X32 Discussion

Routing Question

Since I won't have my S16 for the first gig, I'll be using my current snake. It has TRS monitor sends. Can I route the monitor mixes out of the TRS Aux Outs and still be controlled by the same Mix Bus faders? Hope that makes sense.
 
Re: Routing Question

Mike Horn said:
the mix buss is available as the source for the aux outs in the edit software


the mixer is packed currently...
Click to expand...
I noticed that and that's how I have them routed on the edit software (I'm building m a scene\config file offline to load), I just hope it works, I won't have time to change the ends on the snake.
 
Re: P16M manual, EQ?

Greetings,

My question pertains to the P16M monitor mixer, so my apologies if this is in the wrong place - just seems that this thread has become the de-facto repository for all things pertaining to the X32 family...

First off: does a complete manual exist for the P16M? The extremely basic quick-start guide packaged with the device instructs me to find it online, but I can't seem to find it anywhere on B*'s website, or anywhere else on the interwebs. I'm usually a proponent of R'ingTFM before asking others, but as I can seem to find the manual....

After connecting the P16M to the X32's local ultranet port, and sending audio into the X32 via USB and XUF card, I was quickly able to get a monitor mix in the P16 using the direct outs on X32 channels 1-16. Cool; I'll get into subgroups later. Its great that there's EQ available on all inputs and the master output.

However, The physical EQ controls don't update to reflect the current channel selection. It would be great if they'd configured the EQ encoders like they did for volume and pan - infinite rotation with LED indication of encoder value, rather than a hard-stop 270 degree rotation potentiometer with a white line to indicate value. Oh well, gotta cut cost somewhere.

Lets say I adjust the EQ on CH1, move to CH2 and adjust its EQ, then switch back to CH1. I ASSume the EQ applied to CH1 hasn't changed, even though the encoders now represent CH2's EQ. If I adjust CH1 EQ again, do the filters 'jump' to reflect the physical setting of the encoders, and update from there? How do the light collars around these encoders function?

Then there's master EQ... It's too bad it's not as capable as the X32's parametric on outputs... Sort of precludes using this to drive powered wedges where high GBF is necessary. I guess I could set up and EQ a set of subgroups with the monitor EQ I need and send those to the P16...

Anyway, TIA for any input, and to all of you whose reviews and generally-gushing praise for the X32 system convinced me to take the plunge. I don't know if its a good thing or bad thing that my guitar practice time has be re-purposed to 'learning the X32.' :)~:-)~:smile:
 
Re: P16M manual, EQ?

Peter Kowalczyk said:
Greetings,

Lets say I adjust the EQ on CH1, move to CH2 and adjust its EQ, then switch back to CH1. I ASSume the EQ applied to CH1 hasn't changed, even though the encoders now represent CH2's EQ. If I adjust CH1 EQ again, do the filters 'jump' to reflect the physical setting of the encoders, and update from there? How do the light collars around these encoders function?

Then there's master EQ... It's too bad it's not as capable as the X32's parametric on outputs... Sort of precludes using this to drive powered wedges where high GBF is necessary. I guess I could set up and EQ a set of subgroups with the monitor EQ I need and send those to the P16...

Anyway, TIA for any input, and to all of you whose reviews and generally-gushing praise for the X32 system convinced me to take the plunge. I don't know if its a good thing or bad thing that my guitar practice time has be re-purposed to 'learning the X32.' :)~:-)~:smile:
Click to expand...

I don't have a P16-M personally, but from what I've seen online, when you switch channels, the LED collar should change brightness - when you rotate the encoder, as you "hit" the point that the EQ parameter on that channel is assigned to, the ring will change brightness to show you've "grabbed" it (low to high brightness??). From there, you're controlling it with the encoder in either direction until you switch channels, rinse and repeat. I hope this helps, and is reasonably consistent with your findings.

Don
 
Re: Mondo delay due to Imag Sync

Dan Mortensen said:
And yet the American (North American?) distributor has removed it entirely from availability.

If it's gone, I'm not surprised, as the X32 is small enough itself that reducing features a lot and price and size a little are not interesting to me enough to buy any (or the Producer, for that matter). Those two products are not different enough to tempt me as an X32 owner; the Core and Rack and anything similar are another ball game, though. Those will be immensely useful to an already-X32 owner/user.

Which is why it is mildly aggravating that the sole American (North American?) distributor has and has continuously had 0 Cores in stock and a grand total of 63 incoming at some indefinite future date, and 0 Racks in stock and 262 incoming on that same indefinite date.

If you're right that's interesting, too, as they have been able to determine already the lack of market for that product at the previous price. That's good for the folks for whom the product is the right one.
Click to expand...

I would much rather the Compact been, well compact, and rack mountable. Then it Would be more interesting to me. The producer doesn't have scribble strips (????) so again, makes it not so desirable for me. Looks like it will be the Qu16/Expression for my small rack mount digital system.
 
Re: Mondo delay due to Imag Sync

Jared Koopman said:
I would much rather the Compact been, well compact, and rack mountable.
Click to expand...

Yes.

Rack mounted like the APB Pro House/Monitor etc. would be much more attractive. Those APB boards, which allowed for easy addition of a second console for more inputs without having to use an input per output and without losing unified solo'ing/PFL'ing, were tremendously useful for my operation. The feature set of the X32 blows them away, unfortunately, and to my ears the sound is equivalent, and actually better in a couple ways.

Back to your comment, any console which lets you avoid changing its physical state from vertical-while-traveling to horizontal-while-using to vertical-for-traveling again makes a big difference to the sole practitioner at the gig. It's also nicer to lift a smaller case cover rather than a larger one.
 
Re: Routing Question

Hi
just thought I'd air an opinion on FireWire interface for the x32.
I absolutely need FireWire.
I bought the x32 purely for recording and require the lowest latency possible from my audio interface. The USB port is just not adequate for multitrack recording because of its obvious limitations with latency. It would be fine if I was just recording 32 channels in a live scenario but I'm not- I'm layering instruments and overdubbing as required which requires the lowest latency possible. I don't know if the FireWire is so much better than USB because its a streaming protocol rather than packet based, but I do know USB is no good for multitrack recording.
so - there you go - please keep the FireWire interfaces for the x32 coming - my ideal next interface card would have FireWire, word clock, and a number of spdif ins and outs - that would allow seamless digital interfaces with my boutique preamps, and low latency multitrack recording.
thanks
pauly
 
X32 Rack Expansion

Hi

I browsed the thomann (fi) website and discovered on the product pictures that the expansion slots are empty.

So they dont ship with audio interface card?

And if not theres no pricing on the card anywhere.
 
Re: X32 Rack Expansion

Mikko Pajuvirta said:
Hi

I browsed the thomann (fi) website and discovered on the product pictures that the expansion slots are empty.

So they dont ship with audio interface card?

And if not theres no pricing on the card anywhere.
Click to expand...
All x32's come with the recording card as standard the pictures just don't show it.; All new x32's from the factory now come with the XUSB card preinstalled.
 
Re: Routing Question

Gary Weller said:
Since I won't have my S16 for the first gig, I'll be using my current snake. It has TRS monitor sends. Can I route the monitor mixes out of the TRS Aux Outs and still be controlled by the same Mix Bus faders? Hope that makes sense.
Click to expand...

This is the beauty of digital consoles and the x32 in particular. Perhaps this will help...

Visualize 3 buckets...
1. Bucket of physical inputs (xlr, trs, rca)
2. Bucket of internal mix busses
3. Bucket of physical outputs (xlr,trs etc...)

You can pretty freely mix and match which PHYSICAL INPUT will be attached to/feeding which INTERNAL MIXBUS and select which PHYSICAL OUTPUT each of the INTERNAL MIXBUSS' will be sending to.

What you've described (routing a MIXBUS output to one of the TRS, or RCA aux out's) should be no problem.

Hope this helps.

Karl
 
Re: Routing Question

Pauly Mel said:
Hi
just thought I'd air an opinion on FireWire interface for the x32.
I absolutely need FireWire.
I bought the x32 purely for recording and require the lowest latency possible from my audio interface. The USB port is just not adequate for multitrack recording because of its obvious limitations with latency. It would be fine if I was just recording 32 channels in a live scenario but I'm not- I'm layering instruments and overdubbing as required which requires the lowest latency possible. I don't know if the FireWire is so much better than USB because its a streaming protocol rather than packet based, but I do know USB is no good for multitrack recording.
so - there you go - please keep the FireWire interfaces for the x32 coming - my ideal next interface card would have FireWire, word clock, and a number of spdif ins and outs - that would allow seamless digital interfaces with my boutique preamps, and low latency multitrack recording.
thanks
pauly
Click to expand...

A few things to consider.....as I understand it, Firewire tends to be faster than USB (USB 2.0 at at least) because of the way Firewire controls/manages data transfer. Even with this however, in my experience, latencies between digital consoles and PC's (and all I can reference here are what I use....the x32 and the Presonus SL24.4.2) will be around the 5ms range for inbound signals and slightly higher....7-9ms for outbound signals (from the PC to the console).

This is what I see Cubase reporting on my system (I'm running a pretty high end ADK laptop built specifically for Audio...i7, 8 gig ram, clean OS installation tuned for audio use, all audio recorded to an external, SATA attached, solid state drive). This is running the x32 FW driver with buffer's set to lowest possible setting.

Personally I would rate a round trip latency of 11-12 ms about the max that could be usable. Some folks might be more flexible but to my ears anything much beyond this just starts to sound confusing (particularly if you're trying to overdub a vocal track...phasing, comb filtering etc...).

What you may find will work even better than Firewire will be to look for the release of a direct to hard drive recording card. Since the x32 specs talk about max latencies (input to any output) of <1ms, using a direct to HD multitrack recorder card would allow you to use the x32/external HD as your recording system (dont even hook up the PC/laptop). Use the consoles built in FX for headphone monitoring during recording/overdub's. Get your tracks laid down this way then take the external HD, hook it up to your PC/laptop and do final editing/mixing etc.... using your DAW. This could give you the best of all worlds.
 
Driver settings in windows

I found this note from Joe on gearslutz.

Definitions in the Windows driver control panel:

Stream Buffer = minimum buffer that is required for the hardware to couple the streams to the OS

ASIO Buffer = couples the streams from the OS to the respective low-latency ASIO-application

WDM Buffer = couples the streams from the OS to the Windows sound manager

Any application either uses WDM or ASIO for audio I/O, but never both.
Click to expand...

This is good info.
 
Re: P16M manual, EQ?

Donald P Leaman said:
I don't have a P16-M personally, but from what I've seen online, when you switch channels, the LED collar should change brightness - when you rotate the encoder, as you "hit" the point that the EQ parameter on that channel is assigned to, the ring will change brightness to show you've "grabbed" it (low to high brightness??). From there, you're controlling it with the encoder in either direction until you switch channels, rinse and repeat. I hope this helps, and is reasonably consistent with your findings.

Don
Click to expand...

Thanks Don,

That sounds reasonable, I'll see if that will work.

Still, I'd love to see a proper manual for this thing...

Peter
 
Re: New Products/Namm 2014

Uli Behringer said:
View attachment 8184

Dear all,

*snip*

The X32 will also be compatible with the new flexible and affordable line of MIDAS stage boxes announced at WFX this week. They all feature MIDAS XL4 mic preamps and can be stacked in any configuration needed via AES50; all models are $1499 US MAP.
There will be four models, (DL151 = 24 in), (DL152 = 24 out), (DL153 = 16 in x 8 out), and (DL154 = 16 out x 8 in).

As mentioned earlier, the X32 is the heart of a large and continuously growing eco-system; at Namm 2014 we will be showing very exciting new members of the X32 family.

Warm regards

Uli
Click to expand...
@Uli,
what about the DL155 (AES 8 in/8 out, as well analog)8)~8-)~:cool:? any date(s) as well?
TX
Klaus
 
Latency and multitrack recording with overdubbing.

I will not argue against the advantage of having low latency, but low latency is not a prerequisite for doing multitrack recording and overdubbing. Solid performance and consistent latency, however, are important factors.
In any studio setting where overdubbing and multiple takes are being performed, post take alignment is needed no matter how small the latency is, and if the latency is consistent, this task should be automated. In most daws, post take automatic alignment is available, it is only a matter of turning it on and specifying the correct latency, thus the need for consistent latency so that it can be calculated accurately.
Latency in recording is only a problem when attempting to monitor current take from daw, and since latency in some form is always going to be present even when spending fortunes on high-speed, low latency interfaces, the practice of monitoring takes through daw is a flawed one.
Set up to have rock solid recording performance with no drop-outs and consistent round trip latency, do live monitoring straight through the desk.
 
Re: Latency and multitrack recording with overdubbing.

I always have and will use a console for studio recording. I am confused as to why anyone would want to make the DAW do all that work.
 
Re: Latency and multitrack recording with overdubbing.

John Chiara said:
I always have and will use a console for studio recording. I am confused as to why anyone would want to make the DAW do all that work.
Click to expand...
Some folks like to be chained up and whipped too. I don't understand that nor wanting to monitor through the DAW - both are gonna hurt and leave marks :twisted: .
 
Top Bottom