New Midas - M32R

Re: New Midas - M32R

Tim McCulloch said:
In this forum, it sounds like Matt needs a Pro2 or bigger.
Click to expand...

But the Pro2 isn't rack mount.

I might end up running a split and using 2 small rack mount consoles instead. Then I'd run the M32R for FOH and 2 DL16s for band inputs, and I hope Midas comes out with a X32-Rack or X32-Core type brain for Monitors (again my knowledge of X32/M32 functions are limited). But then again, I am not to concerned about upgrading my LS9-32 just yet (Bigger wants are: 1) powered subs, 2) IEMs in the same Gen & Freq Band).
 
Last edited:
Re: New Midas - M32R

Matt Vivlamore said:
But the Pro2 isn't rack mount.

I might end up running a split and using 2 small rack mount consoles instead. Then I'd run the M32R for FOH and 2 DL16s for band inputs, and I hope Midas comes out with a X32-Rack or X32-Core type brain for Monitors (again my knowledge of X32/M32 functions are limited). But then again, I am not to concerned about upgrading my LS9-32 just yet (Bigger wants are: 1) powered subs, 2) IEMs in the same Gen & Freq Band).
Click to expand...

Matt, I'm not quite clear on your setup requirements... Are you looking FOH and a MON console, or you just need 32 ch to FOH?
I assume you are looking for "midas pre's". In that case you could run 2 x X32 cores or x32 racks on midas pro stageboxes, or DL16 - which would allot you midas preamps.
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

Shane Presley said:
Matt, I'm not quite clear on your setup requirements... Are you looking FOH and a MON console, or you just need 32 ch to FOH?
I assume you are looking for "midas pre's". In that case you could run 2 x X32 cores or x32 racks on midas pro stageboxes, or DL16 - which would allot you midas preamps.
Click to expand...


I am just thinking out loud. I don't really "need" Midas Pre's, but would rather have the better hardware/chipset/computer.

Yes, I use 1 console for both FOH & Monitors; LS9-32: Layer 1 is dedicated to FOH duties, Layer 2 is for Monitors. I would love to build 1 Rolling Rack for the band (core of the band is 6 piece, sometimes optional 1-3pc horn section) to consist of console, 2 wireless mic (2 rack spaces), 3-6 IEM Transmitters (3-4 spaces) and Rack Drawer. And then have a sweet patch bay on the back side (I've got the band on a few multipin drop snakes).
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

IMO truly hearable differences - in the live performance crucible - are negligible/academic.

Utility as a rental stock item will differ.
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

Matt -

Like you, I mixed on an LS9-32 with splits for foldback. I went to the iLive systems (T112/idr48 and an R72/idr32), which was a step up in about every detail. As I have slowly been backing out of the live sound arena, I sold the T112 as the R72 system took care of everything I was doing. I used a 24/24 split for 90% of my jobs, and had a scene with 32 inputs for the scarce jobs that needed more than 24. (system is for sale, by the way)

You need to consider the FADER COUNT as well as CHANNEL count on any surface that can provide your requirements... You'll need 64 faders for foh+monitors, say 8 dcas, 16 mixbus outs, and if you are including LR in the 16 output, you're going to need a surface with 88 available faders. Add 8 matrix, you're at 96... How about some FX? You could be looking at 100 or more faders needed. In my situation with the R72 (which provides 72 fader positions, 6 layers of 12 faders), I programmed my basic 24/24 scene with 48 channels on the left bank, (8 ch x 6 layers) - except monitor channels 23 & 24 were used for matrix sends, and the right 4 x 6 bank was 4 x dca, 4 x FX sends, 4 x FX returns, 8 x auxes (2 layers) for foldback and a layer with L-R-SUB-Playback (playback in stereo on 1 fader). That worked for me using all 72 faders, but you'll need something with considerably more faders for your plan. Maybe Digico has something? The Allen & Heath boards allow the "hiding" of faders, so for instance, if you had a number of stereo input or output channels, they can be operated with 1 fader per stereo pair. You can "gang" up to 8 channels in 8 gangs, which could save faders...

I think deciding if rackmount is more important than channel count - or vice versa - will help you make your plans. As it is, you need a 64 channel mixer and a surface with whatever you decide your fader count must be... hopefully rackmountable...

Cheers,

-Tim T
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

Tim Tyler said:
Matt -

Like you, I mixed on an LS9-32 with splits for foldback. I went to the iLive systems (T112/idr48 and an R72/idr32), which was a step up in about every detail. As I have slowly been backing out of the live sound arena, I sold the T112 as the R72 system took care of everything I was doing. I used a 24/24 split for 90% of my jobs, and had a scene with 32 inputs for the scarce jobs that needed more than 24. (system is for sale, by the way)

You need to consider the FADER COUNT as well as CHANNEL count on any surface that can provide your requirements... You'll need 64 faders for foh+monitors, say 8 dcas, 16 mixbus outs, and if you are including LR in the 16 output, you're going to need a surface with 88 available faders. Add 8 matrix, you're at 96... How about some FX? You could be looking at 100 or more faders needed. In my situation with the R72 (which provides 72 fader positions, 6 layers of 12 faders), I programmed my basic 24/24 scene with 48 channels on the left bank, (8 ch x 6 layers) - except monitor channels 23 & 24 were used for matrix sends, and the right 4 x 6 bank was 4 x dca, 4 x FX sends, 4 x FX returns, 8 x auxes (2 layers) for foldback and a layer with L-R-SUB-Playback (playback in stereo on 1 fader). That worked for me using all 72 faders, but you'll need something with considerably more faders for your plan. Maybe Digico has something? The Allen & Heath boards allow the "hiding" of faders, so for instance, if you had a number of stereo input or output channels, they can be operated with 1 fader per stereo pair. You can "gang" up to 8 channels in 8 gangs, which could save faders...

I think deciding if rackmount is more important than channel count - or vice versa - will help you make your plans. As it is, you need a 64 channel mixer and a surface with whatever you decide your fader count must be... hopefully rackmountable...

Cheers,

-Tim T
Click to expand...

Tim, I don't mind multiple layers. I've got my LS9 set-up in blocks of 8 channels because of the iPad App.
FOH:
1-8: Drums
9-16: Keys, Bass & Guitars
17-24: Horns & Vocals
25-32: Band Comm, TB, FX (linked to stereo channels), iPod.

Mons:
33-40: Drums
41-48: Keys, Bass & Guitars
49-56: Horns & Vocals
57-64: Linked to Layer 1.
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

Andrew Broughton said:
Is there any evidence or documentation that any hardware in the X32 OTHER than the preamps and faders is not identical to the M32?
Click to expand...

No, none whatsoever. Not in the signal path anyway.
We know that preamps, DAs, ADs, output amps, xlrs, faders, switches, encoders, buttons, possibly scribble strips, chassis construction (and possibly power-supply?) is different.
We have no indication whatsoever that there is any difference in the purely digital domain, and a very strong indication from the firmware that the difference is no bigger than the difference between any two models in the family.
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

Andrew Broughton said:
Is there any evidence or documentation that any hardware in the X32 OTHER than the preamps and faders is not identical to the M32?
Click to expand...
I've posted this before. The only differences between the x32 and the m32 are what Per listed. All of the digital processing hardware is the same in both consoles.

This was confirmed by the behringer staff.
 
Last edited:
Re: New Midas - M32R

once available I will be keen to migrate from an x32 to a M32R - however I currently use 2 x S16s ( not going to moan about the redundant in built pres this time) - so to get the full benefit will need DL16s. But cannot justify the full leap in one go
Therefore will I be correct in assuming the following will work (I.e no sw sync issues):
1. The M32 will happily interface with the S16s
2. A dl16 can be cascaded with an S16 to provide the full 32 remote stage pres.
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

Nick Davis said:
once available I will be keen to migrate from an x32 to a M32R - however I currently use 2 x S16s ( not going to moan about the redundant in built pres this time) - so to get the full benefit will need DL16s. But cannot justify the full leap in one go
Therefore will I be correct in assuming the following will work (I.e no sw sync issues):
1. The M32 will happily interface with the S16s
2. A dl16 can be cascaded with an S16 to provide the full 32 remote stage pres.
Click to expand...

Yup, I would guess that the digital side (after the D->A/A->D which I guess will be different like the X32/M32 internals) is the same (probably the same input and output PCB's that are in the M32) and there is a software switch that tells it if is a DL16 or S16 and that will be the only difference the X/M32 sees.
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

Daniel Levi said:
Yup, I would guess that the digital side (after the D->A/A->D which I guess will be different like the X32/M32 internals) is the same (probably the same input and output PCB's that are in the M32) and there is a software switch that tells it if is a DL16 or S16 and that will be the only difference the X/M32 sees.
Click to expand...

I assume the same but nevertheless would be nice if someone from Midas or Behringer (i.e. MG) would confirm the compatibility & mix of M32 DL16 and S16
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

Dear Nick,

Yes, the DL16 and S16 are interchangeable regarding their connectivity with M32/X32 consoles and can be daisy-chained from one another.

Best,
Chase McKnight
Specialist, Experience Engagement
MUSIC Group
MIDAS
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

Chase McKnight said:
Dear Nick,

Yes, the DL16 and S16 are interchangeable regarding their connectivity with M32/X32 consoles and can be daisy-chained from one another.

Best,
Chase McKnight
Specialist, Experience Engagement
MUSIC Group
MIDAS
Click to expand...
Chase,
Thanks for the confirmation - all good!
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

Robert Lofgren said:
I've posted this before. The only differences between the x32 and the m32 are what Per listed. All of the digital processing hardware is the same in both consoles.

This was confirmed by the behringer staff.
Click to expand...

That’s what I thought but if they are the same why doesn’t the X32-Q work on an M32 like as has been discussed on page 50 of the New Midas M32 thread?
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

Kevin Maxwell said:
That’s what I thought but if they are the same why doesn’t the X32-Q work on an M32 like as has been discussed on page 50 of the New Midas M32 thread?
Click to expand...

Same processing doesn't mean that there aren't coding differences. That said I'd much more likely blame it on getting the "look and feel" of the app that they want.
 
Re: New Midas - M32R

Max Warasila said:
Same processing doesn't mean that there aren't coding differences. That said I'd much more likely blame it on getting the "look and feel" of the app that they want.
Click to expand...

X32-Q should recognize the M32 as an X32 if it is told to do so, it should be a simple update, but for some reason they have opted to wait for the development of the M32 Cue.
 
Top Bottom