SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

[David Elsbury]

Hi all
I work for a corporate AV company with a couple of GB4, a couple of GB8, and a handful of smaller Soundcraft and A+H mixers.

Looking to try and convince them to go digital, and looking at the Soundcraft range. Would appreciate your comments, on what may be a slightly jumbled collection of my thoughts.

Thinking of suggesting they initially buy 2x Performer 1's. One with a 32ch stagebox and one with a 16ch stagebox. Both fitted out with a CAT5 MADI card. Possibly look at getting a DANTE card for one of them - we run a few Shure ULX-D which offer DANTE out.

Then in the future looking at either a VI4 or a VI3000 with another stagebox, and a MADI card.

So my questions...
Should I keep both console packages the same? I.E both with 32ch stagebox? That way no matter which console is out on the job, it's not the "wrong one" if I suddenly need the other stagebox?

The DMX functionality... really just need it to drive a stage wash and change the colour of some LED uplights. Should be OK for this?

VI4 or VI3000. What is the better console? VI3000 has DANTE onboard. Can the optical MADI port on the VI3000 do a stagebox? I could run one stagebox over optical and one over CAT5 for large shows.

Small to medium shows are do-able on the Perfomer 1. Should I get Performer 2's instead? The only concern I have, is that the Performer 2 isn't totally different (from a management point of view) to the VI4 or VI3000.

Thanks heaps
David

 

[TJ Cornish]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

They are fine boards, but one choice of many.

Who will be running these? If clients, are they what the client is asking for? Why the Vi4/Vi3000 as a next step? Surely your management will notice the extra zero in the price of the Vi-class boards. If you need it, that's great, but that is definitely a different class.

 

[David Elsbury]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

They are fine boards, but one choice of many.

Hi TJ, thanks for the reply.
I agree that there are many choices out there. Too many
My last employer had the SI Expression 2's, which I liked, my thinking on the Performer is the DMX control capability and a few small features, such as dual option slots, and VCA's.

My thinking on going Soundcraft is that, apart from the fact that I am already familiar on the boards, the stageboxes can be used with the larger desk for bigger shows, without having to buy another different set of stageboxes. Also, the workflow will be similar for the other techs.

Who will be running these? If clients, are they what the client is asking for? Why the Vi4/Vi3000 as a next step? Surely your management will notice the extra zero in the price of the Vi-class boards. If you need it, that's great, but that is definitely a different class.

We will be running these, normally it's corporate with a few awards dinners and a few bands. Hence why the Performer as the initial step and then looking at a VI later in the game. I suppose an alternative future expansion would be the Performer 3, but I would be concerned that I would be limiting myself with the number of mixes and matrixes. Then again, we're talking (for a really big show) maybe 1500, 2000 pax audience so...

I do, of course need to get some $$$$ numbers out of a sales rep, at some point soon, but just wanted to put some feelers out there to see what others thoughts were.

Cheers
David

 

[Rob Timmerman]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

Hi TJ, thanks for the reply.
I agree that there are many choices out there. Too many
My last employer had the SI Expression 2's, which I liked, my thinking on the Performer is the DMX control capability and a few small features, such as dual option slots, and VCA's.

My thinking on going Soundcraft is that, apart from the fact that I am already familiar on the boards, the stageboxes can be used with the larger desk for bigger shows, without having to buy another different set of stageboxes. Also, the workflow will be similar for the other techs.


We will be running these, normally it's corporate with a few awards dinners and a few bands. Hence why the Performer as the initial step and then looking at a VI later in the game. I suppose an alternative future expansion would be the Performer 3, but I would be concerned that I would be limiting myself with the number of mixes and matrixes. Then again, we're talking (for a really big show) maybe 1500, 2000 pax audience so...

I do, of course need to get some $$$$ numbers out of a sales rep, at some point soon, but just wanted to put some feelers out there to see what others thoughts were.

Cheers
David

Other manufacturers (at least A+H and Yamaha) have scalability up and down the line as well, and may be worth a look.

What's the reason for going digital? Setup time? FoH footprint? Truck pack? It's the shiny new toy?

 

[David Elsbury]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

All of the above, really. Setup time definately comes into it (currently, each bit of kit is in it's own sleeve, so there is a stack of eq's, line drive, compresssion, fx) - all must be wired and connected separately - getting it all in the box is a big plus. Being corporate, the smaller the FOH setup the better. And the increased flexibility it offers me as an engineer (being able to throw some gentle compression on the mic mid-presenter because they have decided to start varying their level all over the place, without having to re-route through a subgroup, etc) is a definate bonus. And a CAT5 multicore is always good also.

The A+H stuff seemed a lot pricer when I looked, but that was a little while ago, and I must admit that was without me having got quotes.

What in the A+H range would you suggest? An 80 and a 114 ? Usually we will have the radio recievers at mix position, with the Soundcraft offerings I am looking at, there are plenty of local inputs whereas with the A+H we would need a small mix rack at FOH, and the rest on stage.. yes?

Cheers

 

[Max Warasila]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

All of the above, really. Setup time definately comes into it (currently, each bit of kit is in it's own sleeve, so there is a stack of eq's, line drive, compresssion, fx) - all must be wired and connected separately - getting it all in the box is a big plus. Being corporate, the smaller the FOH setup the better. And the increased flexibility it offers me as an engineer (being able to throw some gentle compression on the mic mid-presenter because they have decided to start varying their level all over the place, without having to re-route through a subgroup, etc) is a definate bonus. And a CAT5 multicore is always good also.

The A+H stuff seemed a lot pricer when I looked, but that was a little while ago, and I must admit that was without me having got quotes.

What in the A+H range would you suggest? An 80 and a 114 ? Usually we will have the radio recievers at mix position, with the Soundcraft offerings I am looking at, there are plenty of local inputs whereas with the A+H we would need a small mix rack at FOH, and the rest on stage.. yes?

Cheers

There's no need to get a 114 if you don't need the physical faders or iPad space. It does nothing to the actual processing power of the board. To be honest, though I'd consider iLive more seriously, for cross rental reasons.

 

[Eric Lenasbunt]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

I'm sitting at a Vi1 right now running nearly 64 channels and 13 outs plus MTX outs, etc.

This church also has a Si Expression for mobile use so that sharing stage boxes is easy. It works well.

The Vi1 may actually fit your needs if you don't need more then 64 in and 24 out. You are limited on expansion cards though, so need the Compact Stagebox to add an additional out...
It is nice though that we have the full 32 channels of analog ins on the console, it lets us use existing snakes along with different stage box configurations.

If I were making this call RIGHT NOW or in the near future I would seriously consider the Behringer X32 range with the Midas consoles as the big brother. Or better yet, the M32 Midas that is forthcoming with the Pro series stage boxes, same idea, maybe more channels then you need on the smaller board.

Should be a lot cheaper then the Vi4, that's a big $ console...

 

[Simon Ryder]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

This is a decision that we have just made. We have just sold off the Yamaha LS9s and replaced them with Si Performers. We bought an Si Compact 2 about a month ago on a stupidly cheap deal and fell in love with it. However we felt that it (and the Expression) lacked the functionality of the LS9 for doing more complicated shows (not having 4 bands of fully parametric EQ is the biggest downfall) and so picked up a Performer. That inventory has now grown to 1 x Compact 2, 2 x Performer 2s and 1 x Vi1. Our next point is to start buying stage boxes. In a couple of weeks, we will add a pair of 32ch Mini stage boxes.
As we grow, the next step will likely be a Vi3000 and the 64ch stage box (on optical) though this may have to wait until next year...

Why the Soundcrafts?

I find them faster and more intuitive than the Midas boards with a similar level of sound quality. We do not as yet need the complicated networking abilities of the Midas offerings.

I have never been a particular fan of the A+H desks (it is just a personal preference). I also never seem to see them requested on riders.

The Behringer for the lower end stuff? Too many riders say "strictly no Behringer X32s" for it to be an option. I suspect that they are just too affordable and this is a way of selecting the quality of rental house.

Our other big contender are the Digico family which is superb but these have been plagued by stories of being unreliable and could be an iffy choice for a small company that doesn't want to carry a spare desk. However, at the price point the Soundcrafts were offered to us at, it was a no-brainer.

 

[Robert Lofgren]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

The Behringer for the lower end stuff? Too many riders say "strictly no Behringer X32s" for it to be an option. I suspect that they are just too affordable and this is a way of selecting the quality of rental house.

This is the first time heard of, but if this is true then they are plain stupid.

The quality of a rental house have nothing to do if they have the x32 in their inventory or not...

 

[Eric Lenasbunt]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

This is the first time heard of, but if this is true then they are plain stupid.

The quality of a rental house have nothing to do if they have the x32 in their inventory or not...

+1 I have several B-level (and below riders on my desk right now and so far not one "no x32". In fact, most guys I have run into now prefer it to the LS9 for gigs that used to want that desk.

On the second comment, literally every production/rental company I know (10+) in my region has at least one x32 if not several. These are multi-million dollar production companies.

And to the OP, if they were accepting an A&H analog why would they not take an x32? That's silly.

Now I feel like a fanboy, which I am not, but I do recognize a useful tool that makes me $$$

 

[Brian jojade]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

The cost for the DMX ability built into the Performer series is a pretty hefty premium for not a very powerful DMX controller. Heck, a $100 external DMX controller will give you the functionality you need for a stage wash and a few LED cans.

While there are also a few extra features, The SI expression is $2500 less. Now you can afford to have 32 channel stage boxes on each rig, and use an external DMX controller that actually fits your needs.

Soundcraft, A&H, and Behringer are all pretty much competing in the same space with their Expression, QU and X32 lines, with the X32 as the one that gets the most bashing because of the brand name. I'd take any of them as a replacement for your larger analog boards. My current pick is the X32 line because of the X32 rack. For only a couple dollars more than what the SoundCraft 16ch stage box goes for, I have a stage box AND a mixer. No, it's not the top of the line brand name, but the sound quality has been as good if not better than my older analog gear that I replaced.

 

[David Sturzenbecher]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

With the latest software release, the Si line has preamp control of BSS London boxes. In my world...thats a big deal.

 

[Brent Handy]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

There's no need to get a 114 if you don't need the physical faders or iPad space. It does nothing to the actual processing power of the board. To be honest, though I'd consider iLive more seriously, for cross rental reasons.

It is a GLD 112. There is no 114.

GLDs are smaller, lighter, just fine for corporate/hire work.

I have sold iLives. In my market, my entry level digital console has been the GLD line. AM&S provides excellent service. I have had two instances where a console out of warranty was replaced, or the repairs were covered. They are accessible on the on phone. Communication is very thorough and expedient.

That said, GLD cannot be expanded. This is where my Soundcraft sales begin. If I need to give a customer more in the future, I will sell them SI Performers, VI3000s, etc. I just got my church two VI3000s and two SI Performer1s. The Performers are going in the youth rooms to run sound and lights. The VI3000s are replacing a Yamaha M7CL and M3000 in the main auditoriums. We can grow volunteers, starting them off in the youth rooms, then shadowing them in the auditoriums. I think the VI3000s are going to be my meat and potato mixer for a while. Soundcraft support is good as well. I have a great couple of reps and they are good at taking care of biniz.

 

[Steve Hurt]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

Performer has an extra card slot, Scribble strips, VCA's as well as the DMX

And if you shop them, you'll find that the difference in cost is not near what the list price difference is.

 

[Simon Ryder]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

The cost for the DMX ability built into the Performer series is a pretty hefty premium for not a very powerful DMX controller. Heck, a $100 external DMX controller will give you the functionality you need for a stage wash and a few LED cans.

While there are also a few extra features, The SI expression is $2500 less. Now you can afford to have 32 channel stage boxes on each rig, and use an external DMX controller that actually fits your needs.

Soundcraft, A&H, and Behringer are all pretty much competing in the same space with their Expression, QU and X32 lines, with the X32 as the one that gets the most bashing because of the brand name. I'd take any of them as a replacement for your larger analog boards. My current pick is the X32 line because of the X32 rack. For only a couple dollars more than what the SoundCraft 16ch stage box goes for, I have a stage box AND a mixer. No, it's not the top of the line brand name, but the sound quality has been as good if not better than my older analog gear that I replaced.

The biggest factor for me for the Performer over the Expression is the 4 bands of fully parametric EQ (rather than high and low shelves on the Expression). The VCAs are also an incredible advantage, especially if mixing from an iPad. The second card slot then means you can add a second stage box or the firewire / USB card and have 32ch of i/o and still keep a stage box on the first slot. This then means that it does everything that the X32 does and a fair bit more besides (56ch + 4 stereo).

As for the DMX - never used it but I guess it may be of use to someone with a few LED par cans.

If you can do the stretch to the Performer it is worth the extra £/$ over the Expression and leaves more room for growing your system.

 

[Simon Ryder]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

This is the first time heard of, but if this is true then they are plain stupid.

The quality of a rental house have nothing to do if they have the x32 in their inventory or not...

You are quite right about the quality of a rental house not being based on whether they have an X32 or not. There is one in my warehouse. Most of the major players have a few of them around for budget gigs.

As for Eric's statement about the A&H comparison it is very accurate .The price point of the X32 puts it straight in the niche once filled by the GL2400 and small outboard rack.

You may recall that many riders used to say "no A+H". A little unfair as the desks were quite decent. It wasn't the console however that was really being rejected, it was the dodgy outboard rack of Behringer / Samson / Phonic / insert other cheap brand here, as well as the level of infrastructure associated with it from a provider or venue who has just about scraped together enough cash to buy one of these consoles.

This is not to say that the X32 is not good. It is (now I sound like a fan boy). However there is a limit to the level of bands and corporate clients that will be willing to accept one. If this does not matter to you in your market, and you haven't fallen for one of its slightly pricier competitors, go ahead and buy one. I do not think that you will regret it. If however you are already doing higher level acts and events once in a while (or want to be), you may want to consider the Performer ,Yamaha QL, or the M32.

Finally, there is also the sound quality factor. the M32, Performer (and Expression) and the A+H digital desks all sound noticeably better than the X32. Now obviously this is subjective ,so I would recommend going and listening.

 

[Jeff Hague]

Re: SI Performer/VI ? to replace GB series

Hi all


Thinking of suggesting they initially buy 2x Performer 1's. One with a 32ch stagebox and one with a 16ch stagebox. Both fitted out with a CAT5 MADI card.
Thanks heaps
David

Cant help much with your other questions but I can suggest that you get 2 MiniStagebox32s instead of a 32 and a 16. I recently bought a Performer 3 for my main console and a Performer 1 to use for smaller gigs or for monitors. I also got a MiniStagebox32 and planned on buying a second MADI card for the Performer 1 but then saw that Stagebox16 with the card was about the same price so I got a stagebox32 and a stagebox16. What I then found out is that the Stagebox32 comes with a dual MADI port card while the Stagebox16 comes with a single MADI port card. They do work together but the single port card doesnt give you redundancy and makes running both consoles with a stagebox tricky.