ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: NAMM2013 - Behringer discussion thread  (Read 4367 times)

Tommy Peel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1092
  • North/East Texas        (near Tyler, TX)
    • Facebook Profile
Re: NAMM2013 - Behringer discussion thread
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2013, 03:36:07 pm »

I'm very curious to what the price diferences between the models will be... The core and rack versions would make a sweet iPad mixing setup. You could have the "rack" version mounted with your power amps in one rack to put on the stage and mix a show with just an iPad(or 2 or laptop). Not sure how much I would like that but it's an interesting idea; and with the x32's functionality I'd be much better that a DL1608. These may be some game changing consoles. I also like the x32 compact; it would be better for the setup that our band uses because it's not near as wide as the full size version.
Logged
Mackie Onyx 1640, JBL MPro 415s, Mackie 808s Mixer Amp, Samson S-Com Dual Comp, Behringer MDX 4600 Quad Comp, TC Electonic m300 Multi-Effects processor, Shure DFR11EQ5,  '09 13 inch MacBook Pro, 1st gen iPad

Chris Clark

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 132
  • Jack of many trades, Master of few.
Re: NAMM2013 - Behringer discussion thread
« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2013, 05:51:08 pm »

So are there any major differences between the Compact and Producer?  Other than the Compact is for Desktop set=up using a 7" screen and "Scribble Strips" and the Producer is Rack mount with 5" screen.

It looks to me like the Producer fits more in line with what you typically see in TV Studio mixers vs live scenarios, which I suppose also means its meant more for recording studios in general though it looks a little minimalist for music mastering purposes. Could definitely be geared towards live TV studios or Live-To-Tape productions.

The reason I say this is that your inputs rarely change in scenarios like this (thereby no electronic scribble strips and the fairly obvious place for permanent labels next to the Assign buttons), and as Chris B mentioned no Scene/Mute Group buttons, items which you don't usually see in TV production (and could very well overwhelm the sound mixperson who was just promoted from the graphics department)  ;)

That's my first impression of it, at least.

EDIT: Did anyone else notice that there seems to be four Assign buttons missing from the Producer version?
« Last Edit: January 24, 2013, 05:59:17 pm by Chris Clark »
Logged
Technical Services Coordinator
Entertainment System Designer
Darien Lake Theme Park, Darien Center NY

Greg Cameron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 542
    • Cameron Pro Audio
Re: NAMM2013 - Behringer discussion thread
« Reply #12 on: January 24, 2013, 07:54:39 pm »

Anyone else notice the ix16, look familiar?

I know this isn't shipping yet, but it looks like it could easily be a Mackie DL1608 killer if the price is less or even the same. It has key features lacking on the DL:

- recallable preamp gain
- parametric EQ on all buses
- DL doesn't dock with latest iPads
- connectivity for personal monitoring systems
- high quality FX

If they have selectable pickoff points for the auxes, that will really be something. Nothing about subgrouping with insertable processing. That would be cool to have.
Logged
"Procrastinators of the world - contemplate uniting!"

Cameron Pro Audio

dick rees

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5039
  • St Paul MN
Re: NAMM2013 - Behringer discussion thread
« Reply #13 on: January 24, 2013, 08:04:45 pm »

I know this isn't shipping yet, but it looks like it could easily be a Mackie DL1608 killer if the price is less or even the same.

The 1608 (IMO) was already on life support as serious buyers wrote it off or were waiting for upgrades to make it flexible enough to be practical.
Logged
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...

Chris Buford

  • SR Forums
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 37
  • Richmond, VA
    • My Website
Re: NAMM2013 - Behringer discussion thread
« Reply #14 on: January 24, 2013, 08:37:24 pm »

I'm very curious to what the price diferences between the models will be... The core and rack versions would make a sweet iPad mixing setup. You could have the "rack" version mounted with your power amps in one rack to put on the stage and mix a show with just an iPad(or 2 or laptop).

I'm the monitor engineer and lighting designer for the band I work with (yes you read that right). We carry everything but 2 monitor mixes. Mics, stands, subsnakes, split, all pretty self contained. This makes our 3 IEMs pretty much consistent, I dial up 2 wedges at soundcheck and its pretty much set and forget (which in essence turned me into an LD). We ditched out TT24 a year and half ago and have been using an LS-9 thats our FOH engineers (He wants to get it off the road so much and have it for his small sound co he runs). I love having the iPad out front or onstage for dialing in wedges. The control surface rarely gets used.

For years I've wanted a system that was the "mixer in a box" with computer and iPad control and an optional surface. Obviously things like Yamaha's DSP-5d or running an Avid Mixrack sans surface are a bit out of our budget. The Mackie 1608 needed to be a 3216 for my needs but that concept was close.

I finally got to see and hear an x32 in action last Sunday and I was impressed with all its features and it certainly sounded fine in the small club it was in. These new options seem fantastic for building flexible options.

I'm thinking an x32 rack and stage box in our rack with the split/IEMs etc. That gives me the I/O that I need. I can control it out front via PC or ipad and I get the band to use the iPhone app that allows aux control. (they knew enough about the LS-9 to select their user page). Or if the band really wants faders near the stage I could rack mount a producer and get a stage box.

Sometimes our LS-9 did double duty as FOH/MON as some nights its an SC48 out front, others its a GL-2400 and an opening act.

My original complaint of the x32 was that it couldn't duplicate 32 channels to a second layer. With this rackmount system we could buy a full sized x32 and use it out front with just the AES50 snake (I was told by the owner of the x32 I saw that its possible to do this with 2 consoles so I would assume it work with all their products. He said he even did it with his Pro2 and the x32 could use those preamps).

I'd like to see 1 more product. An x32 thats a control surface with the processing power, but no built in preamps. Maybe a few local I/O for ipods and L/R,FF, Sub etc sends. That way I could have a fully functional monitor system all of the time, and easily have a FOH with separate control (except shared pres) by running an ethernet snake and a control surface.

Anyway, just some ramblings about the ideas of the product line. Hopefully the durability proves to be reliable and the production quality stays where it seems to be at.





Logged
Monitor Engineer
Lighting Designer
Carbon Leaf - www.carbonleaf.com

Tommy Peel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1092
  • North/East Texas        (near Tyler, TX)
    • Facebook Profile
NAMM2013 - Behringer discussion thread
« Reply #15 on: January 24, 2013, 11:38:37 pm »

I'd like to see 1 more product. An x32 thats a control surface with the processing power, but no built in preamps. Maybe a few local I/O for ipods and L/R,FF, Sub etc sends. That way I could have a fully functional monitor system all of the time, and easily have a FOH with separate control (except shared pres) by running an ethernet snake and a control surface.

Anyway, just some ramblings about the ideas of the product line. Hopefully the durability proves to be reliable and the production quality stays where it seems to be at.
+1
Also a control surface minus the processing with built-in wireless used with the "x32 rack" would be pretty awesome. Then I could buy the rack unit and latter, if I decided I wanted it, I could add a surface; although I doubt this would be as cost effective as what you suggest.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Logged
Mackie Onyx 1640, JBL MPro 415s, Mackie 808s Mixer Amp, Samson S-Com Dual Comp, Behringer MDX 4600 Quad Comp, TC Electonic m300 Multi-Effects processor, Shure DFR11EQ5,  '09 13 inch MacBook Pro, 1st gen iPad

paul bell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 476
Re: NAMM2013 - Behringer discussion thread
« Reply #16 on: January 25, 2013, 06:46:22 am »

I just heard the door closing and locking on the PreSonus Studio Live stuff.
Logged

Chris Eddison

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
Re: NAMM2013 - Behringer discussion thread
« Reply #17 on: January 25, 2013, 08:51:30 am »

With the addition of some crossovers, doesn't the rackmount version suddenly look like a really able little speaker management unit? Can't be that hard for Behringer to write some crossovers in to the DSP at a later date. Tonnes of inputs, bit of matrix mixing, input and output delay. Job done. It'd come in way cheaper than the larger DBX, LAB and XTA products, and have way more functions, plus you could mix your gig from it!
Logged

Jason Vanick

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 35
Re: NAMM2013 - Behringer discussion thread
« Reply #18 on: January 25, 2013, 09:49:12 am »

With the addition of some crossovers, doesn't the rackmount version suddenly look like a really able little speaker management unit? Can't be that hard for Behringer to write some crossovers in to the DSP at a later date. Tonnes of inputs, bit of matrix mixing, input and output delay. Job done. It'd come in way cheaper than the larger DBX, LAB and XTA products, and have way more functions, plus you could mix your gig from it!

The beauty of a software-defined architecture, I'm guessing that it wouldn't be hard for them to do do this at all...

I for one would LOVE to see the speaker management/crossovers be added in, even if it took slots in the onboard 'FX' rack.  For smaller gigs, it would be huge. 
Logged

frank kayser

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 331
  • Maryland suburbs of Washington DC
Re: NAMM2013 - Behringer discussion thread
« Reply #19 on: January 25, 2013, 12:10:38 pm »

I just heard the door closing and locking on the PreSonus Studio Live stuff.
I'm not sure I heard the door actually lock, but it is an increasingly heavy door to push open.  Maybe some motorized faders would help push the door open... :P
If the price is right, that door will get very heavy for Presonus.

The Compact looks pretty good - though I'm having trouble with the names - I would think the Compact would be rack mountable, and the Producer the slightly larger, more fully featured one.  My problem... :o

I still need to see how the add-on channels work (ala 01v and variants).  Never got my head wrapped around that, as I am used to the single layer analog-style interface of Presonus - I guess it's time to go "3-D"...

Interesting times.  Behringer. Who'da thunk THIS forum would be seriously discussing one.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
 


Page created in 0.147 seconds with 24 queries.