ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3  All   Go Down

Author Topic: New Mixer Recommendations  (Read 8336 times)

Tim Barber

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 105
  • Eastern Washington State
Re: New Mixer Recommendations
« Reply #10 on: July 19, 2018, 11:56:45 AM »


My main concern with switching to a digital mixer is the lack of faders, and the steep learning curve for the team. The other members of my sound team are in their mid-60's to early 70's and they have all expressed concerns of being able to learn how to be effective on a digital mixer.  Working with layers and only having 24 faders to mix on the fly just won't work for us. 

You might be underestimating your team. Even good changes are stressful at first, but it won't stay that way. We went from a Mackie 32-8 to an X32, and despite initial reservations my very non-technical volunteer team is singing the praises of how much easier the X32 is to use. I don't expect them to know how configure everything, but for basic mixing operations they love it.
Logged

Tim Hite

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1221
    • Bad Quail
Re: New Mixer Recommendations
« Reply #11 on: July 19, 2018, 03:12:52 PM »

PMed you

We are looking to replace our 40-channel Soundcraft Series . . .(Trying to keep it under $7,000)

Thanks in advance.
Logged
Bad Quail
Sound + Light + Image
Joshua Tree, California
Authorized Dealer for all this stuff

Chip Smith

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
Re: New Mixer Recommendations
« Reply #12 on: July 19, 2018, 03:58:50 PM »


You might be underestimating your team. Even good changes are stressful at first, but it won't stay that way.

These are two separate things, commonly lumped together.  Quantity of physical faders...

...more faders does not equal more efficient interaction with a console. 

I'm in my 40's, but the rest of the team is in their 60's & 70's having used the same console for almost 20 years. Heck two of the guys still have flip phones. The learning curve is real here.  Sure we probably need some new blood, and we're working on that, but I'd rather not have to replace the bulk of the team at the same time as the mixer. 

As for the fader count, that is mostly for me because I run sound for the big musical services we have a few times a year. It is not uncommon for me to be making slight volume adjustments on up to 23 faders throughout a song.  I mic the string section and woodwinds, as well as the guitars, keys, piano, drums, and percussion, and balance all that with the choir, soloists, & narrator, while competing with the brass section which is not miked. The songs are often played and sung with a lot of dynamics, and the room acoustics add to those dynamics. I make sure everyone is heard, nobody sticks out, and everything is balanced. I can't do that if I have to jump back and forth between layers to access the active channels. Grouping any of the instruments doesn't make sense because there is only one of each type.

Logged

Chip Smith

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
Re: New Mixer Recommendations
« Reply #13 on: July 19, 2018, 04:01:03 PM »

In going from a 32 channel to a 40 channel board are those additional 8 channels something that would be used at the same time along with the other 32 or just needed for special extra inputs but your over all needed channel count would not exceed 32?
If the total needed channel count does not exceed 32 at any given time using a stage box with a QU32 the extra inputs could remain connected and with a scene change activated and brought into the mixer.

With the QU series mixers there's a little bonus when you use a stage box, you can assign mic inputs from the stage box to the 3 stereo line inputs on the board that would get you a 35 channel mixer!
The stereo line inputs are on the second surface layer though. The QU does have a custom layer.


Not sure I completly follow. We have a 40 channel mixer now. I can't recall a time where 40 channels wasn't enough. A few times a year more than 32 channels are needed, but typically 20-28 channels are used weekly.

We have 58 XLR inputs in passive stage boxes spread around the stage. We use a passive 40 channel patch panel backstage to patch those to the mixer as needed. We also have 12 wireless receivers, although we typically only have 4 connected for a regular service. So in theory we could use up to 70 channels.

I was originally looking at the A&H Qu-32, even though it would be tight on channels. The A&H SQ-7 was released last month and solves that issue and has the larger form factor.
Logged

Chip Smith

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
Re: New Mixer Recommendations
« Reply #14 on: July 19, 2018, 04:03:15 PM »

Thanks for all the recommendations so far. I know there are some real deals in the used mixer market, but whatever we end up purchasing will be new. The combination of various issues with our Series Two, along with its age, has caused church leadership to lose faith in the mixer. They want a new mixer installed before September.
Logged

TJ (Tom) Cornish

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4317
  • St. Paul, MN
Re: New Mixer Recommendations
« Reply #15 on: July 19, 2018, 05:27:22 PM »

I'm in my 40's, but the rest of the team is in their 60's & 70's having used the same console for almost 20 years. Heck two of the guys still have flip phones. The learning curve is real here.  Sure we probably need some new blood, and we're working on that, but I'd rather not have to replace the bulk of the team at the same time as the mixer. 

As for the fader count, that is mostly for me because I run sound for the big musical services we have a few times a year. It is not uncommon for me to be making slight volume adjustments on up to 23 faders throughout a song.  I mic the string section and woodwinds, as well as the guitars, keys, piano, drums, and percussion, and balance all that with the choir, soloists, & narrator, while competing with the brass section which is not miked. The songs are often played and sung with a lot of dynamics, and the room acoustics add to those dynamics. I make sure everyone is heard, nobody sticks out, and everything is balanced. I can't do that if I have to jump back and forth between layers to access the active channels. Grouping any of the instruments doesn't make sense because there is only one of each type.
Chip, I think you'll find with a little practice that you can flip fader layers just as fast or faster than you can reach to the far side of an analog desk.  Caleb is right - having the whole world in 36" of width is the way to go. 

I'm not sure how much outboard gear you're used to working with so forgive me if I'm telling you things you already know, but with digital you get a compressor on every channel.  This significantly mitigates fader tweaking if set correctly.
Logged

Stephen Swaffer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2672
Re: New Mixer Recommendations
« Reply #16 on: July 19, 2018, 09:49:34 PM »

Thought I posted last night-but I'll chime in on the ease of jumping to digital.

Two and a half years ago we went from an A&H GL3800-48 to a QU-32.  I set it up in a couple hours on Saturday and gave our regular FOH guy a 30-40 minute intro (I myself had never touched a digital either).  He is not a very techy guy.   The next day a man who's family sings and plays a number of instruments (though not that day) owns and runs their own sound system, told me you couldn't tell we were using a new mixer.

I had also commented on it being easier to change faders than reach from channel 2 to 38 accurately, etc.  I also recently set the mixer up to run as a "split" PA during Sunday School-our overflow is used as a SS class.  I have a SS setting that has a mic only in the overflow-press a couple buttons and we are back to business as usual in the brief intermission between SS and church.  As a side benefit, EVERY service gets the same starting point on the mixer-no matter who or what happened the last service, or even in sound check right before a service (of course, a sound check can be saved just as easily if we want to use it).

The QU seems easier for non-sound people.  We have an occasional mid-week funeral that I or a media person can't get to.   Church staff can easily handle prelude and a mic and aren't intimidated by 3000 knobs and switches (that can be accidentally bumped!)

We have an annual Christmas event where I usually need 30-36 channels-I was concerned about fader count myself, but larger desks were out of reach financially. I've learned I never use more than  26 or so concurrent channels-a single stage box lets me have up to 44 connected mics accessible simply with a scene recall.   The QU-32 has been a game changer and I've never regretted it-until the SQ-7 came out-it'll be a few years before I can justify that upgrade. 
Logged
Steve Swaffer

Ken Webster

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 102
Re: New Mixer Recommendations
« Reply #17 on: July 21, 2018, 11:08:09 AM »

Since your original request indicates a preference for analogue, have you considered patching 2 smaller analogue mixers together?  I know our analogue mixer has that option though we have never used it.  We are also close to the point of having to replace but only have 12 stage lines, 2 PCs, 1 DVD and 2 ch RF mic. I tend to share your reservations about digital mixers, there just doesn't seem any pros in it for us.
Logged

Chip Smith

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
Re: New Mixer Recommendations
« Reply #18 on: July 21, 2018, 01:32:19 PM »

Thought I posted last night-but I'll chime in on the ease of jumping to digital.

Two and a half years ago we went from an A&H GL3800-48 to a QU-32.  I set it up in a couple hours on Saturday and gave our regular FOH guy a 30-40 minute intro (I myself had never touched a digital either).  He is not a very techy guy.   The next day a man who's family sings and plays a number of instruments (though not that day) owns and runs their own sound system, told me you couldn't tell we were using a new mixer.

I had also commented on it being easier to change faders than reach from channel 2 to 38 accurately, etc.  I also recently set the mixer up to run as a "split" PA during Sunday School-our overflow is used as a SS class.  I have a SS setting that has a mic only in the overflow-press a couple buttons and we are back to business as usual in the brief intermission between SS and church.  As a side benefit, EVERY service gets the same starting point on the mixer-no matter who or what happened the last service, or even in sound check right before a service (of course, a sound check can be saved just as easily if we want to use it).

The QU seems easier for non-sound people.  We have an occasional mid-week funeral that I or a media person can't get to.   Church staff can easily handle prelude and a mic and aren't intimidated by 3000 knobs and switches (that can be accidentally bumped!)

We have an annual Christmas event where I usually need 30-36 channels-I was concerned about fader count myself, but larger desks were out of reach financially. I've learned I never use more than  26 or so concurrent channels-a single stage box lets me have up to 44 connected mics accessible simply with a scene recall.   The QU-32 has been a game changer and I've never regretted it-until the SQ-7 came out-it'll be a few years before I can justify that upgrade.

Thanks for sharing this, especially since it seems very close to my situation.
Logged

Chip Smith

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
Re: New Mixer Recommendations
« Reply #19 on: July 21, 2018, 01:39:21 PM »

Since your original request indicates a preference for analogue, have you considered patching 2 smaller analogue mixers together?  I know our analogue mixer has that option though we have never used it.  We are also close to the point of having to replace but only have 12 stage lines, 2 PCs, 1 DVD and 2 ch RF mic. I tend to share your reservations about digital mixers, there just doesn't seem any pros in it for us.

I have considered this because there just aren't that many options in analog mixers over 32 channels.  My main dislike of just about all the new analog mixers I've seen is the placement of buttons in between the faders.  That's the way the Soundcraft Spirit mixer in our Family Life Center is laid out and I find it to be a poor design.
Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: New Mixer Recommendations
« Reply #19 on: July 21, 2018, 01:39:21 PM »


Pages: 1 [2] 3  All   Go Up
 



Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 21 queries.