous, therefore training will be required in order to use it properly" have two different connotations.

Just my 2cents
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

Or in any situation where the system will be operated by the very kind but very inexperienced guy from the church singles group who fancies himself a bit of a DJ and relishes the opportunity to get to operate a sound system. I can't grudge him that because all of us like to play with cool toys that aren't usually our day to day thing, but simplicity is probably best. As mentioned above, this argues against aux fed subs also.

Loren

In that case I'd give them a 5 mic input mix pad which would also handle a couple of CD players and be done with it. If they're that raw, 16 channels is going to just get them into trouble.......
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

If I may add my perspective on this, don't design your system around the lowest common denominator. Get what you need to do the job right, and then train people to use it correctly. Perhaps all your volunteer needs is the proper equipment and quality training and you will be set.

Yes it is important to be "volunteer friendly", but not at the sake of compromising what you need and within reason. Obviously the budget determines a lot of what we choose to use, but we are also to be good stewards of the money spent. Get the best that you can within your budget.

As a volunteer, having the church tell me that "they didn't get what they needed because they didn't feel I was able to operate it" versus "the equipment we got is more complex than previous, therefore training will be required in order to use it properly" have two different connotations.

Just my 2cents

So nice to hear this! We usually hear, "But xyz company costs less, and said their system will be easier to use than yours." Preach it! Note: ease of use does not equal lack of capabilities.

Which costs less - a client having to re-do/upgrade their system, or have us there a couple times a year for the next 10 years for advanced training? Which has the larger benefit to the client? Which meets their true needs better? Which helps cure the glut of poorly used, poor quality AV systems?
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

The trick would be to get the cost of ongoing training spec'd as part of the initial capital investment in the PA system in addition to getting a proper system spec'd and installed the first time. What venue besides a church would invest over $200k in a sound system and then not have anyone but volunteers operate it and maintain it. Not to denigrate the skills of many volunteers who give their time and energy to the church by running the sound system (hey, I'm one of those people). It just doesn't seem likely that a business or even a government owned venue would make that sort of investment and not include professional operation, training and maintenance, not necessarily to have someone on staff but to include a reasonable figure in the annual budget to have a pro come in, and make sure everything is still as it should be.

So nice to hear this! We usually hear, "But xyz company costs less, and said their system will be easier to use than yours." Preach it! Note: ease of use does not equal lack of capabilities.

Which costs less - a client having to re-do/upgrade their system, or have us there a couple times a year for the next 10 years for advanced training? Which has the larger benefit to the client? Which meets their true needs better? Which helps cure the glut of poorly used, poor quality AV systems?
 
Re: 16 Channel Rackmount Mixer (MixWiz vs Soundcraft GB2R), Cheap DSP

We use the Soundcraft GB2R 12/2 and are happy with it - good sound. I'm interested to hear the more expensive ProRack-House, which gets good reports on these forums ....