Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

I would like to have the option to choose a different color "skin" for the X32-Edit software that would only apply to a specific instance of X32-Edit that is running. At times, I use WAPs as a bridge between FOH & monitors and I sometimes use multiple instances of the X32-Edit running on a tablet PC @ FOH to access either console (FOH or monitors). A change in skin color that is specific to each instance of the application running would be a plus as it would help to keep the confusion down a bit when switching between the multiple instances--different skin color for FOH than for the monitor desk. As it is, I sometimes find myself going to the Setup/Network screen to check the IP address to make sure that I am "on" the correct console.
 
Re: New Yamaha QL Console at Frankfurt

It would be nice to see a console "link" function where you can link 2 or more desks together to create a scaleable system. 2 desks would liknk where all mixes, matrix, outputs and input could be used as if it were one console. 80 input x 50 out!
 
Mute Group function

I know this is an old thread but just in case it is revisited by any Behringer staff I need to throw my hat into the ring re this Mute function.

The Mute function needs to work as latching mute, so if a channel is muted individually, then as part of a group, un-muting the group needs to leave the channel muted as it was originally. This is the way mute groups have always worked - think of the mute groups on any analogue desk.

The scenario described before is what we have as well - a three-stage venue, with different acts on different stages throughout the night. Each stage has a slightly different setup, probably with 3-4 vocal mics, piano, and other bits depending on how big it is. (Piano & vocal stage, guitar & vocal stage, and full band stage).

During the night we just mute whatever items on that stage are not being used on the channel mutes, and then the whole stage is assigned to a mute group. This works on analogue consoles, and every other digital console I've ever come across. I have never found one other console where the mute and mute group interaction is as is on the X32, nor can I see any point in it - if you want all channels to un-mute with the group, just turn the channel mutes off whilst the group is muted, then when the group is un-muted, same result.

In our scenario the same result can be gained by assigning each stage to a DCA, and then use the individual channel mutes to take out the elements not needed for that stage, and use the DCA to unmute the whole group. However, this doesn't kill pre-fade monitor sends as the Mute group function would when the stage is muted, and this also renders the mute group section totally redundant.
 
Assignable encoders

Hello

On X32-Edit I can use the assignable encoders with my X32 RACK

But when I look at my iPad - the controls are not there - PLUS in set-up it says that X32 Rack does not have them at all and thus can not be selected.....


SOOO - obviously they are there anyhow - and can be selected and controlled with computer - please give us way to control them with iPad also - a new tab or page somewhere perhaps.

Thank you
 
Last edited:
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

John DiNicola said:
Dear All,
As we have just rolled out generation 2.0 firmware for the X32, we are now starting to collect feature requests for 3.0. As mentioned some time ago we are considering adding auto-pitch correction as well as auto-mixing, a technology we are very familiar with. Auto-mixing has already been implemented in some of our commercial audio products, such as our EUROCOM MA6000M.
Click to expand...

John, you mention automix in the MA6000M, whilst I have not had any experience with that unit, I had a look thru the documentation and there does not seem to be any real detail about automix deployed. It looks like it applies some dynamic level control across the 8 microphone inputs only. Automix in a mixing console would be better described in reference to how Studer, Lawo and Stagetec have deployed their versions of automix, for example;

You might have dynamic auto levelling of sorts on a group or an individual source and then further auto levellling on other groups or individual sources. You may have numerous group or sources each with their own dynamic levelling parameters. Then over arching this, you can determine with group/sources have priority over other and you can set average target levels for each and a target level for the final mix output. For example, you may want your main vocal mic/vocal group always 3dB higher than anything else, and then the crowd effects mics you may set to 5dB below the main vocal mic group. As audio levels fluctuate, the relationships set between the various sources are maintained and then the overall mix level is also adjusted to maintain the target maximum output. The solution would fully featured dynamic control, I assume including compression, limiting, agc, expansion, downward expansion and ducking and the ability to setup different processing for different groups or individual sources and then methods to make the processing between groups interactive in respect to targets set.

I have tried automix on several products and its absolutely fantastic. Would be awesome to see this sort of power in the X32.
Cheers
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

As others before my already said a freely assignable routing matrix instead of these 8-block-things would be great.

Thank you very much!
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Andreas H. said:
As others before my already said a freely assignable routing matrix instead of these 8-block-things would be great.

Thank you very much!
Click to expand...

Behringer has stated the blocks of 8 is a hardware issue, not firmware. Expecting a change is probably folly.

Also, you need to go to your profile and change your display name to your real first and last names or your post could be locked or deleted by the mods.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Tim McCulloch said:
Behringer has stated the blocks of 8 is a hardware issue, not firmware. Expecting a change is probably folly.
Click to expand...
It is kind of both hardware and software actually...

All signal routing is taken care of the fpga chip, however that chip can be reprogrammed at any time. To be picky, the fpga is programed every time the x32 boots since the fpga memory is volatile and can't contain its information after a powerloss..

The problem is that the current fpga code needs to be altered so much that it may not be feasible to perform this development effort in the current x32 design. Since all signals in the x32 matrix is coherent any change to the code need to take this into account when programming a new routing matrix and this is a highly complicated task...
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Well, John, there are two things I'd like to suggest, and they're both somewhat meta to the topic of actual firmware features on the board, but I think both of them would contribute a lot to reducing the amount of energy I see people expending on the various forums trying to figure things out:

1) Get the documentation up to date.

I see that you have the manual sources poured into a wiki, which is an excellent starting point, and you even picked my favorite engine, mediawiki. That said, no one seems to be *doing* anything there; when I manually pull up the Recent Changes page (because the link to it's been removed), I find only spammers on talk pages, and no apparent actual updates. There's some new copy about some of the 2.x feature set, but as near as I can tell, it's just the release notes; there's no actual *documentation* about, say, how snippets are created and used. Or how safes work. And these are topics about which I've seen a fair amount of speculation in the wild this week, as I've come up to speed on the board, since my favorite rental house just bought one, and after a new job matures, I might as well.

I thought to go look at the Midas manual, and it's Much Newer (about a week old as I type this), and while it's clearly 2.x, at least in parts (it includes the RTA, for example), it still doesn't really seem to explain topics like snippets and safes in as much detail as I would like to see, having grown up on, say, Mackie's manuals.

2) A Public Bug Tracker

I know that these are often looked at with somewhat of a jaundiced eye by corporate managements, but exactly the sort of thing you're doing here is exactly what -- at least the current generations of -- bug trackers do well: capture bug and RFE reports from the end users, and allow users to vote on which ones are most important to them.

They can also capture, of course, bugs against the documentation, making that job easier in two ways. Finally, they allow you to assign target releases to specific changes, so that end users have an idea when what they might need is coming down the pike, and whether (here's another question I've seen several places) a showstopper for them is going away, and they should either hold out, or buy, knowing that their particular showstopper *is acknowledged and scheduled for extinction*... instead of buying something else.

Other than that, I'll chime in on the group muting. :)

I've actually got a short list of other suggestions to make about the UI and operations design, but I want to get my hands on the board and confirm they're software issues and not doco issues, first. (As you might suspect by now, I've got fairly deep background in both production and software engineering. :)
 
Last edited:
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Having now gotten my fingers on faders of a 2.04 unit, I have a couple of other observations to make.

Number one: tied faders behave very poorly if you grab both faders at the same time. They fight with each other. It seems to me it ought to be possible to special case that so that if tied faders notice that's happening they can just release the tie on the fader temporarily. On a related note, it is impossible to tell from the control surface that two channels are tied, so you are guaranteed to do this if you don't already know. I can think of a couple of ways to indicate that graphically on the Scribble screen that would not take up a lot of space.

Secondly: it seems to me, and that this could be just me--so many things are just me-- that it is difficult to stand on a given point in a signal flow and see where it's coming from. I had a cable plugged in to XLR Out 14, for example, and I didn't know what was feeding it (it turned out to be fed from matrix 1). Since the way you do that routing is to go to the source (a bus or matrix) and select XLR out 14 as its destination, it's difficult to work the other direction. Unless there is a place to find that that I haven't found yet.

Finally: the encoders below the screen go the wrong way. Or at least they go the opposite of the direction I would expect to have to turn them in order to move the cursor is up and down things the way that I would expect to move the cursors up and down things.

I believe I understand why the the direction that was chosen was chosen... But this is what computer hackers call a miswart. You have to do it the opposite of the intuitive way for it to actually be intuitive for users. Again, maybe this is just me, but it's irritating. I I suspect it's a left-hand versus right hand operator thing. Perhaps the designer's a lefty?
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Jay Ashworth said:
Having now gotten my fingers on faders of a 2.04 unit, I have a couple of other observations to make.

Number one: tied faders behave very poorly if you grab both faders at the same time. They fight with each other. It seems to me it ought to be possible to special case that so that if tied faders notice that's happening they can just release the tie on the fader temporarily. On a related note, it is impossible to tell from the control surface that two channels are tied, so you are guaranteed to do this if you don't already know. I can think of a couple of ways to indicate that graphically on the Scribble screen that would not take up a lot of space.

Secondly: it seems to me, and that this could be just me--so many things are just me-- that it is difficult to stand on a given point in a signal flow and see where it's coming from. I had a cable plugged in to XLR Out 14, for example, and I didn't know what was feeding it (it turned out to be fed from matrix 1). Since the way you do that routing is to go to the source (a bus or matrix) and select XLR out 14 as its destination, it's difficult to work the other direction. Unless there is a place to find that that I haven't found yet.

Finally: the encoders below the screen go the wrong way. Or at least they go the opposite of the direction I would expect to have to turn them in order to move the cursor is up and down things the way that I would expect to move the cursors up and down things.

I believe I understand why the the direction that was chosen was chosen... But this is what computer hackers call a miswart. You have to do it the opposite of the intuitive way for it to actually be intuitive for users. Again, maybe this is just me, but it's irritating. I I suspect it's a left-hand versus right hand operator thing. Perhaps the designer's a lefty?
Click to expand...

I would use an iPad in various meter modes to keep an eye on signal flow. And the lefty thing is probably a British thing....like comps where the threshold is the opposite of everything else in the world.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Jay Ashworth said:
Having now gotten my fingers on faders of a 2.04 unit, I have a couple of other observations to make.

Number one: tied faders behave very poorly if you grab both faders at the same time. They fight with each other. It seems to me it ought to be possible to special case that so that if tied faders notice that's happening they can just release the tie on the fader temporarily. On a related note, it is impossible to tell from the control surface that two channels are tied, so you are guaranteed to do this if you don't already know. I can think of a couple of ways to indicate that graphically on the Scribble screen that would not take up a lot of space.

Secondly: it seems to me, and that this could be just me--so many things are just me-- that it is difficult to stand on a given point in a signal flow and see where it's coming from. I had a cable plugged in to XLR Out 14, for example, and I didn't know what was feeding it (it turned out to be fed from matrix 1). Since the way you do that routing is to go to the source (a bus or matrix) and select XLR out 14 as its destination, it's difficult to work the other direction. Unless there is a place to find that that I haven't found yet.

Finally: the encoders below the screen go the wrong way. Or at least they go the opposite of the direction I would expect to have to turn them in order to move the cursor is up and down things the way that I would expect to move the cursors up and down things.

I believe I understand why the the direction that was chosen was chosen... But this is what computer hackers call a miswart. You have to do it the opposite of the intuitive way for it to actually be intuitive for users. Again, maybe this is just me, but it's irritating. I I suspect it's a left-hand versus right hand operator thing. Perhaps the designer's a lefty?
Click to expand...

Every digital condole that I have used when you have 2 linked faders next to each other and you grab both of them it feels really weird. They are fighting each other. I think the real solution is when you have a stereo pair it would be nice if it only took one fader. I am not sure how to do that in a logical way on a mixer in this price range. On some of the more expensive digital mixers if you make a channel stereo it puts both sides on one fader.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Jay Ashworth said:
Secondly: it seems to me, and that this could be just me--so many things are just me-- that it is difficult to stand on a given point in a signal flow and see where it's coming from. I had a cable plugged in to XLR Out 14, for example, and I didn't know what was feeding it (it turned out to be fed from matrix 1). Since the way you do that routing is to go to the source (a bus or matrix) and select XLR out 14 as its destination, it's difficult to work the other direction. Unless there is a place to find that that I haven't found yet.
Click to expand...
That is not the way it works, you go to the destination and select the source, and that is the only way.

Finally: the encoders below the screen go the wrong way. Or at least they go the opposite of the direction I would expect to have to turn them in order to move the cursor is up and down things the way that I would expect to move the cursors up and down things.

I believe I understand why the the direction that was chosen was chosen... But this is what computer hackers call a miswart. You have to do it the opposite of the intuitive way for it to actually be intuitive for users. Again, maybe this is just me, but it's irritating. I I suspect it's a left-hand versus right hand operator thing. Perhaps the designer's a lefty?
Click to expand...

Have never noticed that, our brains are probably wired differently.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Yeah, Per; I knew I would say it backwards.

Ironically, I had it right, and then 'fixed' it.

So, looking at, say, a Matrix, how can I tell where it goes?
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Jay Ashworth said:
Yeah, Per; I knew I would say it backwards.

Ironically, I had it right, and then 'fixed' it.

So, looking at, say, a Matrix, how can I tell where it goes?
Click to expand...

You can't.

Push the ROUTING button and select "out 1-16". Scan down the Analog Output list while watching the Category column until you find Matrix highlighted, then note the highlighted selection in the Output Signal column. Now that you know which Analog Output is for the matrix in question, select the "xlr out" tab to see which physical XLR connector has your Analog Output... default patch is one-to-one, but physical XLRs can be reassigned in blocks of 4.

A cribbage board matrix like VENUE would be most welcome.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Probably. But even just having it show which destinations were picking up the source you're looking at be good enough...
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Jay Ashworth said:
Probably. But even just having it show which destinations were picking up the source you're looking at be good enough...
Click to expand...
Would be easily implemented if you could only have one destination, but by doing it the other way around, selecting source from destination, you have better options and the drawback is that it is difficult to indicate at the source where the signal is going. You would have to have a list at every source, or a matrix. Incidentally, there is a matrix in the Mixing Station Android app.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Yeah you absolutely would have to show all of the destinations to which a source feeds, but I don't see that that's a major problem either in implementation or in GUI design. There is certainly enough space for it. And if you are not the one who set up the mix, it's critical. As a walk-in engineer, you really have to know where things are going, and the Scribble labels on things like matrixes are not necessarily enough. I'm going to make this one into a formal feature request.

And incidentally, I'm relatively certain the reason they picked the implementation they did, where a destination chooses its source, used to preclude multiple sources showing up at the same destination. That makes things messy.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Jay Ashworth said:
And incidentally, I'm relatively certain the reason they picked the implementation they did, where a destination chooses its source, used to preclude multiple sources showing up at the same destination. That makes things messy.
Click to expand...

I should expect that like Yamaha, the B and others do not allow two sources to be routed to the same destination.
 
Top Bottom