New Midas M32 Console

Re: New Midas M32 Console

I've found Midas nothing but terrific to work with. I send them an e-mail and they respond within a couple of hours to me. Much better than other companies I've worked with which can take days or weeks to respond.

Art
 
Re: New Midas M32 Console

Daniel Levi said:
Has the firmware just got a software switch that detects if it's either an m32 or an x32 and uses it to load the correct branding
Click to expand...

Yes, there are at present six models catered for; X32 Console, Compact, Producer, Rack, Core and M32. In the case of the M32, it only gets a different graphic as far as I could tell from the firmwares. (M32 has been catered for in a couple of earlier Behringer FW updates)
 
Re: New Midas M32 Console

Daniel Levi said:
Has the firmware just got a software switch that detects if it's either an m32 or an x32 and uses it to load the correct branding
Click to expand...

Yea, we do this at my work as well. We generally use a pair of resistors to make a voltage bridge, then read an A/D to determine hardware type and revision. They could also be reading it out of a register in a chip somewhere as well.
 
Not A Pleasant First Outing with the M32

With the protective film still on the display screen and scribble strips, I ventured out with the M32 for its debut at an outdoor festival last night.

It wasn't the best of times.

  • None of the band could connect with X32-Q. Needless to say, they were most unhappy not being able to control their IEMs.

Silly me for assuming that X32-Q would function on the M32. I've spent several hours today putzing with it and still no connection.

The M32 CUE is not yet available ... despite what the web site states.

M32 CUE.jpg

This is a show stopper and the M32 will have to stay home until this can be resolved. What a waste! $$$


  • At the end of the first set, faders 1, 3, and 4 (input side) became unresponsive to layer changes. So much for the 1 million life cycle.

Those three faders would just remain in the layer one position when going to other layers.

It was overcast with no sunshine and the air temperature was 65º F/18º C. The M32 was sheltered under a pavilion.

As you might expect, the M32 has been on at home for 3 hours now and the faders operate properly. Go figure.


I'm now paranoid of using the M32 and feel that it's a real boat anchor that can only sit and look pretty until these issues are resolved.
 
Last edited:
Re: Not A Pleasant First Outing with the M32

Hi Bob,
Despite the other issues what were the back lights on the buttons like - were they clearly visible as being selected?
 
Re: Not A Pleasant First Outing with the M32

Hi Nick ...

Thanks to the overcast sky, the back lit buttons were marginally visible. In bright sunlight, the back lit button labels will be rendered useless.

I cannot fathom that this design flaw was not noticed by the Kutty-Bentley crew!
 
Re: Not A Pleasant First Outing with the M32

Bob Harvey said:
Hi Nick ...

Thanks to the overcast sky, the back lit buttons were marginally visible. In bright sunlight, the back lit button labels will be rendered useless.

I cannot fathom that this design flaw was not noticed by the Kutty-Bentley crew!
Click to expand...

That was the first thing I've noticed looking at the M32 pics from NAMM: its look has definite priority over functionality. I don't know if any real world sound engineer was involved at the design stage, but these barely visible red dots at the buttons is a serious flaw. The only other desk that's worse in this respect is AVID S3L, lights are also barely visible (on that one buttons are copied straight from studio S6 desk, obviously no one tested them under bright sun on a live gig). Being fan of Profile, I just can't stand S3L though.

Also, seems like that "96K-capable" thing we've been mumbling about since January boils down just to ability to use DL25 and DL15 series stageboxes clocked down to 48K. What's the point of introducing DL16 altogether, besides Ultranet/P16 monitoring? DL251 costs not whole lot more than two DL16 ($3.5K even on eBay), and preamps are supposedly the same in both.

Frankly my excitement about M32 went down. Would keep using X32 and probably get Yamaha QL5 instead of M32. Price is double, but looks like it's worth it. Not whole lot bigger, but has everything I wish M32 had.
 
Re: Not A Pleasant First Outing with the M32

Bob Harvey said:
I'm now paranoid of using the M32 and feel that it's a real boat anchor that can only sit and look pretty until these issues are resolved.
Click to expand...
As I understand it the firmware is identical to the x32 so this suggests that the fader issue is hardware related. It would have shown on all of the x32's out there by now otherwise. It is a pain if it is intermittent as well...

I would be mad as well if it happened to me and I'd contact the seller to have the unit exchanged for another...
 
Re: Not A Pleasant First Outing with the M32

I have see M32 in normal light and it look ok for me. many console have problem with direct sunlight. From all console I know, midas screen are best and very bright, the Pro console is very good.
Bob, fader not seem hardware problem, maybe software , is possible that show file is loaded or other settinmg? what I read x32 and m32 software no same and maybe solve problem to update last firmware.
 
Re: Not A Pleasant First Outing with the M32

You know, I personally have never understood why on earth you would under power the LEDs. I mean, they're so cheap. I understand that the cost to consumer is much more than the cost of manufacturing, but it can't be that significant, even if you had to increase some part of the PSU and etching to handle it (once again, seemingly negligible to me).
 
Top Bottom