Digital mixer I would buy:

Weogo Reed

Freshman
Jan 4, 2012
99
2
8
Western North Carolina
Hi Folks,

Most of my shows are smaller. The last time I needed more than 18 channels was two years ago.
But I still need a better quality mixer.

) 16 XLR inputs, two stereo inputs. Similar to QSC Touchmix.

) 34 mix channels. Ability to send any input to any output.
This is so I can double-assign one input to two or more channels, for sending one channel to House, another to Monitors. Sometimes I also do this with a Guitar with octave pedal for a subwoofer channel.
To be perfectly clear, yes, I want a mixer with 20 inputs and 34 channels!

) Digitally controlled preamp gains would be very useful, but not absolutely necessary.

) L/R Masters and 8 ~ 10 Auxes, plus built-in Effects buses. Four groups.

) Eighteen mute groups, so I can mute House and Monitor channels for an input with one button press.

) Fader linking. Ability to link L/R Masters and an Aux or Group delay fill send.
I like how Yamaha does this.

) Plenty of parametric EQ on inputs and outputs. I haven't used a GEQ in over a year.
With many open mics on stage, or just a few lavs, lots of EQ is very helpful.
I like the LS9 and DL1608 EQ. X32 is close, but not quite enough.

) Low latency, under 1ms. The 01V96 from about 2003 can do this. Surely newer digital mixers can?

) Excellent tablet interface. Mackie's app has grown on me.

) Front panel control, in case the router and/or tablet die. Like Touchmix.

) Multi-track recording. Touchmix looks pretty simple with just a USB drive connected to the mixer, though the software is pretty basic.

) Reliable. It works. Rock-solid hardware and software. No pops through outputs when turning on or off.
If the power fails and the UPS fails it comes back up running as it was when it lost power.
For me, Yamaha mixers have been solid.

) Small and light, similar to Touchmix, though I would be fine going up a bit in size and weight.

Basically, I want some of the best features of the 01V96, LS9, DL1608 and Touchmix in one box.

A&H QU32 looks interesting, but my understanding is that channels are permanently assigned 1 > 1, 2 > 2, etc.
And I like the Touchmix on-mixer interface better, with virtual faders.


Does anybody know of anything like this on the horizon?

Thanks and good health, Weogo
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

iLive via laptop/ipad fits the bill, minus cost and weight. No front panel control, but you may be asking for something that does not exist as you want it.
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

Hi Helge and Steve,

Soiundcraft Performer and Impact::
Variable HPF, LF parametric or shelving, two parametric, HF parametric or shelving = 5 filters

The Expression and Compact have:
Variable HPF, LF sweepable shelving, two parametric, HF sweepable shelving

DL1608:
Variable HPF, LF parametric or shelving, two parametric, HF parametric or shelving = 5 filters

Touchmix:
Variable low cut, four parametric, variable high cut = 6 filters


Corrected as per Adam and further investigation. Thanks!


Max,

Thanks for the suggestion but this is for smaller gigs where I don't want to carry in a 27# LS9-16.
There are plenty of bigger boards that have far more channels, etc. than I need.
Agreed, what I want probably doesn't exist. Yet. Am curious to know what folks are hearing about on the horizon.


Thanks and good health, Weogo
 
Last edited:
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

Weogo -

X-32 Rack... I don't see 18 mute groups anywhere, not sure I understand this mixer being "light" on parametric eq (4 band on all inputs, 6 band on outputs), but it SEEMS to meet your requirements.

Don't know what your price range is, if you want physical faders, an app and also editor program, but it's worth a look.

http://www.behringer.com/EN/Products/X32-RACK.aspx

Cheers,

-Tim T
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

Si Performer has what you need minus one eq band, it's small, local control is real easy, remoting it is real easy and you can add a stagebox and use it as a basis for a mixing system. And the Delay comes up in mS after some samples. Never used that function myself.

Don't overcomplicate your mixer selection :)
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

X32 producer has almost what you want in a light and really compact design the only problem is the small screen wich is 5" instead the 7" the full had, but you'll get use to it, mixing station remote app is great and it does have some features that you are asking as well
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

Hi Helge and Steve,

For me, the Soundcrafts are a little light on channel EQ:

Si Compact, Expression:
Variable HPF, two parametric, variable LPF = four filters

Performer, Impact:
LF parametric or shelving, two parametric, HF parametric or shelving = 4 filters

DL1608:
Variable HPF, LF parametric or shelving, two parametric, HF parametric or shelving = 5 filters

Touchmix:
Variable low cut, four parametric, variable high cut = 6 filters


What is with the Soundcrafts having delay in samples instead of milliseconds?
Is this a setting that can be changed somewhere?


Max,

Thanks for the suggestion but this is for smaller gigs where I don't want to carry in a 27# LS9-16.
There are plenty of bigger boards that have far more channels, etc. than I need.
Agreed, what I want probably doesn't exist. Yet. Am curious to know what folks are hearing about on the horizon.

Thanks and good health, Weogo

Your EQ comparison for the Soundcraft mixers is incorrect.

The Performer and Impact have a variable HPF, so if you include that as have for the other mixers you compare, the count of EQ bands is 5 not 4:
Variable HPF, LF parametric or shelving, two parametric, HF parametric or shelving = 5 filters

The Expression and Compact have:
Variable HPF, LF sweepable shelving, two parametric, HF sweepable shelving

If I'm remembering correctly, the delay on the Soundcrafts is simultaneously displayed in samples/ms, meters and inches/feet. I think it shows samples until it gets to 1 ms then it uses ms for delay amounts above that.
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

Tim,

I took a closer look at the X32 EQ and of course you are correct, more there than I first saw.
The X32 Rack is close to what I'm asking for.

Caleb the Qu-Pac is what I meant to write above. Too bad it is limited to 1:1 channel assignment.

Helge, thanks for the Delay clarification. The LS9 is still lighter than the Performer 1.
Good point about overcomplication. The corrolary is to not over-simplify, and after 25 years mixing I have a pretty good idea of what works for me.

Mauricio, the X32 Producer is also on the short list. A couple pounds lighter than the LS9.

Adam, thanks for the EQ clarification, I found the HPFs on the MISC page.

Thanks and good health, Weogo
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

Some comments from my side.
as far as I know is the minimum latency of the yamahas 2.4 ms (input to output incl. Conversion) only the X32 is at the moment below 1 ms. Most. Of the other current mixers have a latency of 1.6 or higher. Again, as far as I know.
the direct to disc recording of the Touchmix requires extra needs on the disc, USB 3 and very high thruput to avoid dropouts, which are not reported to the user if they occure. Imo far, far away from reliability. Furthermore the FXs of the QSC need further improvements. At the moment they sound cheap, imo.
No small mixer I know have eighteen mutegroups. The x32 have 14 if you count the 6 mutegroups and the 8 DCAs.
The X32 works for me as good as the LS9 eq and the overallsound is really better than the LS9. You can improve the sound using the DL16 stagebox or one M32.
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

If you are considering the x32 producer what about the Midas M32R - basically the same but with scribble strips better faders and pres.
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

Klaus,

Thanks for the observations.
I think a generation-II Touchmix could be very interesting.


Hanno,

How ya been?

"what exactly do you do with the octaved guitar and the sub?"
Guitar player plays Rhythm, Lead and also occasionally Bass(octave pedal), in Band-A with Kick Drum, and Band-B with Keys.
Patching the Guitar to two House channels allows one channel to have EQ and compression set for playing Rhythm/Lead, while the other channel is set for Bass, without affecting low end of Kick or Keys. Easy to adjust levels as needed.
Maybe odd, but it works for me.(And yes, I'm also doing subs-on-an-aux.)


Nick, the M32R might be worth it, but a bit pricey for me.


Dark horse I'm considering is the Mackie DL32R.
) I thought inputs:channels were assigned 1:1 but actually checked and the are in fact freely assignable.
) I have a DL1608 and am familiar with the app; with a good router the connection has been very reliable.
) Doesn't have some functionality some other mixers have, but has pretty much what I need.
And does have some functionality that I really like, for instance ability to show only faders needed.
) If the router has issues, the DL1608 can hard-wire dock the Ipad for control. The DL32R is Ipad ONLY.
Would have a spare Ipad and router handy. And I always have a spare mixer.
The old Midas XL250 I mixed on years ago is probably turning over in its case at the thought...

For more than a decade I have been mixing most of my concerts on an 01V96 and laptop.
For the past three years have been mixing the 01V96 through the laptop and VNC on an Ipad. Surprisingly do-able, and
has gotten me out of some horrible FOH positions.
But time to move on.

Thanks and good health, Weogo
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

Regarding the need for a lot of mute groups to turn mains/monitors channels on or off... On my usual LS9 showfile I used the channel link function with only the mute switch linked. Had to do that for every pair of channels between the two layers, but now it's just part of the showfile and works fine. I didn't really need the link function for anything else.
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

Hi Scott,

Regarding the need for a lot of mute groups to turn mains/monitors channels on or off... On my usual LS9 showfile I used the channel link function with only the mute switch linked. Had to do that for every pair of channels between the two layers, but now it's just part of the showfile and works fine. I didn't really need the link function for anything else.

I forgot this - been a while since I have been on an LS9.
Indeed a huge plus for the LS9 and something I would love to see on more mixers. Do newer Yamahas do this?

The 01V96 has channel linking for adjacent pairs or across the layers(1/17, 2/18, 3/19, etc.) but everything is linked - you can't link only the mutes.

With a surface at FOH and a tablet on stage, or vice-versa, one mixer really can be both monitor and house mixer.
Would anybody be interested in 20 input/40 output, 40 input/80 output, etc., mixers that are designed from the start for monitor/house duty?
The basic Behringer X32Rack is pretty much like this as shipped.
Cutting down on physical inputs would mean less weight, less expense.

All these choices we have - amazing times we live in!

Thanks and good health, Weogo
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

Hi Scott,

I forgot this - been a while since I have been on an LS9.
Indeed a huge plus for the LS9 and something I would love to see on more mixers. Do newer Yamahas do this?

The 01V96 has channel linking for adjacent pairs or across the layers(1/17, 2/18, 3/19, etc.) but everything is linked - you can't link only the mutes.

M7CL, LS9, CL, QL, etc. can choose what parameters are linked, and link any combination of channels. Newer mixers you can select parameters per link, instead of globally.
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

Si Performer has what you need minus one eq band, it's small, local control is real easy, remoting it is real easy and you can add a stagebox and use it as a basis for a mixing system. And the Delay comes up in mS after some samples. Never used that function myself.

Don't overcomplicate your mixer selection :)


He said "excellent tablet interface"

I'm a Soundcraft owner and Soundcraft ViSi is probably the worst tablet interface going.

Yamaha, Presonus, Behringher, and Mackie are all better. (I haven't tried the A & H app)
 
Re: Digital mixer I would buy:

Having used the TouchMix in a band situation, the screen and virtual faders are too small and take too much attention while trying to play and tweak at the same time. Kind of like trying to use the touch screen entertainment system in some cars while driving. Not every band has a dedicated soundperson, many of us have to grab and tweak things in pauses or while holding notes. I've even dealt with sound while playing drums. The old a stick down, play with just one hand and fix the mix with the other.

I'd like to see something like a Qu16 or Expression1 with the linear faders replaced with rotary encoders and indicators and put into a compact topbox format. Keep the touch screen for more complex setup stuff but be able to make on the fly main/monitor/FX level/channel or main eq adjustments on the fly with no more that a single button punch and a twist of a knob.

With powered speakers becoming more common, there isn't really a substitute/upgrade for people who currently use a top box head and passive speakers. And don't have room (either on stage or in the car) for something bigger. Something that looks like a big time console with linear faders laid out horizontally is fun and feels like a big time mixing desk. But for many corner bar musicians it's just not practical. I know some folks who make a living playing small bars in SF and who appreciate quality sound (One guy has a 4U rack with 1U mixer, 1U amp, compressor and effects going into SRX712s for these gigs) and there's no solution for them.