Presonus Studio-Live 24

Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

Steve Milner wrote on Sun said:
-No motorized faders -- MAJOR FAIL for my needs doing multiple monitor mixes.
Click to expand...



You can do multiple monitor mixes just fine without the motorized faders. Monitor mixes are not controlled by the faders but via the rotary controller above each individual channel. Select the mix you want and turn the knob for the appropriate channel. I don't personally find this to be any slower than sends on faders.



I think too many people are forgetting about the price of the Studiolive boards. I'm sure if presonus set a target price in the same range as an LS9-32 they could have a similar feature set.



Consider their target is somebody coming from a mixwiz with a small rack of a few comps, gates, and fx.



It is what it is. It does a decent job based on the features the designers chose to implement. I can find things to gripe about with any console. The key is to pick the one that has the least compromises for your particular needs.
 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

Jeff Babcock wrote on Mon said:
Select the mix you want and turn the knob for the appropriate channel. I don't personally find this to be any slower than sends on faders.
Click to expand...

The reason I like digital consoles with send-on-faders for monitor mixing is that the faders give me a quick, visual representation of what is going into the mix. Sure, I have cans and ears, but that doesn't mean I don't see the value of additional tools to make the task easier.
 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

Jeff Wheeler wrote on Mon said:
The reason I like digital consoles with send-on-faders for monitor mixing is that the faders give me a quick, visual representation of what is going into the mix. Sure, I have cans and ears, but that doesn't mean I don't see the value of additional tools to make the task easier.
Click to expand...



One of the features I find quite useful is the ''meter bridge'' feature of the fat channel LED's. You can quickly select:



Input

Output

Aux

Gain reduction



To see a visual representation of what's going to a monitor mix, simply select that aux and the ''meter bridge'' will show you what the level is on each channel.



To me, this visual is much better than looking at faders. You can see the LED's in low light much better than the faders. This is one of the better features of the SLive IMO.





 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

From all personal inquiries I have made...most with PC's have had recording problems..and those with Macs have not. I will be using a Mac in a few weeks and I will report my personal findings and impressions.
 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

5 yr old Dell with built in firewire (probably TI chipset) works fine. Toshiba I bought last year, no dice. Tried 2 different Express cards. Ended up selling the laptop and just use the old Dell.



I understand why firewire was chosen as it can send and receive data at the same time (USB2 cant). Too bad USB3 wasn't around when they built it. My guess is 12-24 months from now that's the interface you'll be seeing on pretty much every digital board for the foreseeable future. USB3 is faster than firewire and can send and receive simultaneously.



Also, FWIW, firewire native on a laptop is almost nonexistent and, I understand no major manufacturers are using TI chipsets when they do include firewire. Texas Instruments (TI) chipsets are by far the most compatible. I'm noticing just in the last 3 months or so, as laptops get smaller and thinner, less and less have 34/Express card slots giving no way to get firewire.
 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

Dick Rees wrote on Mon said:
Jeff Wheeler wrote on Mon said:
The reason I like digital consoles with send-on-faders for monitor mixing is that the faders give me a quick, visual representation of what is going into the mix. Sure, I have cans and ears, but that doesn't mean I don't see the value of additional tools to make the task easier.
Click to expand...







To see a visual representation of what's going to a monitor mix, simply select that aux and the ''meter bridge'' will show you what the level is on each channel.



To me, this visual is much better than looking at faders. You can see the LED's in low light much better than the faders. This is one of the better features of the SLive IMO.
Click to expand...



+1



It seems to me that some of the complaints expressed about the StudioLive actually do have acceptable solutions. I sense that some of those complaining haven't spent much hands on time with the product.
 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

John Chiara wrote on Mon said:
From all personal inquiries I have made...most with PC's have had recording problems..and those with Macs have not. I will be using a Mac in a few weeks and I will report my personal findings and impressions.
Click to expand...



You take your chances with a PC.

If you buy a Mac, you can pretty much be assured they have tested it on your hardware platform.



If you don't like MacOS then just use Boot Camp and run Windows. Their hardware works great for either OS.

 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

Jeff Babcock wrote on Mon said:
Dick Rees wrote on Mon said:
Jeff Wheeler wrote on Mon said:
The reason I like digital consoles with send-on-faders for monitor mixing is that the faders give me a quick, visual representation of what is going into the mix. Sure, I have cans and ears, but that doesn't mean I don't see the value of additional tools to make the task easier.
Click to expand...







To see a visual representation of what's going to a monitor mix, simply select that aux and the ''meter bridge'' will show you what the level is on each channel.



To me, this visual is much better than looking at faders. You can see the LED's in low light much better than the faders. This is one of the better features of the SLive IMO.
Click to expand...



+1



It seems to me that some of the complaints expressed about the StudioLive actually do have acceptable solutions. I sense that some of those complaining haven't spent much hands on time with the product.
Click to expand...



Yup. And some of the ''work-arounds'' actually turn out to have some of the advantages of analog layout that are lost on more ''advanced'' digital consoles. For example:



With the monitor feeds on the channel encoders you can meter your aux inputs and not lose the ability to simultaneously use the channel faders to tweak the main mix. With sends on faders you have to do either one or the other. I regard this as an advantage for the Presonus.



Another ''analog'' type advantage is the access speed. No menus to speak of, no cursors or the like to fiddle with. Just big, clunky ACCESSIBLE controls with very high visibility.



Not a fan-boy, but I like it well enough.

 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

Jeff Babcock wrote on Mon said:
It seems to me that some of the complaints expressed about the StudioLive actually do have acceptable solutions. I sense that some of those complaining haven't spent much hands on time with the product.
Click to expand...

This is true, and I'm glad Dick posted about the meterbridge and clued me in. However, you don't have to take a Corvette out for a test ride to know it isn't good for towing a boat.
 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

Jeff Wheeler wrote on Mon said:
Jeff Babcock wrote on Mon said:
It seems to me that some of the complaints expressed about the StudioLive actually do have acceptable solutions. I sense that some of those complaining haven't spent much hands on time with the product.
Click to expand...

This is true, and I'm glad Dick posted about the meterbridge and clued me in. However, you don't have to take a Corvette out for a test ride to know it isn't good for towing a boat.
Click to expand...





Some of us don't have boats......



0




 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

[/quote] Yup. And some of the ''work-arounds'' actually turn out to have some of the advantages of analog layout that are lost on more ''advanced'' digital consoles. For example:



With the monitor feeds on the channel encoders you can meter your aux inputs and not lose the ability to simultaneously use the channel faders to tweak the main mix. With sends on faders you have to do either one or the other. I regard this as an advantage for the Presonus.



Another ''analog'' type advantage is the access speed. '''' No menus to speak of, no cursors or the like to fiddle with. '''' Just big, clunky ACCESSIBLE controls with very high visibility.



Not a fan-boy, but I like it well enough.

[/quote]



No menus to speak of? It has layers and menus just like any other digital board. Just look at assigning effects.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZfuX72PJas



Yes its easy to set up as others are as well. But it has layers and menus and cursors like any other digital board.



Douglas R. Allen



 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

Yup. And some of the ''work-arounds'' actually turn out to have some of the advantages of analog layout that are lost on more ''advanced'' digital consoles. For example:



With the monitor feeds on the channel encoders you can meter your aux inputs and not lose the ability to simultaneously use the channel faders to tweak the main mix. With sends on faders you have to do either one or the other. I regard this as an advantage for the Presonus.



Another ''analog'' type advantage is the access speed. '''' No menus to speak of, no cursors or the like to fiddle with. '''' Just big, clunky ACCESSIBLE controls with very high visibility.



Not a fan-boy, but I like it well enough.

[/quote]



No menus to speak of? It has layers and menus just like any other digital board. Just look at assigning effects.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZfuX72PJas



Yes its easy to set up as others are as well. But it has layers and menus and cursors like any other digital board.



Douglas R. Allen



[/quote]





Yes, I know how to assign effects. I said ''no menus to speak of'', meaning that most of the things that you need are there at hand without having to go through several actions to access them a la Yamaha.



Do you use one of these units or is YouTube as close as you get?
 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

Dick Rees wrote on Mon said:
Yup. And some of the ''work-arounds'' actually turn out to have some of the advantages of analog layout that are lost on more ''advanced'' digital consoles. For example:



With the monitor feeds on the channel encoders you can meter your aux inputs and not lose the ability to simultaneously use the channel faders to tweak the main mix. With sends on faders you have to do either one or the other. I regard this as an advantage for the Presonus.



Another ''analog'' type advantage is the access speed. '''' No menus to speak of, no cursors or the like to fiddle with. '''' Just big, clunky ACCESSIBLE controls with very high visibility.



Not a fan-boy, but I like it well enough.
Click to expand...



No menus to speak of? It has layers and menus just like any other digital board. Just look at assigning effects.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZfuX72PJas



Yes its easy to set up as others are as well. But it has layers and menus and cursors like any other digital board.



Douglas R. Allen



[/quote]





Yes, I know how to assign effects. I said ''no menus to speak of'', meaning that most of the things that you need are there at hand without having to go through several actions to access them a la Yamaha.



Do you use one of these units or is YouTube as close as you get? [/quote]



Sent a reply to your pm.



I see the Studiolive as not easier to use it just does not have as many features to have access to. A digital desk may seem complex at first if it has allot of features. A desk with not allot features may seem easy to run but the menus and layers are still there.



I would take the time to learn how to run a desk with more features before I would have a desk that on the surface seems easy only because its a bare bones desk.



Douglas R. Allen



 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

You're just not getting it. You seem to be setting a standard that a board should have every feature ever thought of. With that mindset all analog boards are garbage and should be burned. Just because the SL is digital doesn't mean it has to do everything. It's not all about how many features per square inch a board has. It's about the feature set and usability for the intended purpose.... period.



Throwing out the whole ''which is easier to use'' argument, the SL does have some material advantages over the Yamaha. No cards and outboard input bays needed and stupid simple recording are 2 that you cannot deny. Perhaps the biggest advantage is the full meter bridge. To me that's what makes the Yamaha a no go for my application. Now, whether that equals value to you versus the features the Yamaha has that the SL lacks is up to you.



A few quirks aside, I admit I'm a fan. I don't want or need the additional options of the Yamaha. Frankly, they'd just be in the way as I'd be tempted to never leave well enough alone and would constantly be screwing around with the board, likely during performances. For my application there is a certain elegance to having only what you need, all available on the surface with no layers (the few things in the menu I just don't need to get into during a show.)
 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

Sean Zurbrick wrote on Tue said:
You're just not getting it. You seem to be setting a standard that a board should have every feature ever thought of. With that mindset all analog boards are garbage and should be burned. Just because the SL is digital doesn't mean it has to do everything. It's not all about how many features per square inch a board has. It's about the feature set and usability for the intended purpose.... period.



Throwing out the whole ''which is easier to use'' argument, the SL does have some material advantages over the Yamaha. No cards and outboard input bays needed and stupid simple recording are 2 that you cannot deny. Perhaps the biggest advantage is the full meter bridge. To me that's what makes the Yamaha a no go for my application. Now, whether that equals value to you versus the features the Yamaha has that the SL lacks is up to you.



A few quirks aside, I admit I'm a fan. I don't want or need the additional options of the Yamaha. Frankly, they'd just be in the way as I'd be tempted to never leave well enough alone and would constantly be screwing around with the board, likely during performances. For my application there is a certain elegance to having only what you need, all available on the surface with no layers (the few things in the menu I just don't need to get into during a show.)
Click to expand...



Oh well to each his/her own as they say. I'm sure the debate will continue as long as there is different boards out there.

When the next Gee whiz board comes out it most likely will be praised and trashed as well. If nothing else I like having the board that allot of people have and it seems to be used as a standard to compare other boards too.

To me the StudioLive 24 is close but just doesn't ''have it'' as far as what I'm looking for. At least in the same price range.

Take behringer behringer X32 that is slated to come out. If it ''Works'' and the price holds then both the 01v96 and studiolive boards will have been over run as far as features and price. It could happen. I would go with behringer behringer if it held up and the sound was fine. Still there is ALLOT of ''Ifs'' that needed to be addressed first. Time will tell.

Enjoy your studiolive. Its a nice basic board to get people started in digital. I'd like it allot better if it were around $1499 for what it offers. But that's me.
icon_twisted.gif




Kindest Regards;

Douglas R. Allen



EDIT: NOTE. Everytime I edit a post a word here or there is doubled. Anyone else have this problem?
 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

I'm putting out a double post to see if my words are doubled as in the Behringer / Behringer above. I edited and correct 5 times and could not stop the edit function from doubling different words at ramdom. Test Test.





Oh well to each his/her own as they say. I'm sure the debate will continue as long as there is different boards out there.

When the next Gee whiz board comes out it most likely will be praised and trashed as well. If nothing else I like having the board that allot of people have and it seems to be used as a standard to compare other boards too.

To me the StudioLive 24 is close but just doesn't ''have it'' as far as what I'm looking for. At least in the same price range.

Take behringer behringer X32 that is slated to come out. If it ''Works'' and the price holds then both the 01v96 and studiolive boards will have been over run as far as features and price. It could happen. I would go with behringer if it held up and the sound was fine. Still there is ALLOT of ''Ifs'' that needed to be addressed first. Time will tell.

Enjoy your studiolive. Its a nice basic board to get people started in digital. I'd like it allot better if it were around $1499 for what it offers. But that's me.



Kindest Regards;

Douglas R. Allen





 
Re: Presonus Studio-Live 24

Sean Zurbrick wrote on Tue said:
You're just not getting it. You seem to be setting a standard that a board should have every feature ever thought of. With that mindset all analog boards are garbage and should be burned. Just because the SL is digital doesn't mean it has to do everything. It's not all about how many features per square inch a board has. It's about the feature set and usability for the intended purpose.... period.



Throwing out the whole ''which is easier to use'' argument, the SL does have some material advantages over the Yamaha. No cards and outboard input bays needed and stupid simple recording are 2 that you cannot deny. Perhaps the biggest advantage is the full meter bridge. To me that's what makes the Yamaha a no go for my application. Now, whether that equals value to you versus the features the Yamaha has that the SL lacks is up to you.



A few quirks aside, I admit I'm a fan. I don't want or need the additional options of the Yamaha. Frankly, they'd just be in the way as I'd be tempted to never leave well enough alone and would constantly be screwing around with the board, likely during performances. For my application there is a certain elegance to having only what you need, all available on the surface with no layers (the few things in the menu I just don't need to get into during a show.)
Click to expand...



My take, and it looks like many share this point of view, is that the SL overall is a lower console than the Yamaha (fewer features). If this were reflected in the cost, there would be no issue. Half the console = half the cost. If the SL16 were $1200, it would be compared with the MixWiz crowd more than the 01V96. If the SL24 was around $2k MAP, I'd be interested, as that's about what it's worth to me.
 
Top Bottom