X32 Discussion

Re: strange or not strange!

Frank Pajak said:
For the Smaart component,what is the wish list? Is there a better approach than what Presonus is providing, I am interested what the forum thinks is acceptable or even realistically possible with a limited Smaart capability?
Click to expand...

For the record, I've never used a Presonus or indeed a SMART system. I'm not entirely sure how it works or what it does. What I do know is that I'd like to throw pink noise through a PA and look at it on a spectrum analyser. I'd also like to be able to play around with the resulting measurement using a GEQ, manually.

Many posts back in this thread, there was some discussion about accomplishing such a thing within the X32 firmware and it was also mentioned that this kind of functionality would be implemented in v2.0. I have no idea how the developers will implement such a feature but I'm looking forward to finding out.

I would like to see what suggestions everyone has for the developers at Behringer to what can be done to build on what the Presonus measurement approach is doing....
Click to expand...

As I see it, we will need a way of displaying a frequency analysis graph on the X32 screen at the same time as a GEQ. We also need a way to specify which input the measurement mic is connected to, though for me the best option (if it's possible) would be to use the talkback XLR input so that I don't have to start re-patching the back panel or re-routing blocks of 8 inputs to get local access when using a digital snake.

If the SMART implementation on the Presonus is all automated then I'm not really interested in SMART. I have one of the early Behringer UltraCurve units that had an Auto mode and I never really found it useful. My desire is to use a spectrum analyser purely as a visual tool and keep the process manual. It would be highly useful if I could call up the display from the measurement mic during a live show (minus the pink noise obviously) and / or route SOLO to the frequency display.
 
Re: strange or not strange!

The cue to spectrum would be nice, I agree that having auto modes wouldn't be as good as manual features. Getting the repeatable results and having tools built in is where I hope this is all heading now that DSP is more available. Hopefully this gets the conversation going and we can get some more tools to making good audio as the result.
 
RE: Contact Info

Dear Guys,

While our computer systems are being restored, customers can go to www.mg-center.com to submit warranty claims and register their products. For all other questions, including parts and technical support, please email: [email protected]


You can also PM me or John DiNicola, as we are always here to help.
 
Last edited:
Re: strange or not strange!

I've been using sending the cue out through the xuf card to SMAART and using that for my spectrograph. Works well. I've also used it for doing some basic alignments using the preamps in the x-32.

We put together a simple analog split into a pair of P-16s. The rack also features a outlet in the back for running power from the console to the same place as the snake. There is a 30 foot fan for going to the monitor console.


Untitled


Untitled
 
Re: strange or not strange!

This really sums up the obvious choice to just use the x32 as the Smaart interface, the thought of having everything in one device was so alluring I lost sight what makes the most logical choice here.

Nice rack and handy work BTW!

Charles Harrigan said:
I've been using sending the cue out through the xuf card to SMAART and using that for my spectrograph. Works well. I've also used it for doing some basic alignments using the preamps in the x-32.

We put together a simple analog split into a pair of P-16s. The rack also features a outlet in the back for running power from the console to the same place as the snake. There is a 30 foot fan for going to the monitor console.


Untitled


Untitled
Click to expand...
 
Re: strange or not strange!

Frank Pajak said:
This really sums up the obvious choice to just use the x32 as the Smaart interface, the thought of having everything in one device was so alluring I lost sight what makes the most logical choice here.

Nice rack and handy work BTW!
Click to expand...

I've got the impression that this is how it is done in the Presonus implementation, that the board is the interface and the computer runs a light version of Smaart. While I expect this is what Behringer might be offering as well, I guess I wouldn't mind having some basic tools that didn't need a computer connection.

+1 on the rack.
 
noticed another discrepancy between readings on desk and X32 Edit software

As the Behringer forum still isn't working I have to throw in my observation into this giant X32 thread now:
Using an X32 Compact and the X32 Edit on a Mac there are obviously differences with the Input Layers and such, as the software refers to the big X32 only and not consider differences of the Compact. But I don't understand why Input Trim on the Aux In channels show a range from -12 to +12 on the software and -18 to +18 on the desk itself. This can and did led to some confusion already. Can this please be fixed in the next release of X32 Edit? As well as the Behringer Forum, soon please?
 
Re: strange or not strange!

Per Søvik said:
I've got the impression that this is how it is done in the Presonus implementation, that the board is the interface and the computer runs a light version of Smaart. While I expect this is what Behringer might be offering as well, I guess I wouldn't mind having some basic tools that didn't need a computer connection.

+1 on the rack.
Click to expand...

Given that the last update for the Midas Pro1 had the Klark Teknik DN60 Spectrum Analyser added to it, I wouldn't be surprised if that also makes the 2.0 firmware release.
 
Core

Uli Behringer wrote here late July that large quantities of the X32 HAD left the Factory

Have not seen ANY - ANYWHERE yet ... So where are they - it's been more than 6 weeks...
 
S16 Rack

Hey Charles,

I'am a huge fan of custom, well built rack setups, so that dual S16 setup you built is rad. But I'm curious about two things. 1) Is the point of wiring the I/O of the S16's to panels simply so to not stress the S16's I/O? Like if someone trips on an XLR, its way better to damage one of your panel mounts than the actual S16?

And 2) Is there a reason why it's so tall? If I were to do that, I would probably have the panel mounts all the way at the bottom, with the S16's above, so that with XLR's plugged in, they would be as low to the ground as possible. Thanks for any insights!

Chris
 
Re: S16 Rack

Chris Wadden said:
I'am a huge fan of custom, well built rack setups, so that dual S16 setup you built is rad. But I'm curious about two things. 1) Is the point of wiring the I/O of the S16's to panels simply so to not stress the S16's I/O? Like if someone trips on an XLR, its way better to damage one of your panel mounts than the actual S16?
Click to expand...

Analog split to a monitor console, Cat 6 connection to FOH.

@Charles, I proposed something just like this to my boss a month or two ago when we were discussing picking up another X32. Any advice or things you would do differently if you were to build another?
 
Re: S16 Rack

Peter van Gils said:
Hmm. If you really need an analog monitor world, I would have added a couple of ADA8000s to the ADAT outs of the S16s. On the X32 you can route all 32 direct outs to the ADATs. Would be line-level though...
Click to expand...

I can't imagine buying four ADA8*00 units would be cheaper than just wiring an analog split, we're just looking to provide separate head-amps for the monitor and foh desk while still eliminating the big snake to FOH.
 
Re: noticed another discrepancy between readings on desk and X32 Edit software

Axel Luedecke said:
As the Behringer forum still isn't working I have to throw in my observation into this giant X32 thread now:
Using an X32 Compact and the X32 Edit on a Mac there are obviously differences with the Input Layers and such, as the software refers to the big X32 only and not consider differences of the Compact. But I don't understand why Input Trim on the Aux In channels show a range from -12 to +12 on the software and -18 to +18 on the desk itself. This can and did led to some confusion already. Can this please be fixed in the next release of X32 Edit? As well as the Behringer Forum, soon please?
Click to expand...

Dear Axel,

Firmware 1.15 added +18dB/-18dB trim. We will be releasing a new version of X32-Edit that will update any changes made in firmware 1.15.
This should be available by the end of this month.
 
Last edited:
About that rack being so tall, it was an extra sitting in the shop of a local dealer and we got it for a song. It is nice as it puts the patching above waist height so you don't have to bend over to get to it.

An analog split is a must for me as I don't want my IEM mixes dependent on the foh preamp gain.

If I were to make another, I would have the monitor fan be 50 feet, and have a quad on the back instead of just the duplex. The split ended up being 30 ft long b/c that's how much we had left over on the spool from an install.
 
Top Bottom