ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Go Down

Author Topic: Modern equivalent to Presonus Studiolive 16.0.2?  (Read 5966 times)

Scott Bolt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1768
Re: Modern equivalent to Presonus Studiolive 16.0.2?
« Reply #50 on: August 31, 2022, 11:35:01 AM »

I just pulled the trigger on a "like new" RCF M20X w/ road case for $1,200.

Looks like everything I wanted in the 16.0.2 but in a much newer package. If this ends up being a disaster too then maybe I'll finally wise up and get a tablet + rack mixer.

I recently used a rig with the XR18+iPad and X-Touch and it felt like a really weird hodgepodge of technology.

Something I've been running into lately is having a helpers/techs run sound at events without me there, so I really want something with an XLR input straight to getting sound through the master as a simple fast process, almost every gig I've done with my friends XR18 rig has had issues with connectivity dropping, iPad dying, etc.

So I'm still shying away from full glass even if I have to pay a little more for less.
Are you mixing your own band from stage, or mixing other bands?  Do you have a dedicated mix position in the venues you play, or do you have to put the mixer on the side of the stage?
Logged

Russell Ault

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2514
  • Edmonton, AB
Re: Modern equivalent to Presonus Studiolive 16.0.2?
« Reply #51 on: August 31, 2022, 02:13:17 PM »

{...} So I'm still shying away from full glass even if I have to pay a little more for less.

As an avowed fader-lover I absolutely understand the sentiment, but please understand that physical controls are going to cost you a lot more, even for less. The reason that an X32 Compact is nearly three times the price of an XR18 has almost nothing to do with its audio capabilities (it has basically the same analogue I/O, after all) and basically everything to do with how expensive faders, knobs, screens, and buttons are.

I believe the main differences are the lack of scribble strips, smaller display (5" instead of 7"), no AES3 output, no mute group buttons and no scene buttons.

I've never understood how anyone could use this console without scribble strips. IIRC the left fader bank has 8 pages and the right has almost as many, and that's without counting DCA Spill. I would get lost!

-Russ
Logged

Tim McCulloch

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23775
  • Wichita, Kansas USA
Re: Modern equivalent to Presonus Studiolive 16.0.2?
« Reply #52 on: August 31, 2022, 02:23:22 PM »

Yep, the software and computer hardware can be shared among several models and the development costs amortized across all of them.  "Real estate", the sheet metal, the faders, encoders, buttons and switches and displays... all are costly.

The cost of an X32 Rack is about half of the cost of a full size X32.  Other than having half the i/o, what's the difference?  Faders and buttons and knobs, oh my!
Logged
"If you're passing on your way, from Palm Springs to L.A., Give a wave to good ol' Dave, Say hello to progress and goodbye to the Moonlight Motor Inn." - Steve Spurgin, Moonlight Motor Inn

Douglas Cyr

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 119
Re: Modern equivalent to Presonus Studiolive 16.0.2?
« Reply #53 on: August 31, 2022, 09:56:32 PM »

Hey Douglas, I've been following along and finally have time to chime in. 

I too think the RCF choice is a mistake along with the original Studiolive idea.  As you probably recall from our Yorkville dealings that I have nothing against older or oddball equipment, a digital mixer isn't where I'd apply that same philosophy.  I agree with the others that XR, X32 and SQ are really the "baseline minimums" on the market today. 

I personally am not a fan of mixing on glass either.  I had an A&H Qu-PAC as a hold-over until I was able to make the investment into dLive - it was okay.  The Qu-PAC works fine for a set-and-forget job or for very simple applications but if mixing a band or a musical I'd definitely want some sort of tactile interface.  Even running the dLive "headless" with just an IP8 fader wing and a laptop with dLive Director is miles beyond the feel of running the Qu-PAC on glass. 

Looking to compact budget offerings, the X32 Compact, M32R, and SQ-5 are where my attention would be if not wanting a glass or hybrid solution.  They might cost more than what you'd prefer to spend, but in my opinion this isn't the place to be cutting corners - performance, interface, or reliability-wise.  Commonality and familiarity aside the vast user base for these three products will always help when you have the "why did my mixer just do that" kind of moments.  Good luck and hope this helps!

Well I already ordered it so hopefully it's not too bad ;D ! If the money was there the SQ-5 would definitely be my first choice, it's my favorite series of consoles to mix on (the "biggest" consoles I've used have been QL1, Midas Pro1, and M7CL as a freelancer). In retrospect maybe I should've just saved a little more for the X32 compact, but the M20X has all the features I need + came with the road case.

In terms of rental desirability, the X32 Compact would've been a better choice, but I always just provide a service package rather than dry hire equipment rentals, so the mixer will just be for me or any tech I hire to use.

Are you mixing your own band from stage, or mixing other bands?  Do you have a dedicated mix position in the venues you play, or do you have to put the mixer on the side of the stage?

I do rental/production for mainly EDM events, but as the events are getting bigger I find myself needing more control of the inputs/outputs and routing than I have with the Soundcraft Signature 12MTK I've been using. I almost always have a dedicated FOH thankfully.
Logged

Scott Bolt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1768
Re: Modern equivalent to Presonus Studiolive 16.0.2?
« Reply #54 on: September 01, 2022, 09:09:37 AM »

Well I already ordered it so hopefully it's not too bad ;D ! If the money was there the SQ-5 would definitely be my first choice, it's my favorite series of consoles to mix on (the "biggest" consoles I've used have been QL1, Midas Pro1, and M7CL as a freelancer). In retrospect maybe I should've just saved a little more for the X32 compact, but the M20X has all the features I need + came with the road case.

In terms of rental desirability, the X32 Compact would've been a better choice, but I always just provide a service package rather than dry hire equipment rentals, so the mixer will just be for me or any tech I hire to use.

I do rental/production for mainly EDM events, but as the events are getting bigger I find myself needing more control of the inputs/outputs and routing than I have with the Soundcraft Signature 12MTK I've been using. I almost always have a dedicated FOH thankfully.
If routing flexibility is a strong factor, then I defiantly would have recommended the X32 Compact or the MIDAS M32R.  Sounds like you have experience with some good mixers.

Hope the RCF works out for you.  Definitely a better option than the quite aged 16.0.2.
Logged

Douglas Cyr

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 119
Re: Modern equivalent to Presonus Studiolive 16.0.2?
« Reply #55 on: September 07, 2022, 05:11:42 PM »

I just had someone offer me a full size X32 for $1,500 after buying the RCF for $1,200....

Definitely wish I could've seen that coming.
Logged

Douglas Cyr

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 119
Re: Modern equivalent to Presonus Studiolive 16.0.2?
« Reply #56 on: September 07, 2022, 05:12:41 PM »

The M20X has a lot more power and flexibility than I expected though - the biggest downsides are no scribble strips and the LCD screen has bad viewing angle and is a strain to my eyes.
Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Modern equivalent to Presonus Studiolive 16.0.2?
« Reply #56 on: September 07, 2022, 05:12:41 PM »


Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Go Up
 



Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.049 seconds with 22 queries.