Presonus 32.4.2Al

Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

Rob Gow said:
True.

Behringer has always been a low cost alternative.

Behringer DI: $80
Radial DI: $175
Click to expand...

Behringer of old had been a low cost alternative when they copied other designs and simply used cheaper crappy components inside. Their products looked the same, or very similar on the outside to the product they had copied, but performance and reliability were nothing like that which they were copying.

The 'new' Behringer seems to be taking a different direction. Yes, their products are still a low cost alternative, but they are coming up with their own designs. The cost savings are not simply because they copied an idea and used cheaper components. They are taking advantage of quality mass production savings and passing those savings on to the customer. Their pricing is derived from an actual cost of production model instead of pricing at whatever they think the market will bear model used by most others in the pro audio spectrum. From a build quality standpoint, I'd put the X32 in the same boat as the Presonus board. They are both O.K, but obviously not top of the line gear.

Each board obviously has its advantages. 32 real sliders vs 16 sliders on 2 layers offers different mixing opportunities. Some will want all sliders at their fingertips, others live with layers. I'd give the advantage here to the Presonus by a very slight margin. Having the input meter on all channels is a definite plus to the Presonus, although The behringer can get there simply by switching layers. Of course, the output meter on the Presonus is nearly useless, with 10db increments around 0dB, you can't use it to get a very accurate reading. The behringer has more flexibility as far as patching, routing, digital snake, etc, but for many users, that doesn't matter at all. If it's just a straight 32 in board for a band, it's a tie. But overall flexibility goes to the Behringer. The learning curve on the Presonus is slightly easier, but once set up, the Behringer seems pretty straight forward as well.

Overall, both boards seem to fit into the same class, and could satisfy users with the same or similar needs. If they were priced the same, it would make the decision as to which to choose for a particular application a bit more difficult. But the $1000 price difference makes it really hard to even consider the Presonus board for most uses.
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

I think its pretty clear that both brands offer something useful. If it suits your needs and you are able to do what you need to with either one, than great... that's the way it should be.
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

Brian jojade said:
Having the input meter on all channels is a definite plus to the Presonus, although The behringer can get there simply by switching layers.
Click to expand...

When it's sitting Idle, I usually have my PC set to the meter screen in XControl, gives you a good idea of what's going on (level, compression and gating) on each channel.
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

Spenser Hamilton said:
When it's sitting Idle, I usually have my PC set to the meter screen in XControl, gives you a good idea of what's going on (level, compression and gating) on each channel.
Click to expand...
Or you watch all levels on the lcd.

As soon as you want to change the FAT, geq or aux sends on the presonus your level meters are gone until you press the input meter button. It is also difficult to se the level meters outside when the sun is shining.

Another thing that bugs me a little bit is that all the levels are spread out over the console surface that is cluttered with knobs and text. I prefer the levels spread over a smaller and/or cleaner surface. Also, the printed numbers for the levels aren't always the correct levels either...
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

Robert Lofgren said:
Or you watch all levels on the lcd.

As soon as you want to change the FAT, geq or aux sends on the presonus your level meters are gone until you press the input meter button. It is also difficult to se the level meters outside when the sun is shining.
Click to expand...

True. Is never do an outside gig with the board exposed to the elements. I always set up in my trailer. In my neck of the woods, it WILL rain during a weekend, so I make sure everything is out of the elements, rain AND sun. When its nice I mix via iPad.
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

Klaus Mock said:
First, most arguments pro SL are something like 'coming from analog desks its easier'. In fact this argument is not a real one because normally it needs a few hours to get familiar with the concepts of a digital console. Imho it is more complex to deal with all the routing and usabilty issues of analog consoles and the needed outboard gear then using a digital desk.
Click to expand...
You may not feel it is not a real argument for you but it is very real for many people. I am dealing with a situation right now with a group of operators, only one of which has any experience with digital audio mixers. Some of them have picked up on it very quickly, some get parts of it but struggle with others and one just cannot wrap their head around even the basic concepts of layers and programmable routing. Hours with the manuals, hours with the software and hours with people with them at the console and they still can't grasp concepts such as being able to assign any input to any fader, which then also trickles down to other issues. What makes that situation worse is that the particular individual struggling the most is the designated Owner's Rep and the one providing direction on what they want and determining when the system is operating properly.

Klaus Mock said:
Second, a big disadvantage of the SL series is the fact, that the less input channels the less processing parameters and features you get. Other vendors, e.g. Yamaha or Soundcraft, are providing the same features except the number of inputs and outputs.
Behringer goes even one step further and allows you to have the same engine and IO capabilities for the whole range. (Except the
IX16). Only the control surface and local io differs. But the eq, dynamics , busses and so on are the same for the whole range.
Click to expand...
If someone only needs or will only utilize certain capabilities and will only use that one mixer then how does that matter?

John Chiara said:
Ditto on all counts. If you can't get the hang of a new interface then buy what you like, but the whole "less is more" perspective is just laziness or no passion about improving your mixing skills.
Click to expand...
I would say it's about looking beyond preconceptions and at what actually best fits a specific application. Think of the church with a volunteer operator who just wants to mix the service or the band with a musician mixing, they are likely more focused on being able to get through what they have to do now than on expanding their skills or making mixing their career. Different solutions for different situations.
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

Brad,

I completely agree.

I currently mix on a MixWiz. What I really WANT is:

  1. Ability to mix wirelessly
  2. Ability to re-eq the mix and channels to get a good scene for use in gigs.
  3. 16 mic inputs

The SL can do this; however, it has the following drawbacks (the 16.4.2):

  1. It can not be remotely mixed without a computer hooked up through firewire
  2. The computer really should be an iMac if you want the firewire to work well
  3. There is no support for MIDI scene changes
  4. There is no support for Android remote devices

There are some very real advantages to the X32 that are either there already, or coming soon:
  1. The EFX are exceptional, not just OK
  2. Android tablet app for remote mixing
  3. Integrated pitch correction
  4. Record straight to USB drive.
  5. MIDI scene changes
  6. Open interface specification for 3rd party applications


Now having said all those nice things about the X32, here are my beefs.

It is not as convenient to switch layers while mixing (minor quibble).

The big thing for me is usability. Guys, I am not a sound pro, but I am the Chief Engineer of my company. I can read an electrical circuit diagram, make board layouts, and program both embedded and server based programs in several languages.

The X32, and perhaps digital consoles in general, was not a walk in the park for me to figure out. I had to read manuals, watch videos, and ask questions to get it figured out.

Sure, it is HUGELY more flexible than the SL, but I don't really need it to be. I only really mix my OWN band .... and our I/O needs don't change very often .... if ever.

It took me about 5 minutes of playing around with the Studio Live to be completely at ease with its (admittedly much more limited) capabilities.

I will likely still go with an X32 family mixer (I am debating on either the Producer or the Rack). I am very particular about good vocals, and the X32 is significantly better at processing vocals and making them sound good than the StudioLive from everything I have seen, read, and heard. The announcement that Behringer would be making a pitch correction effect really made me happy.

Before anyone pipes in and says that you should just sing better .... well, not every singer in the band is going to be the "lead" singer, and even though I am the lead singer, when you are busy playing guitar, or trying to figure out who in the band just missed a cord, or an old lady is giving you the finger ;) it is nice to have pitch correction keeping you sounding good even if you stray. I am always surprised listening to my recordings when I hear a weak note... and I think .... I don't remember being off on that one ;)

Anyway, I agree that the X32 isn't for everyone. There are going to be plenty of bands out there that feel more comfortable with the StudioLive series than the X32 just because they can "get it" fast.

The biggest disadvantage that the 32.4.2AI is going to face is that even IF the X32 is harder to figure out, I would be willing to do quite a bit of "figuring out" for the $1000.00 lower price of the X32.
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

The biggest thing for any application is the non- recallable preamp gain settings. You can have the perfect setup and if during a move or whenever the input gain changes, everything downstream is compromised if ONLY from a change in gain structure. I do a lot of dynamic balancing within the whole system and I can't have a nudged knob screw up the works. That is just not acceptable...IMO. I value my own time and others and don't want to have to reset my stuff when I often barely have time for a soundcheck.
C'mon really! The main reason I bought a digital console for studio mixdowns over a decade ago, was the recall abilities. Mixing different projects in the studio is a lot like mixing different bands. With Recall and even more...virtual soundcheck, gain settings are as important as anything else.
So basically, the console either has total recall or it doesn't.
That matters to me.
 
Last edited:
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

John Chiara said:
The biggest thing for any application is the non- recallable preamp gain settings. You can have the perfect setup and if during a move or whenever the input gain changes, everything downstream is compromised if ONLY from a change in gain structure. I do a lot of dynamic balancing within the whole system and I can't have a nudged knob screw up the works. That is just not acceptable...IMO. I value my own time and others and don't want to have to reset my stuff when I often barely have time for a soundcheck.
Click to expand...
Recallable preamp gain is very important for some applications but is not the "biggest thing for any application".

John Chiara said:
C'mon really! The main reason I bought a digital console for studio mixdowns over a decade ago, was the recall abilities. Mixing different projects in the studio is a lot like mixing different bands. With Recall and even more...virtual soundcheck, gain settings are as important as anything else.
So basically, the console either has total recall or it doesn't.
That matters to me.
Click to expand...
Which is why the X32 makes more sense for you and probably many in similar situations. However, others may have quite different applications, needs and goals. What may be a crucial aspect for one use may not matter at all in another and vice versa, so the optimal solution for different situations may also differ. For many here a X32 may be a better fit than a StudioLive but for some here and some of those that don't participate in forums like this one of the StudioLives or some other option may be a better fit.
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

Brad,
as you say there are different needs for different situations. Because there is only a limited range of mixer types out there everybody have to decide which one may be the best in a certain situation. I am owning four different mixer from a mackie 1202vlz up to the X32, which replaced a LS9. There is also a SL 16.4.2, so I think I know what we are talking about.
Today I would not buy the SL for several reasons mainly because it constrains me with so many missing features.
When someone starts to work with a digital console it may help if the console is limited in features. But for me the limit is reached too fast and then I want more, more flexibility in the routing, a better PEQ and so on.
In fact, I used the SL yesterday for a small job with five guys and their acoustic instruments in a small location. Because I didn't know how much space will be left, I decided to use the SL and the Ipad remote app. Once again I was remembered that I also have to connect a computer via firewire. Did you know, that disconnect the computer or close the lid of the macbook causes several very noticeable plops in your loudspeakers because the SL switches the clock? This also happens when you open the lid once again. So if you want to use such a configuration take care not to disconnect accidently the firewire cable.
then I have to notice, I used the remote for the first ime, that you cannot control the aux/fx send master as well as the FX settings as well as the two aux returns. You also cannot see how the compressors will work. This is a constraint for me.
Maybe you do not need to correct the gain from a remote app at the moment, but once you are far away from the mixer in between the croud and the gain of one channel must be adjusted you will give everything for programmable HA.
and I am sure this is also true for your unskilled operators some day.

Please don't understand me wrong, I see your point of view, but for me the most important thing is to do my job in the best possible way with the best tools I can get for my budget. That's it.
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

"2.The computer really should be an iMac if you want the firewire to work well"

That is simply not true. I have been using the SL for 8 months with a six year old Dell laptop with Win 7/iPad and it has "worked well", flawlessly, as a matter of fact. It depends on the function of the fire wire card, not the operating system of the computer.

Your comment about needing a computer for remote access is true, but if recording is important, you will be using a computer anyway, and the Personus is hard to beat for multitrack recording.
 
Last edited:
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

Different strokes for different folkes. You can't be convinced to buy a Studiolive, I can't be convinced to buy Behringer.


It's cool.
 
Rob Gow said:
Different strokes for different folkes. You can't be convinced to buy a Studiolive, I can't be convinced to buy Behringer.


It's cool.
Click to expand...

Yep,

After swearing I would not buy another mixer but live with my mixwiz for the few times a year a mixer is not provided, I just went and bought a studio live 16.4.2.

I am never an early adapter, it took several years for me to go from being accepting of the studio live, to liking the studio live, to actually buying one.

The behringer may be the best thing since swiss cheese but I will not make any personal decision about one until I have 20 or shows on one under my belt and they have stayed on the market about 3-5years. So ask me again in 2016.

The studio live suits my needs at a reasonable price with a reasonable feature set. The known limitations are not a real problem. A much longer feature set is meaningless if most of those features are not used.
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

I have another gig this Friday, 3 bands that I've done before. Load up the scenes and I'm halfway there. I'll remote mix and record them without issue. It will be a great night for all involved.

:)

I like the new features on the 32.4.2 but just can't justify it right now. I'm really happy with my 24.4.2 and 16.0.2 I'm waiting for presonus to dial in the 1818VSL (split the stereo aux's, allow channel naming) ill throw it in the front if my comp/router ATA case, and I'd have an all in one 8 channel solution for tiny gigs, comedians, open mics etc.

I love that I can use the same comp/router for both my 24.4.2 and my 16.0.2 it was one of the reasons I picked up the smaller mixer. And stairs.


Stairs was the other reason.


;)
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

Silas Pradetto said:
Right, you then have to reposition the faders and guess where the aux masters and input gains were. In reality, there's no way you'll ever be able to recall the scene and have it exactly the same as last time.
Click to expand...

Not that I would propose one mixer over the other, but I would say that even if you recall the gains, it is always possible that the band amps are setup different than the last time you mixed them. This happens to me all the time.... even when we try to keep everything the same.

I always end up having everyone check their levels before the gig. I either have them turn up/down to get the UV meter where I like it, or twist the gain a little.

I notice that when we are on a bigger stage, the lead guitar player likes a little more stage volume than on a smaller stage. I am sure that to him it sounds about the same volume in his head, but the larger space messes with him.

Is it really possible to simply recall gain positions and turn on the PA and play without doing a level check?
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

Silas Pradetto said:
Right, you then have to reposition the faders and guess where the aux masters and input gains were. In reality, there's no way you'll ever be able to recall the scene and have it exactly the same as last time.
Click to expand...

Right, and there's no way that all the musicians will be sending you the exact same level as last time. I have not found the inability to save gains to be much of a problem.
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

Chuck Simon said:
Right, and there's no way that all the musicians will be sending you the exact same level as last time. I have not found the inability to save gains to be much of a problem.
Click to expand...

my basic strategy is to know where I want the input level on the meters and have the rest of the gain structure post that set up in my scene. It is quick and easy to read the input gain and adjust accordingly. Since that is the first thing I would be doing on any board anyways not having it saved doesn't mean much. Adjusting to a known input level allows consistent gain structure through the effects and comps which are immediately usable, which does save time.

most of the faders stay in the same basic position where they can be adjusted slightly for mixing. During a band changeover if one or two channels may be very different then the standard position,say due to stage volume, they are pulled all the way out and then slid back into the mix at the appropriate level.

i can understand the desire for recallable head amps and faders on a 25+ channel show, so I can see this as a negative on a 32 channel board but on the smaller boards with a standard band setup, it has not been the slightest problem.
 
Re: Presonus 32.4.2Al

Jay Barracato said:
i can understand the desire for recallable head amps and faders on a 25+ channel show, so I can see this as a negative on a 32 channel board but on the smaller boards with a standard band setup, it has not been the slightest problem.
Click to expand...

The keyword is 'standard band setup'. If you have to deal with very different setups (either in one show or on different days) you will be happy for each recallable parameter you will get.
in fact i use the SL only for small, not recurring, jobs where there is no place for my other one (the ls9 in the past, now the X32).
Sure, you have to correct the gains every job a little bit, but recalling the previously used creates a very good starting point.
 
Top Bottom