Print

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

[Matt Sum]

Hi all,

I'm wanting to purchase a mixer for handling small gigs mostly in a contemporary church setting.  We're talking something that can handle 9-12 inputs most of the time (12 to 16 inputs occassionally) and something from which I can run mono or stereo front of house as well as three or four monitor mixes.  I'm looking for something compact that will be transported by sedan or stationwagon.

Rider acceptability doesn't matter at all.  This is something I want to play with for my own personal interest and something I want to be able to lend to my church and to associated organisations without charging anything more than a small maintenance fee.  As such, it is something that may be operated by relatively inexperienced operators without direct supervision from myself.

Effects and extensive dynamics processing control are nice (and something I'd enjoy getting more experience playing around with), but are non essential as I imagine that the board will fairly often be used in situations where effects and dynamics processing are not utilised at all.  To give some background, I mix mostly at a church where effects are never used and dynamics processing is only used if I bring in my Aphex 622 gates and DPR901.

Well, enough introductory spiel from me.  Now to the main question.  What mixer would you recommend for my needs?  I've been considering the following options:

1. Allen and Heath iLive R72 and iDR16 (~AUD$13795)
2. Soundcraft Si Compact 16 and MADI CAT5e card and Compact StageBox (~AUD$13307)
3. Soundcraft Si Compact 16 and Roland "Baby Snake" 16/8 digital snake (~AUD$10000)
4. Soundcraft Si Compact 16 and Audiopile EWI PSPX-16x8 16/8 copper snake (~AUD$8000)
5. APB Dynasonics ProRack House and Roland "Baby Snake" 16/8 digital snake (~AUD$7035)
6. APB Dynasonics ProRack House and Audiopile EWI PSPX-16x8 16/8 copper snake (~AUD$5035)
7. Digico SD11 and SD-Mini Rack (haven't obtained a quote yet)
8. LS9-16 and Roland "Baby Snake" 16/8 digital snake (haven't obtained a quote yet)
9. LS9-16 and Audiopile EWI PSPX-16x8 16/8 copper snake (haven't obtained a quote yet)

Here are my thoughts about the options above:

1. I'm really quite reluctant to spend that much money given my current (unsophisticated) end usage goals.

2. Same concern about expense as above.  I'm not sure whether getting the MADI CAT5e option card and the Compact Stagebox is worth the money (additional $6800 over the Si Compact 16).  I wonder whether the iLive combo above would be a better bet.  The iLive desks seem to offer more functionality, including Q control over the high and low parametric EQ filters.  Although admittedly, the Si Compact with Stagebox would provide up to 32 in and 16 out.

3. Saves a fair bit of money compared to option two, but fewer inputs and outputs available and lots of additional A to D and D to A conversions as well as added physical bulk.

4. Probably a better option than option 3.  But obviously still stuck with limitations of Si Compact compared to iLive.

5. Great little analogue desk but obviously doesn't have the built in effects and dynamics processing and the relatively limited EQ and the physical limitation on channel count expansion.  Digital snake offers the convenience of just needing to run a CAT5e cable, but does it really save much bulk and weight once one takes into account the CAT5 cable reel etc?

6. Seems to be a better option than option 5.

7. Like the idea of multiband compression etc, but I imagine would be even more expensive than options 1 and 2.

8. Offers a reasonable amount of digital functionality, but by many accounts doesn't sound as good as the Soundcraft and A&H options and I don't imagine it would be a considerable amount cheaper.

9. Probably a better option than option 8, given that I'm again not convinced about the advantage of a digital snake versus copper.

Having said all of the above, I am leaning towards the APB board and copper snake.  Of course I would be sacrificing the on board effects, on board dynamics processing, more flexible EQ, recall, etc of digital boards.  However, it is a cheap option ($13000 is really, really stretching my budget and arguably unjustifiable given my end use).  Furthermore, my need for effects and dynamics processing are currently limited and are likely to remain limited at least for a little while.

The runner up in contention is probably the Si Compact with copper snake.  Third in contention is probably the iLive, although, if I do spend this much money, I wonder whether the Si Compact and Compact Stagebox combo should win out on channel count.

What are your thoughts?  I would particularly appreciate your thoughts regarding analogue vs digital for my situation, regarding digital snake vs copper snake and regarding iLive vs SiCompact plus Compact Stagebox.  And, of course, suggestions and options I haven't even contemplated are very welcome.

I look forward to hearing your wisdom on these matters.

Many thanks.

Regards,
Matt

P.S.  Sorry for the awfully long email.  I couldn't think of a more concise manner to lay out the options I'm considering and share my thought processes.

[TJ (Tom) Cornish]

When I read the usage part of your post I was thinking Mixwizard, Mackie Onyx, maybe Studiolive. Then I saw $$,$$$ digital choices???

I don't know your situation, but from your post there seems to be a disconnect. You need to have a bicycle available to share, but you're window shopping BMW and Audi.

Of your list, the iLives and Digico have the most functionality by far. The closeness in price between your option 1 and your option 2 would make that an easy choice to eliminate the SI Compact, at least for my priorities.

In my opinion, once routing is set up on most digital boards, they aren't any harder to run than an analog. A digital snake is nice, but forces you up to a pretty expensive solution, and makes less difference if you're comparing it to such a small analog snake that would meet your low channel count needs, since a 16/8 snake is both inexpensive and small and light.

I've been whining for years that the market needs a $5,000USD LS9-32 size mixer with a digital snake, but we're not there yet, so I understand your desire.

If it were me, and given your incomplete requirements which I take to mean you're not really sure what you would use this for, I would pickup a used 01v96 and an analog snake and put it in an SKB popup case. You can get all that here for $2000USD, and in a year or two you can upgrade to the next gen digital and save yourself a ton of money as prices fall and capabilities rise.   I see nothing in your requirements that an 01v96 can't do, and I have done this for 8 years with great success.

[Brad Weber]

While operating the iLive, Si Compact, SD11 and LS9 may be something a relatively inexperienced operator with no supervision could handle for a service or event, I'm not as sure about their configuring the consoles (patching, assignments and so on) for their system and use.  Would the mixer be part of a more comprehensive system you would be providing such that it could already be configured for that system and otherwise have some default setup or would it need to be configured by the users to a variety of systems and applications?  If the latter that might be a consideration.

I would be hesitant to use the Roland S-1608/S-0816 digital snake option since you have to control the preamps via the optional S-4000R controller, which I don't know if you included in your pricing, or through a computer with a serial port and the associated RCS software.  That seems a less than ideal approach for the application identified.

While the mixers listed are all very good options, I'm also curious as to why you did not include options such as the PreSonus StudioLive 16.4.2 or the Allen & Heath MixWizard3 16:2/ZED-22FX/GL2400-16 or any of a number of similar options along with an analog snake?  Maybe there is some criteria or goal that was not noted or not clear otherwise those seem to fulfill all of your stated goals and would almost certainly be less expensive.

TJ, I agree that the 01V96 might be a cost effective option but I would be concerned about the inexperienced operator aspect with it.

[Matt Sum]

When I read the usage part of your post I was thinking Mixwizard, Mackie Onyx, maybe Studiolive. Then I saw $$,$$$ digital choices???

I don't know your situation, but from your post there seems to be a disconnect. You need to have a bicycle available to share, but you're window shopping BMW and Audi.

Of your list, the iLives and Digico have the most functionality by far. The closeness in price between your option 1 and your option 2 would make that an easy choice to eliminate the SI Compact, at least for my priorities.

In my opinion, once routing is set up on most digital boards, they aren't any harder to run than an analog. A digital snake is nice, but forces you up to a pretty expensive solution, and makes less difference if you're comparing it to such a small analog snake that would meet your low channel count needs, since a 16/8 snake is both inexpensive and small and light.

I've been whining for years that the market needs a $5,000USD LS9-32 size mixer with a digital snake, but we're not there yet, so I understand your desire.

If it were me, and given your incomplete requirements which I take to mean you're not really sure what you would use this for, I would pickup a used 01v96 and an analog snake and put it in an SKB popup case. You can get all that here for $2000USD, and in a year or two you can upgrade to the next gen digital and save yourself a ton of money as prices fall and capabilities rise.   I see nothing in your requirements that an 01v96 can't do, and I have done this for 8 years with great success.

Hey TJ,

Thanks for your reply.

I completely understand your reaction and I too understand the sense of disconnect :-) between needs and wants.  Hence my great reluctance to put down $13000!  I quite enjoy window shopping and I must confess that I have a bad habit of sometimes buying "better" than I need (and paying the price for that).

I do, however, feel like $5000 for a good quality analogue board and snake, like the APB dynasonics is not entirely unreasonable.  A MixWizard plus copper snake new in Australia is about $3000.  I know there's a big relative difference between the price of these two analogue options, but the absolute difference is something maybe I could cope with.

I wouldn't get a StudioLive, I feel like I might as well get a more flexible digital board if I make the transition to digital.

Thanks for your suggestion re: the O1v96.  Not as easy to get 2nd hand in Aus as in US.  I'll check out pricing new, but imagine it wouldn't be dissimilar to the APB.  In which case I feel I'd rather get an excellent analogue board (for the size) than a average-good digital board.  Would you disagree?

Regarding your thoughts about iLive vs Si Compact, it wouldn't surprise me if I got quite a few answers like that. 

Finally, thanks for your suggestion re: copper vs digital snake.  You did a good job of articulating my feelings about this.

Thanks again for your patience.

Cheers,
Matt

[Matt Sum]

While operating the iLive, Si Compact, SD11 and LS9 may be something a relatively inexperienced operator with no supervision could handle for a service or event, I'm not as sure about their configuring the consoles (patching, assignments and so on) for their system and use.  Would the mixer be part of a more comprehensive system you would be providing such that it could already be configured for that system and otherwise have some default setup or would it need to be configured by the users to a variety of systems and applications?  If the latter that might be a consideration.

I would be hesitant to use the Roland S-1608/S-0816 digital snake option since you have to control the preamps via the optional S-4000R controller, which I don't know if you included in your pricing, or through a computer with a serial port and the associated RCS software.  That seems a less than ideal approach for the application identified.

While the mixers listed are all very good options, I'm also curious as to why you did not include options such as the PreSonus StudioLive 16.4.2 or the Allen & Heath MixWizard3 16:2/ZED-22FX/GL2400-16 or any of a number of similar options along with an analog snake?  Maybe there is some criteria or goal that was not noted or not clear otherwise those seem to fulfill all of your stated goals and would almost certainly be less expensive.

TJ, I agree that the 01V96 might be a cost effective option but I would be concerned about the inexperienced operator aspect with it.

Hi Brad,

Thanks for your post.

Very relevant questions.

My goal eventually, although may be wishful thinking, would be to eventually provide a more comprehensive system.  The reason I'm looking at mixer first is that it seems a major limitation or missing item in the kinds of gigs that friends and I are involved with.  There are always a couple of powered speakers I can get hands on (even I have a couple of RCF 310As that I use with my Nord Stage keyboard setup) but not always a mixer with enough channel count etc (I have a ZED10fx which also forms part of keyboard setup, but can double for spoken word presentation kind of ues).

What might a more comprehensive system look like?  Well, probably initially a FOH setup with two 2-way powered speakers (probably 12" woofer, maybe something like KW122 or a JBL PRX option), two or three 2-way powered speakers for monitor (could use my RCF 310As for this initially) and maybe add some subs for FOH at some point further down the road.  Signal processing initially would be something like a Sabine GraphiQ2 on FOH and some old DN410 PEQs on monitors.  Could consider one of the higher end DriveRacks in future if and when subs are added.  So, in summary, I'm looking at pretty small systems capable of covering 100-200 indoors without an absolute need for a lot fo low end frequency range extension.  As TJ said, I have need for a bicycle to share rather than a BMW.

In the short term, before I piece a system together, the mixer may need to be reconfigured for different setups.

Now for your second comment.  I understand that the price I was quoted for the Roland Snake included controller (given that I was told all I would need in addition for a fully functional setup would be a copper F-XLR to M-XLR "loom".  I will be sure to check if I take the digital option, but do think I'll go analogue because of the points which TJ articulated (with which I am inclined to agree).

Finally, why didn't I include those other cheaper desks?  Good question.  Think I got blinded by the "shiny-ness" of the more expensive options.  The MixWiz would be right in contention (probably at the top) if I had only a small budget.  As such, it remains a viable option. With regards to why not the others, I can offer a little bit of flawed reasoning.  Presonus is out because, yes it does have built in effects and dynamics processing and Q control over mid bands of EQ etc, but just seems so much less flexible than even something like the o1v96 that I feel I might as well spend a bit more for "better" digital.  GL2400-16 may be out because I haven't seen a quote for over a year but I seem to remember it being 30-40% more expensive than a MixWiz and I wasn't convinced it gave me much more function; I shall have to look at the specs again, though.  ZED-22 I haven't even considered because I (perhaps wrongly) assumed that the MixWiz or GL2400-16 would do all the same stuff and more.  Plus, in the end, the APB ProRack just somehow appeals.

Thanks again for your reply.  Hope I've answered your questions.

Cheers,
Matt

[Brad Weber]

Presonus is out because, yes it does have built in effects and dynamics processing and Q control over mid bands of EQ etc, but just seems so much less flexible than even something like the o1v96 that I feel I might as well spend a bit more for "better" digital.

I agree but the inexperienced operator may see it exactly the opposite way with that flexibility equating to a greater learning curve.  It sounds like the decision point may be whether you are purchasing primarily for you or for them.

[Matt Sum]

I agree but the inexperienced operator may see it exactly the opposite way with that flexibility equating to a greater learning curve.  It sounds like the decision point may be whether you are purchasing primarily for you or for them.

Hmm.  Fair call.  Very true if I completely rule out analogue and only look at digital.

However, I still feel I'd rather get an APB than a Presonus (i.e. great to excellent analogue vs good digital).  And I suppose the APB is arguably even simpler for the inexperienced operator.

I'm hoping to have a play with the Soundcraft Si Compact and A&H iLive R72 tomorrow.  I'm sure that will be instructive.  I'll try to post my thoughts afterwards.

Cheers,
Matt

[g'bye, Dick Rees]

Hmm.  Fair call.  Very true if I completely rule out analogue and only look at digital.

However, I still feel I'd rather get an APB than a Presonus (i.e. great to excellent analogue vs good digital).  And I suppose the APB is arguably even simpler for the inexperienced operator.

I'm hoping to have a play with the Soundcraft Si Compact and A&H iLive R72 tomorrow.  I'm sure that will be instructive.  I'll try to post my thoughts afterwards.

Cheers,
Matt

I would venture that anyone who has developed their mixing chops to the point of being competent will know what to look for and, once found, will be able to integrate the UI into their personal view of "how things work".  Less experienced or accomplished operators will have a steeper learning curve as they are working on both the science/art of mixing and the UI.  It's akin to a "musician" blaming the instrument because they don't know the tune.......

[Matt Sum]

I would venture that anyone who has developed their mixing chops to the point of being competent will know what to look for and, once found, will be able to integrate the UI into their personal view of "how things work".  Less experienced or accomplished operators will have a steeper learning curve as they are working on both the science/art of mixing and the UI.  It's akin to a "musician" blaming the instrument because they don't know the tune.......

Hey DR,

Thanks for chipping in.  Always good to hear your opinion on things.

I can accept your definition of competence.  Unfortunately, it may mean that some of the people the board will be loaned to are not competent.  A major problem in the church circles I mostly mix in is that some people have been trained in environments where they only know how to operate a particularly mixer in a particular sound system found at the church in which they were trained.  Some of these people may have never seen a digital mixer, may not know of the existence of dedicated monitor mixers etc.  I consider myself nothing more than a novice but yet find myself trying to educate people about things outside of the single sound reinforcement system that they experience and operate in a given church.  Not sure if this is a problem experienced in the States; maybe the access to "higher end" systems is more readily available.

Anyway, guess I'm derailing my own thread.

It'll be interesting to see how my playtime with the iLive and Si Compact goes today.  Not the same as mixing live, though, unfortunately.

Cheers,
M

[Rob Gow]

It'll be interesting to see how my playtime with the iLive and Si Compact goes today.  Not the same as mixing live, though, unfortunately.

Cheers,
M

With a StudioLive, you can play back a 24 track recording and practice mixing on it.

[ProSoundWeb Community]