ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Should we use Yamaha RIO1608's with QL1 and QL5?  (Read 360 times)

Robert Brown

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
Should we use Yamaha RIO1608's with QL1 and QL5?
« on: February 12, 2019, 01:45:27 pm »

My church is replacing our failing Main board (FOH) and inadequate Production board.
We have settled on the QL5 for the Main board and the QL1 for production mixing (recording, streaming, overflow).

The question is:
Should we go with three TIO1608's or one RIO3224?
I know the RIO box has more capabilities when tied with the QL series, but I'm leaning toward the TIO's, mostly because of cost (Why pay nearly 3x as much?).

One vendor says no, go with the RIO citing TIO reliability issues and that redundant mode doesn't really work well with it. I should point out, however, that he also recommended the CL5, an 80 input board that is nearly twice the cost of the QL5!

The building that it's going in seats about 200, packed! We rarely have more than 5 singers and 5 band members.

The other vendor says the TIO boxes will serve us perfectly. No need to spend that kind of money. He said even if the church was OK with spending the extra money, he would rather spend it on other things the church might need.
I liked that answer!

However, I'm willing to pay the extra money for the RIO box if there is a real advantage, or if I can avoid disappointment later.
I would like some input from anyone who has experience with this gear.

Thanks
Robert
Logged

Lee Buckalew

  • Classic LAB
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1306
  • St. Louis, MO area
    • Pro Sound Advice, Inc.
Re: Should we use Yamaha RIO1608's with QL1 and QL5?
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2019, 02:47:41 pm »

My church is replacing our failing Main board (FOH) and inadequate Production board.
We have settled on the QL5 for the Main board and the QL1 for production mixing (recording, streaming, overflow).

The question is:
Should we go with three TIO1608's or one RIO3224?
I know the RIO box has more capabilities when tied with the QL series, but I'm leaning toward the TIO's, mostly because of cost (Why pay nearly 3x as much?).

One vendor says no, go with the RIO citing TIO reliability issues and that redundant mode doesn't really work well with it. I should point out, however, that he also recommended the CL5, an 80 input board that is nearly twice the cost of the QL5!

The building that it's going in seats about 200, packed! We rarely have more than 5 singers and 5 band members.

The other vendor says the TIO boxes will serve us perfectly. No need to spend that kind of money. He said even if the church was OK with spending the extra money, he would rather spend it on other things the church might need.
I liked that answer!

However, I'm willing to pay the extra money for the RIO box if there is a real advantage, or if I can avoid disappointment later.
I would like some input from anyone who has experience with this gear.

Thanks
Robert

My experience has been to go with the TiO's in a situation such as you are describing.  We have not experienced any issues with reliability.  We have also not experienced any issues with properly configured networks and redundant mode. 
Others may have experiential input that would contradict my experiences so let's see who else chimes in.

Lee
Logged
Lee Buckalew
Pro Sound Advice, Inc.

Scott Helmke

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1324
Re: Should we use Yamaha RIO1608's with QL1 and QL5?
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2019, 04:54:29 pm »

The Tio redundancy issue is that if the primary network fails you lose head amp control, but audio is fine.

I'd go with the Tio boxes in your situation. Yamaha makes them, they are plenty solid enough.
Logged

Nathan Riddle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1560
  • Niceville, FL
    • Nailed Productions
Re: Should we use Yamaha RIO1608's with QL1 and QL5?
« Reply #3 on: February 12, 2019, 05:37:54 pm »

My anecdotal evidence from mixing at a church venue with a TF5 and two TIO1608 boxes installed for the last two years says they are perfectly reliable.

We had one hiccup where they (console & TIO) failed to find each other upon startup. Power cycle and we've never seen it since.

Off-topic/side note; If you aren't fully set on the Yamaha offerings and wanted to save money or get more for your money the A&H SQ/d-Live might be a better fit. (IMO)
Logged
I'm just a guy trying to do the next right thing.

This business is for people with too much energy for desk jobs and too much brain for labor jobs. - Scott Helmke

Lee Buckalew

  • Classic LAB
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1306
  • St. Louis, MO area
    • Pro Sound Advice, Inc.
Re: Should we use Yamaha RIO1608's with QL1 and QL5?
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2019, 06:20:07 pm »

My anecdotal evidence from mixing at a church venue with a TF5 and two TIO1608 boxes installed for the last two years says they are perfectly reliable.

We had one hiccup where they (console & TIO) failed to find each other upon startup. Power cycle and we've never seen it since.

Off-topic/side note; If you aren't fully set on the Yamaha offerings and wanted to save money or get more for your money the A&H SQ/d-Live might be a better fit. (IMO)

I would also caveat this with past issues of length of service for Allen & Heath. 
I like the A&H brand and their products BUT we have had major issues when support for their digital consoles suddenly stopped due to parts availability.  As I understand it this had to due with A&H sourcing some/many of their digital components from "others" which is also what most manufacturers do. 

Yamaha on the other hand, again, as I understand it, manufactures all of their own components.  This has meant a very long life for their digital console products with no issues regarding service for many, many years. 

If ROI is a driving factor, such as the rental market, then A&H can certainly make a lot of sense.  Once longevity becomes a major deciding factor then Yamaha becomes our go to.

Just my $0.02

Lee
Logged
Lee Buckalew
Pro Sound Advice, Inc.

Ray Aberle

  • Classic LAB
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3413
  • Located in Vancouver, WA (and serves OR-WA-ID-BC)
    • Kelcema Audio
Re: Should we use Yamaha RIO1608's with QL1 and QL5?
« Reply #5 on: February 12, 2019, 08:34:12 pm »

So one thing to consider is gain compensation. The Tio1608-D doesn't support that, whereas the Rios will. This could be important if you anticipate someone needing to change gains mid-show-- being able to have the other console react to that change might be nice.

-Ray
Logged
Kelcema Audio
Regional - Serving Pacific Northwest (OR, WA, ID, BC)

Ron Bolte

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 47
  • Mmmmm.. ok...
Re: Should we use Yamaha RIO1608's with QL1 and QL5?
« Reply #6 on: February 12, 2019, 10:01:06 pm »

Our system uses 2 RIO1608s, a 3224 and a tio1608 for backstage monitors and such.
For your application, get the TIO, use the money you saved for some new mics.

Don't forget, your QL5 has 32 preamps that can be gainshared with the QL1, using the "port to port" feature.  Its like having another 3224 on your network.

We use the QL5 for a monitor console, and the "port to port" feature has been handy when you need a few more inputs on stage, gainshared with the CL5 at FOH
Logged

Nathan Riddle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1560
  • Niceville, FL
    • Nailed Productions
Re: Should we use Yamaha RIO1608's with QL1 and QL5?
« Reply #7 on: February 13, 2019, 10:32:37 am »

And I would absolutely differ to your wisdom / $0.02 in that regard.

I second your thought with the fact that Yamaha still being able to produce CPU/DSP modules for their end of life/ (nearly) end of service M7CL series. Albeit at a very high cost.

I would state that this was with SOURCING components. Not repair itself, I've never had an issue with A&H for repair service.

And the way tariffs and global commerce has been recently I'd say any single component could be on the 'limited supply' list. But maybe Yamaha has better supply lines?

Anywho, longevity makes sense in the cotext stated.

I would also caveat this with past issues of length of service for Allen & Heath. 
I like the A&H brand and their products BUT we have had major issues when support for their digital consoles suddenly stopped due to parts availability.  As I understand it this had to due with A&H sourcing some/many of their digital components from "others" which is also what most manufacturers do. 

Yamaha on the other hand, again, as I understand it, manufactures all of their own components.  This has meant a very long life for their digital console products with no issues regarding service for many, many years. 

If ROI is a driving factor, such as the rental market, then A&H can certainly make a lot of sense.  Once longevity becomes a major deciding factor then Yamaha becomes our go to.

Just my $0.02

Lee
Logged
I'm just a guy trying to do the next right thing.

This business is for people with too much energy for desk jobs and too much brain for labor jobs. - Scott Helmke
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 


Page created in 0.113 seconds with 21 queries.