LS9 versus M32?

Michael John

Michael John

Junior
Jun 25, 2011
352
9
18
Sydney, Australia
eclipseaudio.com
I'm helping with a church upgrade to remote stageboxes over Ethernet. The church already has a Yamaha LS9 (which they like) and they're weighing up a few options.

1. Keep the LS9 and add a Dante MY card and RIO3224 stagebox
  • Pros: Redundant Dante networks. Yamaha reliability.
  • Cons: Price. >$9k
2. Replace the LS9 with a Midas M32 and two DL16's.
  • Pros: Price. ~$7500. Minus any money back from selling the LS9.
  • Cons: No network redundancy.* Only 16 input channels accessible at a time. The sound team currently like having access to all 32 channels on faders.
3. SoundCraft Si Performer 3 + Compact stagebox
  • Pros: Great workflow and interface. Faderglow. Any fader can be assigned to anything.
  • Cons: Price > $9500. No network redundancy.*

* Network cabling will be permanent in the walls, but the console and stagebox ends will be connected/disconnected every week since the hall is multi-use and the gear is packed away.

Any insightful, helpful opinions welcome...

Cheers,
 
Re: LS9 versus M32?

The mobile church I mix for has an X32 at FOH with 2 S16s (each one mounted in a rack SL and SR), no issues with drop-outs, just make sure you purchase quality cable, the M32 should be the same but "better". The DCAs and assign section really help to make up for the control surface's limitations.

No direct experience with the Performer 3, but I have some time on the Expressions and would recommend the Si line as a whole.

Not a fan of the LS9.
 
Re: LS9 versus M32?

So why not install multipair? They keep the mixer and nothing changes. To me it looks like they want to spend about US$10k for AD/DA conversion.
 
Re: LS9 versus M32?

For the Soundcraft route, the mini stagebox 32 includes a dual MADI card that has 2x ethercon jacks for redundancy, but I guess that would add another $1k.

For the Midas route, some users have toyed using the DL251 with their X32, not sure if it was a success...
 
Re: LS9 versus M32?

Tim McCulloch said:
So why not install multipair? They keep the mixer and nothing changes. To me it looks like they want to spend about US$10k for AD/DA conversion.
Click to expand...


I would keep the LS9-32 for the fact that the console is there and the techs already know it and buy a Snake with a 1-2 Multipoins Disconnects for the FOH console and if the stage for the box is not permanently fixed. I would estitmate $2k-3k for a nice one (add a mon split tail).

Layers... It would be easier to mix off the 'full/same type layering' that the Yamaha has. However, Behringer/Midas X/M32 does have the DCA's on the "out" half of the console which is nice you can put the money channels on layers 1-16 (or 17-32) and then use the DCA to control the rest of the inputs.

Fader Glow... not a selling point to me. But each console does coloring and labeling on each channel.

I do have some hours on an X32 (same software as M32) and having spent the last 10-12 years on Yamaha on a regular basis, so I think Yamaha is the easiest and most logically laid out. The X32 does make me stop and think about where things are and how to get to them. But once you learn the Lay out on each console, its pretty easy to work with.

Other Key Points I see fitting:
One thing not mentions is internal channel split/duplication. LS9-32 can process 64 channels, use layer 1 as FOH & layer 2 on Mons. As for the X/M32, you need to have 2 "brains" to make it happen, but you can share pre-amps with independent gain control.

Channel Routing: On the LS9-32 you can pick individual XLR in/out-puts and place them any where on that respected layer. I'm not to familiar with X/M32, but the are in banks of 8.

De-Esser: Yamaha has it on each channel, M/X32 you need to insert it onto that channel. But I think Yamaha's De-Esser has better functionality.


I have been looking at the M32 platform and have been toying around with the idea of replacing my LS9-32 with a M32R + X32Rack (bypass the inputs/outputs) + DL16. Yes, I need two because I internally split my channels for FOH & MON feeds. I am putting the M32R on Mons and I would use the X32Rack for FOH. I am going with the X32-Rack just incase I have a 'oh shit, my iPad and/or wifi died', I can mix the band off the face plate and make some adjustments; with the Cores not to much.
 
Last edited:
Re: LS9 versus M32?

Tim McCulloch said:
So why not install multipair? They keep the mixer and nothing changes. To me it looks like they want to spend about US$10k for AD/DA conversion.
Click to expand...

If I had to guess, pulling and terminating multipair would cost a significant fraction of the of the digital snake solution, and may not be feasible depending on architecture.

Otherwise, it's a decent option
 
Re: LS9 versus M32?

Tim McCulloch said:
So why not install multipair? They keep the mixer and nothing changes. To me it looks like they want to spend about US$10k for AD/DA conversion.
Click to expand...

I forgot to mention..... Right now each week they're laying out a 150' Whirlwind custom 24/8 with Mass connectors at both ends. Mass pins are slowly getting damaged. There's no opportunity to permanently install analog, but someone recently installed CAT5 or 6.

Thanks,
 
Re: LS9 versus M32?

Michael Smithers said:
I forgot to mention..... Right now each week they're laying out a 150' Whirlwind custom 24/8 with Mass connectors at both ends. Mass pins are slowly getting damaged. There's no opportunity to permanently install analog, but someone recently installed CAT5 or 6.

Thanks,
Click to expand...

Existing infrastructure has its charms.
 
Re: LS9 versus M32?

Matt Vivlamore said:
Channel Routing: On the LS9-32 you can pick individual XLR in/out-puts and place them any where on that respected layer. I'm not to familiar with X/M32, but the are in banks of 8.
Click to expand...
It is only the hardware i/o that is patched in groups of eight. Each channel strip can be freely assigned from that i/o. E.g. You can assign input-1 to all channel strips if you like.
 
Re: LS9 versus M32?

I'd go the Yamaha solution, since they already like the mixer. Finding a used spare console will be relatively cheap, too.

One caveat about the MY-Dante card, though - only 16 channels through each card slot, so they'll need two cards and (for the redundant network) two Gigabit switches.
 
Re: LS9 versus M32?

Thanks everyone. Very helpful. And thanks Scott. I'd forgotten about the 16ch per MY card.

Regarding the Soundcraft. I have read that for one console with one stagebox, the MADI over Ethernet can run redundant.


Scott Helmke said:
I'd go the Yamaha solution, since they already like the mixer. Finding a used spare console will be relatively cheap, too.

One caveat about the MY-Dante card, though - only 16 channels through each card slot, so they'll need two cards and (for the redundant network) two Gigabit switches.
Click to expand...
 
Re: LS9 versus M32?

Michael Smithers said:
Does anyone know how the mic pre's and converters compare between the Soundcraft Performer and the M32?

BTW: I'm told the Yamaha RIO mic pre's are miles ahead of the native LS9 pre's.

Cheers,
Click to expand...


Hi Michael,
I have no direct experience with the M32. The X32, however, sounds WAY better than the LS9 does to my ears, and every bit as good as the RIO stuff from Yamaha. I agree that the RIO stuff is better than the LS9.

Our church bought the CL5 stuff with four RIO3224 boxes as soon as they were available and sold an LS9 to purchase an X32 a few months after that for a smaller campus. I mostly do not miss anything about the LS9 and the things that bother me about the X32, in general, are mitigated by the price. :)
 
Re: LS9 versus M32?

Michael Smithers said:
Do you mean each channel strip can be freely assigned from just the 8, or freely assigned from all input sources?
Click to expand...


It's the same as the X32. You assign physical inputs in blocks of 8., but after you "mount" (for lack of a more descriptive term) the block, a console input strip can use any physical input.

You can see the "Select" panel in the attached picture. In the configuration I have local inputs 1-8 and AES50 inputs 1-8. You can select any one of them per channel, and have 1 to 32 console inputs strips use the same physical input, if desired.

X32 home routing tabs.jpgX32 source.jpg
 
Re: LS9 versus M32?

With the exception of expandability (at great cost) and a higher number of scenes, the M32 and even the X32 are better than the LS9 in every way I can think of. I think it would be folly to spend more money on the LS9. An X32 and pair of stage boxes would be less than $4000.
 
Top Bottom