Mix Wiz 3? Really?

Re: Mix Wiz 3? Really?

So far the FX in the X 32 have not disappointed me. The cmcerbs seem to hold together quite well and the Wave Designer works great. I have been forcing myself to mix with just the onboard effects to help me accurately assess their capabilities. I may add a
D2 into the mix alOng with another few favorite reverbs. I prefer 7 effects if I can get them but the 'B' onboard stuff is pretty darn useful.
 
Re: Mix Wiz 3? Really?

Eric Cagle said:
I was actually going to say, "I don't think anybody really expects a $800 console built in reverb to sound as good as a $2500 stand alone effects unit (except Uli)." I haven't spent enough time yet with the new X series consoles to really compare them to the high line effects I have so I held back. It is possible with current technology and The Music Group has the resources to pull it off but I can't personally say one way or the other yet. I can say that the Mackie DL 1608 effects are weak at this current software version though. I still think the DL is a cool board for its application though and has been very dependable for the folks I know who have them. I would use one in most of the situations I use a MixWiz for.
Click to expand...

Hi Eric-

My point was not so much about the FX in any of the mixers mentioned so much as no matter what is built or how good (or not) it may be, there will always be folks that find the device wanting.... it should be Lexicon PCM92/Eventide H3000/EMT 250 for $300, and it should watch the children and cook lunch, too, in addition to being a mixer.

/sarcasm, satire
 
Re: Mix Wiz 3? Really?

Tim McCulloch said:
Hi Eric-

My point was not so much about the FX in any of the mixers mentioned so much as no matter what is built or how good (or not) it may be, there will always be folks that find the device wanting.... it should be Lexicon PCM92/Eventide H3000/EMT 250 for $300, and it should watch the children and cook lunch, too, in addition to being a mixer.

/sarcasm, satire
Click to expand...

I know what you mean. What is interesting is that we really have been getting close to that in this field as the technology and economy of scale progresses. Maybe not the cook lunch part though, I always heard that there is no free lunch.
 
Re: Mix Wiz 3? Really?

Eric Cagle said:
I was actually going to say, "I don't think anybody really expects a $800 console built in reverb to sound as good as a $2500 stand alone effects unit (except Uli)." I haven't spent enough time yet with the new X series consoles to really compare them to the high line effects I have so I held back. It is possible with current technology and The Music Group has the resources to pull it off but I can't personally say one way or the other yet. I can say that the Mackie DL 1608 effects are weak at this current software version though. I still think the DL is a cool board for its application though and has been very dependable for the folks I know who have them. I would use one in most of the situations I use a MixWiz for.
Click to expand...

Thanks Eric for verifying the DL 1608 effects quality again for me.

I would say that the PCM70 you spoke of may well be old, but it has astonishing sound quality. I understand that the PCM98 is even nicer .... but only by word of mouth.

Every post I have seen on the X32 efx was resoundingly positive. The marketing of the Xi16 states that it will share the same efx engine as the X32 which would (in theory) put the X32 quality efx in a DL 1608 package (and put the preamp gains remote as well ..... which Mackie should have gotten right as well). That would be a pretty serious contender in the .... what was it called ... ultra compact 16 channel mixer market.

If I were in product dev at Allen & Heath, I would be on the path of releasing one of these form factor mixers as well. Without a product like this, A&H will have a pretty big hole in their product lineup. There is a pretty big difference between the $2500.00 Qu16 and the $1000.00 DL 1608. I don't see the venerable MixWiz being able to hang with this market (I will be selling mine soon .... as soon as the 16 channel digitals all come out ;) ).
 
Re: Mix Wiz 3? Really?

Scott Bolt said:
Thanks Eric for verifying the DL 1608 effects quality again for me.

I would say that the PCM70 you spoke of may well be old, but it has astonishing sound quality. I understand that the PCM98 is even nicer .... but only by word of mouth.

Every post I have seen on the X32 efx was resoundingly positive. The marketing of the Xi16 states that it will share the same efx engine as the X32 which would (in theory) put the X32 quality efx in a DL 1608 package (and put the preamp gains remote as well ..... which Mackie should have gotten right as well). That would be a pretty serious contender in the .... what was it called ... ultra compact 16 channel mixer market.

If I were in product dev at Allen & Heath, I would be on the path of releasing one of these form factor mixers as well. Without a product like this, A&H will have a pretty big hole in their product lineup. There is a pretty big difference between the $2500.00 Qu16 and the $1000.00 DL 1608. I don't see the venerable MixWiz being able to hang with this market (I will be selling mine soon .... as soon as the 16 channel digitals all come out ;) ).
Click to expand...

One of the things I always try to point out about Allen & Heath is that they are always trying to promote themselves as being a higher product quality than the others. Also, the DL 1608 is really an iPad accessory as it cannot and does not work without the iPad to go along with it. Finally, I personally find Allen & Heath's preamps to sound nicer than any of the other brands in the lower markets (i.e. Mackie/Behringer/Peavey), and their analogue EQ is typically about the same. Unfortunately, they have suffered the problem you just pointed out, which happens to be a lack in getting ahead of the market. Their Qu-16 is an interesting product, but unfortunately doesn't compete in the other market niches that it should.
 
Re: Mix Wiz 3? Really?

Max Warasila said:
One of the things I always try to point out about Allen & Heath is that they are always trying to promote themselves as being a higher product quality than the others. Also, the DL 1608 is really an iPad accessory as it cannot and does not work without the iPad to go along with it. Finally, I personally find Allen & Heath's preamps to sound nicer than any of the other brands in the lower markets (i.e. Mackie/Behringer/Peavey), and their analogue EQ is typically about the same. Unfortunately, they have suffered the problem you just pointed out, which happens to be a lack in getting ahead of the market. Their Qu-16 is an interesting product, but unfortunately doesn't compete in the other market niches that it should.
Click to expand...

Max,

I agree. While I understand that the DL 1608 simply does not function without the iPad, it may well be good enough for the weekend warrior bands (like mine) which mix from stage anyway. The iPad is really only used as a mechanism of doing the out-front sound check. The other cool feature would be for the iPad to be used for scene changes between songs (MIDI would have been even nicer ..... which the Xi16 will have).

I feel that this new "Mix from stage" workflow is going to catch on big with the small band operators. I know that it is still a laughable product for any sound pro.

As an aside, I saw another youtube video of the Qu16 recently where they showed off the 16 channel eq capability by putting all 16 channels on the faders for control. Not a bad option ;)

I am still thinking more along the lines of the X32 Producer, and Qu16 where there is a physical interface, and a bit more umph under the digital hood than the DL 1608 or Xi16. To be honest, motorized faders are just too cool for color TV :) Gotta have it.
 
Re: Mix Wiz 3? Really?

Scott Bolt said:
Max,

I agree. While I understand that the DL 1608 simply does not function without the iPad, it may well be good enough for the weekend warrior bands (like mine) which mix from stage anyway. The iPad is really only used as a mechanism of doing the out-front sound check. The other cool feature would be for the iPad to be used for scene changes between songs (MIDI would have been even nicer ..... which the Xi16 will have).

I feel that this new "Mix from stage" workflow is going to catch on big with the small band operators. I know that it is still a laughable product for any sound pro.

As an aside, I saw another youtube video of the Qu16 recently where they showed off the 16 channel eq capability by putting all 16 channels on the faders for control. Not a bad option ;)

I am still thinking more along the lines of the X32 Producer, and Qu16 where there is a physical interface, and a bit more umph under the digital hood than the DL 1608 or Xi16. To be honest, motorized faders are just too cool for color TV :) Gotta have it.
Click to expand...

OH Well of course then. Thought you were coming from a different standpoint. :p

Actually, the last time I mixed from the stage was on one of Mackie's competing products for the MixWiz series: 1604-VLZ3. Apart from the fact that it was still from the stage, I think I would have preferred something like the DL1608, although I certainly would miss all the knobs! Most of my job was re-doing the board set ups between the groups and being able to recall settings on an iPad would have made it far easier. Still think I would prefer being in the house though. :D
 
Re: Mix Wiz 3? Really?

Max Warasila said:
OH Well of course then. Thought you were coming from a different standpoint. :p

Actually, the last time I mixed from the stage was on one of Mackie's competing products for the MixWiz series: 1604-VLZ3. Apart from the fact that it was still from the stage, I think I would have preferred something like the DL1608, although I certainly would miss all the knobs! Most of my job was re-doing the board set ups between the groups and being able to recall settings on an iPad would have made it far easier. Still think I would prefer being in the house though. :D
Click to expand...

Yea, I hear you.

I think that once you start saying you are going to be mixing in real time from out front with a full time sound pro at the helm, even the X32 layout is a bit cumbersome in that the layers and multi-purpose buttons and knobs don't really lend themselves to fast and easy operation. The Qu16 is more like the MixWiz in this regard (as is the Soundcraft Expression Si).
 
Re: Mix Wiz 3? Really?

Scott Bolt said:
Yea, I hear you.

I think that once you start saying you are going to be mixing in real time from out front with a full time sound pro at the helm, even the X32 layout is a bit cumbersome in that the layers and multi-purpose buttons and knobs don't really lend themselves to fast and easy operation. The Qu16 is more like the MixWiz in this regard (as is the Soundcraft Expression Si).
Click to expand...

Entirely true, but one of the most important things for me in a digital console is DCA's, and unfortunately as far as I can tell the Qu16 doesn't have them. On the other hand, all of the ins and outs are right on the console and without layers, but I've always had to group things for theatrical performances where groups really are required.
 
Re: Mix Wiz 3? Really?

Steve Milner said:
Am I reading this correctly... You prefer to have (seven) effects units available when mixing? What are you using all of those for?
Click to expand...
1. Snare reverb
2. Tom reverb
3. Small vocal verb...ambience.
4. Large vocal verb
5. Chorus... For whatever
6. Short delay for vocal, guitar, etc
7. Long tap delay.

A nice double pitch shift is nice too to add thickening without modulation. A dedicated ping pong delay with high feedback is also good for sending certain notes too for distinct repeating fx.
I mix quite a few Rock Tribute acts and attempt to emulate the recordings as well as I can. Listen to a Def Leapard or Bon Jovi song and you can pick out all these FX. Multiple delay FX are very effective especially live for creating discernible spaces for different instruments. I set up templates for my studio projects and 7 is usually a minimal starting point. This is also a good example of when " less is more" can apply. After I learned to mix with 10 FX I can more effectively choose when forced to mix with less. One thing is that if the band/musicians are loose...don't have well crafted sounds or arrangements, and are not accurate players or singers I will use less as the sonic landscape can be inspiring with well crafted music, but can quickly turn to mud with less accurate playing. All said, with the X32, I am using 2 verbs, a chorus/delay for thickening and motion and a tap delay for vocals/leads. A complex rhythm delay, like a TC D2, with a good bit of feedback, and a constantly riden return DCA can really bring vocal arrangements alive and make the show sound 'larger than life.'
 
Re: Mix Wiz 3? Really?

John Chiara said:
1. Snare reverb
2. Tom reverb
3. Small vocal verb...ambience.
4. Large vocal verb
5. Chorus... For whatever
6. Short delay for vocal, guitar, etc
7. Long tap delay.

A nice double pitch shift is nice too to add thickening without modulation. A dedicated ping pong delay with high feedback is also good for sending certain notes too for distinct repeating fx.
I mix quite a few Rock Tribute acts and attempt to emulate the recordings as well as I can. Listen to a Def Leapard or Bon Jovi song and you can pick out all these FX. Multiple delay FX are very effective especially live for creating discernible spaces for different instruments. I set up templates for my studio projects and 7 is usually a minimal starting point. This is also a good example of when " less is more" can apply. After I learned to mix with 10 FX I can more effectively choose when forced to mix with less. One thing is that if the band/musicians are loose...don't have well crafted sounds or arrangements, and are not accurate players or singers I will use less as the sonic landscape can be inspiring with well crafted music, but can quickly turn to mud with less accurate playing. All said, with the X32, I am using 2 verbs, a chorus/delay for thickening and motion and a tap delay for vocals/leads. A complex rhythm delay, like a TC D2, with a good bit of feedback, and a constantly riden return DCA can really bring vocal arrangements alive and make the show sound 'larger than life.'
Click to expand...

Wow... you're certainly thorough!! I've had studio projects that get into plenty of effects for sure, but four engines have always been plenty for my live needs. So with these tribute bands... are you pulling presets up on 7 different processors between every song in order to re-create the album sound for each song being covered? How do you keep all of that coordinated, or do they use a set-list that doesn't change very often? I'm assuming you're now at least saving scenes in your x32 or each of these songs, but trying to do this with 7 different processors with a top-40 cover band that bounces around a set-list, just sounds like an incredible amount of work.

Personally, I don't dig the over processed sound of an effects heavy mix.... but I also don't do any tribute acts, so re-creting that era of effects heavy mixes isn't something I'm trying to do. I salute you for your willingness to go the extra mile for your bands!
 
Top Bottom