Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Midas M32R

19 (55.9%)

SI Impact

15 (44.1%)

Total Members Voted: 34

Voting closed: September 08, 2017, 11:53:36 AM

[richard_cooper]

A couple of other points on the two.

The Soundcraft has no MIDI or OSC implementation so cannot be controlled externally, the Midas has an extensive implementation. This may, or may not, be important to you but it does make the Impact possibly the only digital console on the market lacking this ability.

Second is the offline editors. The Midas one is very good, the Soundcraft is utterly unusable (literally there is no version compatible with the current firmware). It is also unacceptably slow, and even on a FHD monitor you need to zoom in to the control surface to see what any of the controls are.

These issues may not be important to you, but they ruled out any of the SI consoles for small theatre use when I last looked. Not that I bought the Midas that time round either.

[Kevin Maxwell]

Do you absolutely need immediate access to 24 faders all the time?  The are multiple touring acts using Pro 1 or Pro2C with only 8 input faders on top.

So far I've not mixed a show (well, in this decade) where I was unable to serve my client or performers properly due to having 16 input faders, whether X32, M32 or Avid SC48.  I understand if you are accustomed to having more, as was I, but have found that Pop Groups (Midas Pro), custom layers (X, M and Yamaha) or Group/DCA/VCA spill allow me quick access to the things I need.

The X32 and the M32 only have custom layers in the apps not on the consoles themselves. I use the full size M32 all of the time now a days and I find with proper channel layout (and DCAs) I don't need to switch layers that often.

I have a standard configuration that works for almost every band that I have worked with lately and it includes channels that only get used depending on what the band needs. So I have blank channels some times. I have 8 channels dedicated to vocals, #8 is always the announce mic. As in to announce the band and it doesn't go into the monitors. Because the person that is usually announcing the bands would back away from the mic if they heard themselves in the monitors. Channels 1-7 are the singers and I hardly ever need that many I just use what I need.

Now when I am doing musical theater if I am only using one console (we have 2 M32 mixers) I use an XTC (X-Touch Compact) as a fader expansion wing. I like to have as many faders at my fingertips as possible for theater work. I wish the M32 had DCA spill capability. And I use Palladium cue management software.   

[Steve Ferreira]

I have a Soundcraft Expression 3 and love it. Yes it doesn't have scribble strips but nothing board tape can't fix. The thing that turned me away from the Behringer and Midas was the routing. With what I do, I can't be tied up with I/O of 8. The Soundcraft allows me to patch anything into any channel from any location (stage box or console). Setting up the fader banks in any way I want is also a big plus. Sometimes I run Inputs, Aux sends, EFX all on 1 layer. No need to be bouncing around layers to get to what I need to. Keep in mind this is on an Expression 3 and the Impact has a few more bells and whistles.

[Tim McCulloch]

I have a Soundcraft Expression 3 and love it. Yes it doesn't have scribble strips but nothing board tape can't fix. The thing that turned me away from the Behringer and Midas was the routing. With what I do, I can't be tied up with I/O of 8. The Soundcraft allows me to patch anything into any channel from any location (stage box or console). Setting up the fader banks in any way I want is also a big plus. Sometimes I run Inputs, Aux sends, EFX all on 1 layer. No need to be bouncing around layers to get to what I need to. Keep in mind this is on an Expression 3 and the Impact has a few more bells and whistles.

INPUT processing is allocated in blocks of 8 channels, but any channel input strip can be freely assigned any allocated input.  This is less limiting than it might appear.

As for assigning a random input, output, or DCA control to a random fader is useful and is what made the LS/9 a useful mixer in spite of its other limitations.

If Behringer had made custom layers available on the console physical surface it would have been lovely.  Instead I ended up using Mixing Station Pro (android) which gives me multiple custom layers.

The Soundcraft mixers are decent little desks that have a lot more capability than many owners will use.  My frustrations with them tend to center around the tiny screen and some feature limitations that I can usually work around.  We don't own any but have clients who do...

[Steve Ferreira]

INPUT processing is allocated in blocks of 8 channels, but any channel input strip can be freely assigned any allocated input.  This is less limiting than it might appear.

Tim,
My understanding and from the brief time I spent on one was that if I was going to use inputs 1-6 from the rack I could not assign input 7 from the local I/O. Faders 1-8 would be from the rack.

[Robert Lofgren]

While most users usually uses 1:1 input/channel mapping you can source a channel strip from 'any' input. You can even assign one input to several channel strips if you have those needs.

The only limitation is that your hardware inputs are selected in groups of eight from the physical hardware (the x32, stageboxes, card interface, etc... 200+ inputs!). But since you can only mix 32 ch (ok, 40 to be picky) there is usually not a problem assigning any physical input to any channel strip within those blocks. Since the routing is included in the scenes you can utilize all inputs as a virtual patchbay to select sources.

Tim,
My understanding and from the brief time I spent on one was that if I was going to use inputs 1-6 from the rack I could not assign input 7 from the local I/O. Faders 1-8 would be from the rack.

[Tim McCulloch]

Tim,
My understanding and from the brief time I spent on one was that if I was going to use inputs 1-6 from the rack I could not assign input 7 from the local I/O. Faders 1-8 would be from the rack.

You couldn't use physical input 7 on the back of the mixer if physical inputs 1-8 weren't allocated to DSP.  By default, they'd show up on channels 1-8, but you can, on a channel-by-channel basis, have any channel take its signal from any allocated input.  Yeah, that language is awkward...

For me the problem comes when I need >24 inputs from the stage via digital snake but have a few inputs at FOH.  I have to allocate 4 blocks of DSP to the digital snake leaving none for my VOG or other local inputs.  The AUX 1/4" inputs are still there (permanent allocations) so line level signals can be used but the AUX channel strip lacks the full processing of a regular channel.  Hey, it's a $2500 mixer that does *almost* what a $10,000 mixer does so I'm not complaining.

[Steve Ferreira]

On the Soundcraft I can assign inputs 1-6 from the stage rack and then 7 from the local I/O and 7 from the rack into fader 8 etc.... No exra steps to assign signal from different sources to faders, if that makes sense. It gives me the flexibility to assign from any location and not being tied down to blocks of 8.
The Soundcraft flexibility is what pushed me more towards it when making my purchase. Every event is different and having that ability has saved my rear a few times.

[Tim McCulloch]

On the Soundcraft I can assign inputs 1-6 from the stage rack and then 7 from the local I/O and 7 from the rack into fader 8 etc.... No exra steps to assign signal from different sources to faders, if that makes sense. It gives me the flexibility to assign from any location and not being tied down to blocks of 8.
The Soundcraft flexibility is what pushed me more towards it when making my purchase. Every event is different and having that ability has saved my rear a few times.

I'm not claiming they are identical, only that *most* of that particular limitation can be worked around; why Behringer accepted this particular hardware limitation I don't understand.  The existing way is complicated and not obvious until a user has had some time with the desk.

There are things about the Soundcraft mixers that aren't exactly intuitive, either, but it's a horses for courses thing and why it's so nice to have choices - we can pick the tools that allow us to deliver on our commitments to clients.

[Douglas R. Allen]

On the Soundcraft I can assign inputs 1-6 from the stage rack and then 7 from the local I/O and 7 from the rack into fader 8 etc.... No exra steps to assign signal from different sources to faders, if that makes sense. It gives me the flexibility to assign from any location and not being tied down to blocks of 8.
The Soundcraft flexibility is what pushed me more towards it when making my purchase. Every event is different and having that ability has saved my rear a few times.

Just last night I needed channels 1 and 2 from local and 3-8 from my DL16 stage box and I could patch them in with no problems. On my M32r I think of the "local" 1-8, 9-16 xlr's and the others on the DL16 as patch bays. Once you patch the "8 channel Bay" into the board you can patch any xlr from them to any channel. Or any one xlr to as many channels as needed.  Fully flexible.

Douglas R. Allen

[ProSoundWeb Community]