ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6   Go Down

Author Topic: Here we go with a mixer question  (Read 2415 times)

boburtz

  • SR Forums
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 255
  • San Francisco Bay Area
    • SoundWizard Productions
Re: Here we go with a mixer question
« Reply #10 on: February 04, 2019, 09:31:52 pm »

The direct upgrade/replacement from Yamaha for the LS9-32 would be the QL5, which is a very nice mixer though not as cheap as the options mostly being presented.
If I were looking for something to directly replace the LS9 in terms of functionality, sound quality, and feature set, I would go for the SQ7 in that price range (QL5 is a WAY better product than the LS9, and the price reflects this). The SQ7 is a step up from the LS9 in just about every respect. Sure, everyone knows how to use the Midanger / Behr-as, but a new board without a touch screen in this age is a backward move imho. Even the checkout stand at the grocery store has a touch screen.
Logged

Luke Geis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1622
    • Owner of Endever Music Production's
Re: Here we go with a mixer question
« Reply #11 on: February 04, 2019, 10:13:57 pm »

I would caveat the Yamaha QL as being more a corporate-oriented mixer. It sounds good and has many top end features, but it is slightly slower to navigate with. I would not be at home with it doing live bands. For talking heads, it is the bee's knees though.

For dual purpose work, the Midas M32 is very hard to beat. It has great performance and features and a great price.

I think the newer SQ line from A&H would probably spec out better than the Midas M32, but it is only just starting to pick up traction. I have not used one yet and I am not a fan of the QU, which is probably why I am not so turned on by the marketing for the SQ line. I almost got the GLD a while back and am sort of glad I held off. It didn't get as popular as the hype seemed to suggest it would. I have always liked A&H, but the QU is what made me realize I don't like fixed format mixers. Overall I wasn't impressed by it, so it made me doubt the other higher end A&H offerings.
Logged
I don't understand how you can't hear your self

Mal Brown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 499
Re: Here we go with a mixer question
« Reply #12 on: February 04, 2019, 10:21:27 pm »

Not universally loved here I get but to my ear the Soundcraft SI boards just sound musical in a way that many of the others out there do not.  The workflow on the SC boards is also very ‘analog’ feeling.

The app is in my mind substandard.  The rest of the package makes up for it.

My .02, hopefully worth more ;-)
Logged
Bass player, sound guy.
Fb Gorge Sound and Light
WillyandNelson.com

Matthew Knischewsky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 292
Re: Here we go with a mixer question
« Reply #13 on: February 04, 2019, 10:35:06 pm »

I would caveat the Yamaha QL as being more a corporate-oriented mixer. It sounds good and has many top end features, but it is slightly slower to navigate with. I would not be at home with it doing live bands. For talking heads, it is the bee's knees though.

For dual purpose work, the Midas M32 is very hard to beat. It has great performance and features and a great price.

I think the newer SQ line from A&H would probably spec out better than the Midas M32, but it is only just starting to pick up traction. I have not used one yet and I am not a fan of the QU, which is probably why I am not so turned on by the marketing for the SQ line. I almost got the GLD a while back and am sort of glad I held off. It didn't get as popular as the hype seemed to suggest it would. I have always liked A&H, but the QU is what made me realize I don't like fixed format mixers. Overall I wasn't impressed by it, so it made me doubt the other higher end A&H offerings.

I'm not sure why you would consider a QL to be oriented toward corporate work. A QL5 is a huge upgrade from an LS9-32 and is instantly familiar if you're used to the workflow. QL5 has easily double the "rack" processing over the LS9 and even does some things the CL5 doesn't do. It's easily my preferred console for all of the gigs I previously used an LS9 or even M7 for.

I've never liked the X32/M32 form factor compared to LS9-32. I don't care for flipping fader banks when mixing a band. There's some workflow and ergonomic issues that drive me nuts (Knobs on surface not in the same sequence as on the display).
Logged

Jeff Lelko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1093
  • Cape Canaveral, FL
Re: Here we go with a mixer question
« Reply #14 on: February 04, 2019, 10:38:00 pm »

I have always liked A&H, but the QU is what made me realize I don't like fixed format mixers. Overall I wasn't impressed by it, so it made me doubt the other higher end A&H offerings.

It's like night and day between the two levels.  I was less than impressed with the Qu Series as well.  After demoing an SQ, it seemed to me that the SQ Series is really what the Qu Series should have been to begin with.  Having somewhat recently been in the market myself, the choices were really either get an M32 for its widespread acceptability, get an SQ for a similar price but added features/flexibility, or go with a higher-level board all together such as a dLive or similar-level offering from another manufacturer. 
Logged

Rob Spence

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3067
  • Boston Metro North/West
    • Lynx Audio Services
Re: Here we go with a mixer question
« Reply #15 on: February 04, 2019, 11:06:09 pm »

I would caveat the Yamaha QL as being more a corporate-oriented mixer. It sounds good and has many top end features, but it is slightly slower to navigate with. I would not be at home with it doing live bands. For talking heads, it is the bee's knees though.

For dual purpose work, the Midas M32 is very hard to beat. It has great performance and features and a great price.

I think the newer SQ line from A&H would probably spec out better than the Midas M32, but it is only just starting to pick up traction. I have not used one yet and I am not a fan of the QU, which is probably why I am not so turned on by the marketing for the SQ line. I almost got the GLD a while back and am sort of glad I held off. It didn't get as popular as the hype seemed to suggest it would. I have always liked A&H, but the QU is what made me realize I don't like fixed format mixers. Overall I wasn't impressed by it, so it made me doubt the other higher end A&H offerings.

The M32 is actually also getting long in the tooth too these days. Depending on who uses the mixer, popularity may not play into it.

I understand the “corporate “ label on Yamaha desks. You just don’t see them in mid level band mixing. That said, the QL series are really nice, just pricey.

If the users of the LS9 are used to 32 faders, then a desk with fewer might mess up workflow.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Logged
rob at lynxaudioservices dot com

Dealer for: AKG, Allen & Heath, Ashley, Astatic, Audix, Blue Microphones, CAD, Chauvet, Community, Countryman, Crown, DBX, Electro-Voice, FBT, Furman, Heil, Horizon, Intellistage, JBL, Lab Gruppen, Mid Atlantic, On Stage Stands, Pelican, Peterson Tuners, Presonus, ProCo, QSC, Radial, RCF, Sennheiser, Shure, SKB, Soundcraft, TC Electronics, Telex, Whirlwind and others

Stephen Kirby

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2988
Re: Here we go with a mixer question
« Reply #16 on: February 04, 2019, 11:32:08 pm »

The Yamaha boards have their own unique workflow/OS.  If you know it great, visiting BEs unfamiliar with it will have trouble.  A local venue with a nice Meyer system had a QL and replaced it with an M32 so more folks could jump on and use it.

I'm kind of partial to the Soundcraft due to the more obvious control surface and less button pushes for things like EQ.  And more flexible than the Qu boards.  Although the SQ looks very nice.
Logged

Jain John

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16
Re: Here we go with a mixer question
« Reply #17 on: February 05, 2019, 12:10:20 am »

1 more vote for soundcraft si series for easy to use and sound quality..
Logged

Tim McCulloch

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19635
  • Wichita, Kansas USA
Re: Here we go with a mixer question
« Reply #18 on: February 05, 2019, 12:25:39 am »

I want to love the Si mixers.  They sound good, the expansion capability is there.  FX by dbx and Lexicon.  A client has one and I'd rather mix on it than the other choices in their venue but it's still kind of frustrating to think I'm navigating to a setting or preference only to find myself at a dead end.  It's one of those "I know I can do this, but how" things.

And the screen in tiny.  Sorry but at my age more screen area is usually a good thing.
Logged
"Practicing an art, no matter how well or badly, is a way to make your soul grow, for heaven's sake. Sing in the shower. Dance to the radio. Tell stories. Write a poem to a friend, even a lousy poem. Do it as well as you possible can. You will get an enormous reward. You will have created something."  - Kurt Vonnegut

Brian Jojade

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1352
    • HappyMac Digital Electronics
Re: Here we go with a mixer question
« Reply #19 on: February 05, 2019, 12:38:31 am »

Sure, everyone knows how to use the Midanger / Behr-as, but a new board without a touch screen in this age is a backward move imho. Even the checkout stand at the grocery store has a touch screen.

A touch screen isn't necessarily a positive thing.  With a little practice, muscle memory can get you around when you have physical buttons to press.  With a touch screen, you've got to focus your eyes on the screen the entire time you're operating it.  I like the fact that the X32 does NOT have a touch screen to get finger printed up.

If you do want touch screen control, the iPad app on the X32/M32 really is tough to beat.  While not perfect, it's one of the best designed, IMO.  Very straightforward operation and easy to get where you need to be without any sliding screens or fancy gestures needed.
Logged
Brian Jojade
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6   Go Up
 


Page created in 0.035 seconds with 23 queries.