Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Antoon van den Oetelaar said:
Ok, but I didn't attack him (I believe), or is my english that bad? (Could be as I speak mostly dutch)
Is the peavey an enhanced sabine, or how must I compare those units?
Click to expand...

I am not very familiar with the Sabine unit, while the Peavey MENTOR was a blank sheet novel design, (Just like my FLS invention). IIRC the Sabine was one of the sundry "feedback killers" that came out later(?) and threw notch filters at the feedback rings. I won't speculate about how well it worked, or not. As i recall Sabine was well respected in general.

I am surely repeating myself but the MENTOR did not kill feedback, it just identified where it was. The MENTOR was a pretty early DSP product. While identifying the feedback is arguably the hard part, back then performing a professional quality A/D and D/A conversion was serious dollars and would have increased the MENTOR retail price 2x or more. Peavey made one of the first digital crossovers back around then and as i recall that was $700+ even with Peavey's low prices. Today good quality A/D conversions are silly cheap.

The first automatic feedback killer that I recall ever seeing was an analog unit designed by Dr Patronis (Physics prof at GA Tech). He used a clever variant on PLL (Phase locked loop) circuitry where he stacked up a spaced array of narrow band PLLs that were all looking at the audio signal but tuned to lock on different frequencies. If a PLL locked on the audio signal, that suggested that a constant pitch tone (like feedback) was present and what bandpass it was in. When he got a PLL lock indication he switched in the appropriate notch filter based on which band PLL locked up. This was pretty crude by today's standards but not bad for circa 1970s design. Dr. Patronis first licensed his design to Altec Lansing, and later approached Peavey to make it in the mid "80s but Altec still had some potential legal entanglements regarding the Patronis patent so Peavey declined.

After my time at Peavey they made their own low cost feedback killer, and named it after a rodent (Ferret). Yup, hard to imagine that professionals would not hold the brand in the highest regard. :-( :-(

The only reason I mentioned the old MENTOR was to share that DSP can identify feedback before it is so loud it disrupts the performance.

Sorry about the veer... I now return you to your X32 wish list.

JR
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

John Roberts said:
I haven't repeated this for a while... This is exactly the kind of situation where digital decision making could be helpful. We don't need to trust the digital brain inside the box to fix the feedback by itself, but it can immediately identify the channel that is feeding back and snap to the control, or controls affecting that channel. If it guesses wrong and you don't have feedback to fix, no harm, but it could save you several seconds of hunting around.

JR
Click to expand...
I agree. I think we will be seeing much more of this as time goes on. I would love to have an auto master volume decrease when major feedback is detected. I understand that not everyone is ready for such an invasive feature, but just like fly-by-wire in aircraft, I think that the advantages of digital intervention will soon outweigh the reluctance to rely on these features.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Scott Bolt said:
I would love to have an auto master volume decrease when major feedback is detected.
Click to expand...

With bands I have all monitor outputs added to one DCA channel, and whenever I have a feedback and not sure which mic it is, I adjust this DCA. It can also be very handy to check how much headroom you have before mics are into feedback. After soundcheck I sometimes add some gain with the dca, and I check all (vocal) mics. This way I know which one is close to feedback.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

John Roberts said:
I am not very familiar with the Sabine unit, while the Peavey MENTOR was a blank sheet novel design, (Just like my FLS invention). IIRC the Sabine was one of the sundry "feedback killers" that came out later(?) and threw notch filters at the feedback rings. I won't speculate about how well it worked, or not. As i recall Sabine was well respected in general.

I am surely repeating myself but the MENTOR did not kill feedback, it just identified where it was. The MENTOR was a pretty early DSP product. While identifying the feedback is arguably the hard part, back then performing a professional quality A/D and D/A conversion was serious dollars and would have increased the MENTOR retail price 2x or more. Peavey made one of the first digital crossovers back around then and as i recall that was $700+ even with Peavey's low prices. Today good quality A/D conversions are silly cheap.

The first automatic feedback killer that I recall ever seeing was an analog unit designed by Dr Patronis (Physics prof at GA Tech). He used a clever variant on PLL (Phase locked loop) circuitry where he stacked up a spaced array of narrow band PLLs that were all looking at the audio signal but tuned to lock on different frequencies. If a PLL locked on the audio signal, that suggested that a constant pitch tone (like feedback) was present and what bandpass it was in. When he got a PLL lock indication he switched in the appropriate notch filter based on which band PLL locked up. This was pretty crude by today's standards but not bad for circa 1970s design. Dr. Patronis first licensed his design to Altec Lansing, and later approached Peavey to make it in the mid "80s but Altec still had some potential legal entanglements regarding the Patronis patent so Peavey declined.

After my time at Peavey they made their own low cost feedback killer, and named it after a rodent (Ferret). Yup, hard to imagine that professionals would not hold the brand in the highest regard. :-( :-(

The only reason I mentioned the old MENTOR was to share that DSP can identify feedback before it is so loud it disrupts the performance.

Sorry about the veer... I now return you to your X32 wish list.

JR
Click to expand...

Gee, I have a MENTOR in my kit somewhere. It was part of my last analog FOH rig. Maybe I should dig it out and patch it into the solo bus?


Sent from my iPad HD
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Robert Lofgren said:
5% in the lower scale corresponds to a level change of approx 10dB! Not my cup of tea...
Click to expand...
In this part of the scale 10 dB are 6 mm (here the same as %) and in the upper scale this range expands to 24 mm.
I wrote 3 to 5% so take 3% and your cup of tea comes nearer.
I'm sure the engineers can find a compromise.
Even 2 mm or at least more than 1 mm is better than the current situation.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Charly Spörl said:
In this part of the scale 10 dB are 6 mm (here the same as %) and in the upper scale this range expands to 24 mm.
I wrote 3 to 5% so take 3% and your cup of tea comes nearer.
I'm sure the engineers can find a compromise.
Even 2 mm or at least more than 1 mm is better than the current situation.
Click to expand...

I don't get that, if someone has the habit of constantly nudging faders accidentally, the auto-select should be the least of their problems.

Some consoles have touch sensitive faders of the capacitance type, so consoles requiring actual movement of the faders are already pretty insensitive in the grand scheme of things.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Per Søvik said:
I don't get that, if someone has the habit of constantly nudging faders accidentally, the auto-select should be the least of their problems.

Some consoles have touch sensitive faders of the capacitance type, so consoles requiring actual movement of the faders are already pretty insensitive in the grand scheme of things.
Click to expand...
I have to admit that I don't like the auto-select feature. I've tried it before and the wrong channel is always selected when I need access to a channel strip so I have to press select first anyway (or move its fader).

Or you are adjusting an eq and need to fix a level change on a different channel and you suddenly find yourself eq'ing the wrong channel...

Also, in this case the lcd refreshing when I'm in home-mode is really distracting to my eyes.

Anyone here who actually likes and uses the auto-select feature on any console?
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

I'd like to see more possibilities in setup regarding bus configuration, e.g. 8/2/6, 8/2/4, 8/8/0, 10/2/4.
Right now I need only 2 subgroups (4 if I want stereo) and could use the other buses for something else.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Thorsten Kowalski said:
I'd like to see more possibilities in setup regarding bus configuration, e.g. 8/2/6, 8/2/4, 8/8/0, 10/2/4.
Right now I need only 2 subgroups (4 if I want stereo) and could use the other buses for something else.
Click to expand...
Those mentioned configurations are just templates. You can configure your busses freely.
 
Last edited:
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

I'd like it if I could link 4&5, or 8&9 and just by holding the select button of those channels.
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

I for one find the X32 feature-set EXCELLENT - and I do not have a lot of ideas for further features - however I would like to see some improvements of things that on daily basis are annoying or just limiting. I have no knowledge of hardware-restrictions so bear over with me if I mention things that are simply impossible with current hardware design:

1: X32 EDIT (hoped to have seen this with the major release published yesterday) - ABILY to go full-screen regardless screen resolution.. I run Full HD - and 1024x724 is just a small box. Would actually like to see a modular design where you can detach e.g. RTA display or e.g. all 32 input faders and MAXIMIZE - or e.g. having All 32 input faders at the bottom of the screen and Output meters on top.

2: Ability to link 2 channels even-odd instead of just odd-even

3: Fix Bug that unlinked channels stay panned

4: Ability to route pr. channel - e.g. 1 and 2 "Card" - 3-12: "AES", 13-14 "Local" and so on

5: Fix some nerdiness .... e.g. routing - kind of intimidating for new users "AES50 A" - why not call it "S16 Stagebox 1"

6: X32-Mix - There is still a bug with assignables... Setup, Assignables - choose Encoder 2 - choose midi - any channel and finally any value ... Now encoder 2 is assigned to that midi note ... Now click encoder 3 .....Regardless what encoder 3 WAS assigned it is now assigned to the same midi note as encoder 2

7: X32-Mix .... Actually it is not very useful to be able to control what assignables DO in X32-Mix ... It would be lot more useful if we could USE the assignables in X32-Mix ... So I would prefer that assigning the buttons were done on the console OR in X32 Edit - But the BUTTONS should be accessible in X32-Mix ... In my view - X32 Mix is more "Perform" than "Configure".. in this area X32 mix is "Configure only" now

8: RTA in X32Mix - but that is already planned for 2.3 according to apple-store.

9: MP3 support on the USB-slot (not very important)

10: A new expansion-card with direct recording - e.g. plug in a USB stick or a USB Harddrive and then start recording from firmware 3.0 ...Console should create a folder named date/time and filled with wav files named whats channels are named in the scribble stribs
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

John Roberts said:
I am not very familiar with the Sabine unit, while the Peavey MENTOR was a blank sheet novel design, (Just like my FLS invention). IIRC the Sabine was one of the sundry "feedback killers" that came out later(?)
JR
Click to expand...

The operating manual for the FBX-900 is dated 1993 but my brain seems to think that I used one several years before that. I don't remember any other feedback eliminators before the Sabine but I was a bit young at the time. The Mentor manual seems to be dated 1997. Does this track well with the real history?


http://www.sabine.com/resources/FBX/Literature/FBX-900-OpGuide.pdf
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

drew gandy said:
The operating manual for the FBX-900 is dated 1993 but my brain seems to think that I used one several years before that. I don't remember any other feedback eliminators before the Sabine but I was a bit young at the time. The Mentor manual seems to be dated 1997. Does this track well with the real history?


http://www.sabine.com/resources/FBX/Literature/FBX-900-OpGuide.pdf
Click to expand...

Sorry I do not know the precise time line for the sundry feedback locator/eliminators made.

The earliest one I was aware of was the one Dr Patronis (Ga tech) invented (using PLL technology). His patent US4079199 A is dated 1978 so his may be the first. He licensed his design to Altec Lansing and they made one. Patronis approached Peavey in the mid-80s to become the sole manufacturer, but the legal status of his former agreement with Altec at that time was unclear, so Peavey declined to avoid potential legal conflict. I introduced Dr Patronis to Hartley because we had friends in common from when I was living in Atlanta before I went to work at Peavey.

My (FLS) patent issued in 1998 so I filed a year or two before that. I do not know what compelled the digital engineers to make the Mentor, perhaps because they could. I suspect they were more aware of the competition and state of the art back then... I suspect Peavey would have made a feedback killer then if they could but there were probably patents covering the existing art. While the Mentor was already doing the hard part, adding a high quality A/D, and D/A to the already "too expensive for Peavey" SKU would not have sold well.

I was just designing a slick (and cheap) feature to add into a GEQ.. FLS is kind of silly without the EQ.

Sorry I wasn't trying to dis Sabine... Their patent was issued in 1999, but they also had a patented automatic EQ in 1996, and "adaptive audio resonant frequency filtering" (whatever that is) in 1993. I really did not pay much attention to the automatic feedback eliminators. If i tried to make one I would probably use a different approach, but I do not want to feed this veer any more than I have already.

This thread is supposed to be about Behringer features.. I now return you to that discussion already in progress.

JR
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Virtual Channels - channels that retain all their current parameters and can be assigned to different physical fader channels by different scenes without loosing any changes made on the fly. Currently, if Bob's radio mic input is assigned to fader 1 and I set up gains, eq, dynamics etc for him, and then later I need his mic to be controlled from fader 3, I have to create a snippet to move it fader 3 when required. The problem with that is that whilst assigned to fader 1, I am likely to make changes to several parameters on the fly (musical theatre is like that), but when I load the cue that moves him to fader 3, those changes are lost - I get what I had originally recorded in the cue.

With Virtual Channels, all the parameters are stored in the virtual channel, and that channel can be freely assigned to any fader, any changes made being stored in the virtual channel so that when it is reassigned to a differed fader, those changes are preserved. Assgining a Virtual Channel to a physical fader (with optional confirmation message) would move that physical fader's currently assigned VC to the "unassigned" pool - it could then be assigned to a different fader as and when needed.

edit .. Routing wise, virtual channels would appear as additional inputs that physical inputs could be routed to. So instead of routing local-1 to (physical) fader channel 1, you would route local-1 to Virtual Channel 1, and then assign Virtual Channel 1 to fader 1 (which would be the default assignment, so you wouldn't need any additional steps to set up a local-1:VC-1:Fader-1 routing config.
 
Last edited:
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

I'd like an X-Edit version which runs on Raspberry Pi.
I have one in my cellar to be able to listen to some music and this would make lugging the notebook to the cellar unneccesary :)
 
Re: Behringer X32 Firmware v3.0 Feature Requests

Auto mixing, very much needed, just completed a show with rotating panels of 9 40 presenters in all, all on lavs I successfully used side chain compression thanks to the ability to use the mix busses as a key in. Thanks for the flexibility!
 
Top Bottom