ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Reasons against LS9  (Read 2857 times)

Richard Turner

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 200
Re: Reasons against LS9
« Reply #10 on: July 17, 2014, 11:47:19 am »

Another item to consider is Yamaha's pledge to support its products for I believe 7 years after official delisting from currently for sale product. Not from when initially offered, 7 years from date from the last one sold.

I somehow doubt the others up for consideration will have that behind them.

If you were considering the LS9 as a used piece I wouldnt be considering any possible resale value beyond scrap value, you would likely be flipping it into the tip at the end.

Logged

dave briar

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24
Re: Reasons against LS9
« Reply #11 on: July 17, 2014, 06:40:03 pm »

Thanks for all the input so far,
 --snip--
Has anybody experience mixing FOH with any of the mentioned iPad apps? I would be most interested to hear from those with experience with LS9 Stagemix and The Soundcraft and the A&H Apps.
I've mixed FOH quite a bit with the Presonus iPad and am very comfortable with that but agree with your stated deficiencies of the SL mixers as compared to other offerings these days and so just bought the Compact B-board.  I do work with a fellow that lives on a LS9-16 but he only uses the Apps (Airfader included) to dial-in/ring-out monitors.
Logged

Spenser Hamilton

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
Re: Reasons against LS9
« Reply #12 on: July 17, 2014, 07:31:00 pm »

Based on OPs criteria I say Expression 1, open that criteria up a bit and I change my answer to X32 compact.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged

Michael Elphinstone

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22
Re: Reasons against LS9
« Reply #13 on: July 17, 2014, 07:38:44 pm »

New firmware came out very recently for the A&H Qu series. It adds more flexibility. I like them, and to my ear they sound better than an LS9. I consider the LS9 to be fairly old by digital standards now. It was good when it first came out, but that was nearly 10 years ago. I've always thought they sounded a tad harsh, but that could just be me. I prefer a warmer sound, which is why I like the Qu. I should warn you, I also use an iLive every week so I may be a tad biased towards A&H!

Cheers,
Michael
Logged

Bob Leonard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4315
  • Boston, MA USA
Re: Reasons against LS9
« Reply #14 on: July 17, 2014, 11:51:06 pm »

DOH! I finally put 2 and 2 together... Harman owns both Soundcraft AND JBL... LOL make sense now.

 ;)
Logged
BOSTON STRONG........

Now touring nursing homes in a neighborhood near you..

Bob Cap

  • Classic LAB
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 173
Re: Reasons against LS9
« Reply #15 on: July 18, 2014, 10:16:45 am »

I have Yamaha M7's, LS9's, Presonus 16 and 24 Channel non AI and 32 channel AI mixers in my inventory.

My take is the Yamaha's get the most requests. Not the greatest for IPad use.

The Presonus non ai mixers work great via IPad but you doo need a connection to a computer via firewire.

The newer Presonus AI eliminates the need for an external computer and works very well via IPad.

I mix shows on all of these mixers regularly. They all sound good and have enough capability for everything I need.

Since the OP is talking about a 16 channel mixer and he has set up a price point he wants to work with.

Personally the Presonus does what I need and does it well. It has much more capabilities that some of the other boards listed by the OP.

I happen to like the fact it has no moving faders.

I have replaced all the fader banks on my Yamaha's at least once. I have not needed to replace faders any on the Presonus mixers.

Also I have my board on stage and have my monitor guy mix monitors on it. No moving faders to confuse issues when I switch things on the IPad.

That's my story and I'm stickin to it...:)

Bob Cap
Advanced Audio Inc.
Gilbert, MN

 
Logged

Steve.Oldridge

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 951
Re: Reasons against LS9
« Reply #16 on: July 18, 2014, 12:04:13 pm »

Based on OPs criteria I say Expression 1, open that criteria up a bit and I change my answer to X32 compact.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would go with the QU, but I don't understand the OP's objection to the X32 series.
"To Be honest I'm not comfortable with buying anything from Behringer, It's by far the most Full featured piece of Kit but it is what it is IMO".

I don't do the SR provider role much these days, but the X32 is NOT the Behringer of old. Price point/feature set gives it the edge (IMHO) over the other choices.. and we (band) have an X32 Producer and Presonus 16.4.2.

Our X32 just arrived (will probably use next weekends gigs) after we went thru the same questions/analysis the OP is asking. Our needs are are very similar - FOH mixing from stage, with 5 IEM mixes.  We went with the Producer because the band wanted FADERS to grab - otherwise X32 Rack would have been ideal, but they weren't comfortable with iPad access. Still pretty old school there. 
The X32 will be in a split rig.. so we can take it + IEM's (same rack case) to "house-provided-PA" gigs, and leave the amps at home. That's about 30% of our gigs.
For the rest, we put mixer case on top of/near amp rack..  run 2 XLR's from X32 into the DSP.. and power up!
Logged

Jamin Lynch

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 578
    • www.jlsound.com
Re: Reasons against LS9
« Reply #17 on: July 18, 2014, 12:32:27 pm »

I don't like mixing with that little tiny screen on the LS9.

I have a Soundcraft Performer. It's rare I need to get into the screen. Faders and knobs for me.
Logged
Authorized Dealer for: JBL, Crown, Soundcraft, dbx, Lexicon, AKG, Sennheiser, CBI Cables, Countryman, ProCo Sound, Da-Lite Screens, Dunlop, Digitech, Grundorf, Hosa, Gator Cases, Perdue Acoustics and others. jlsoundpro@gmail.com

Using: JBL VP tops, subs, and monitors, Si Performer

Roland Clarke

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
Re: Reasons against LS9
« Reply #18 on: July 18, 2014, 06:23:22 pm »

LS9's I find a pain in the butt.  I band of eq that you have to constantly step through, same goes for compressor and gate settings and that "clunky" jobs system for setting up.  I like to be able to work fast and the LS9 doesn't cut it on that front. 

I used a Soundcraft Si Performer and was impressed with that, easy to use and decent functionality, good effects, compressors, etc.

The X32 I find similar to the LS9 in many respects in that it isn't that fast to use, however, it costs a lot less so I am more forgiving of it's shortcomings.

The QU range from A&H, much like the Soundcraft is fairly user friendly, though I've only looked at it on the trade stand, seems a logical system to use.

Presonus stuff again is fairly well laid out, though I think it's a much stiffer sector now with the arrival of the QU and the Si Expression.

I think Bob pretty much nailed it on the head in his previous posts.
Logged

Luke Geis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 282
Re: Reasons against LS9
« Reply #19 on: July 18, 2014, 06:24:28 pm »

Having used almost all of the mixers mentioned, I put my vote in for the LS9 and or the Behringer X32. I own an X32 rack and it paid for itself in the first 2 months!

Honestly the only way to answer your question is for you to decide what you value in a system. I got the LS9 because it was ( at the time ) the most versatile and accepted board. I recently picked up the X32 rack because I wanted a highly versatile, affordable stealth rig for bar gigs and weddings.
Logged
I don't understand how you can't hear your self
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up
 


Page created in 0.093 seconds with 23 queries.