Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums > LAB Lounge

Looking for console and wireless mic recommendations

(1/8) > >>

Tsun Gwing-Kai:
Newbie here and working with my first PA.

I realized I probably shouldíve posted here instead of the Lab, as Iím a beginner and starting out.

Was recommended to pick up an X32/M32 and learn as the skills would port to another console easily.

Iíve had limited experience with digital mixers, and hope the M32R or M32Live (is the only difference fader count?) can be a good foundation to teach me mixing.

Current uses would be small bands (drum kit, keyboard, a few vocals, and maybe a backing track).  These are all friends with day jobs and none of us are professional musicians.

Also looking for some wireless mic recommendations.  If I go ULX-D, I can run Dante to a card on the mixer, but the cost to go QLX-D is much cheaper.

If I bypass the D/A and A/D conversion by going ULX-D, will the sound be much better, or is it a small (incremental) improvement?

Would I regret getting a few channels of SM58ís or B87A with the QLX-D (analog) receivers and then find as I grow, ULX-D was better long term?

PA would be QSC KW153 x2, likely a pair of Yorkville LS801p (or if I can swing it, 4x RCF SUB8004), and Iím using QSC K12.2 as monitors.

For someone thatís never mixed a live show on anything but cheap gear (Mackie ProFX, Yamaha MG, etc.) is the combo above too advanced and not ďbeginner friendlyĒ enough?

I can use Dante Controller, set up a crossover, run an RTA, but my mixing skill is practically a fresh slate.

Also do want the PA to be able to grow as I do larger shows, bigger bands, and grow out of doing this for fun and actually getting real gigs.

Thank you,

Tsun Gwing-Kai

Brian Jojade:
X32 is almost the standard platform for entry level rigs. Very suitable starting point.

The audible difference in going Dante vs analog is not going to be noticeable. Dante adds complexity and is harder to troubleshoot if things go wrong. If you donít have strong networking skills, avoid it.

QLX-d is a great system, but still not as good as an old fashioned piece of cable. If going wired is an option, thatís always a better (and cheaper) choice.

Dave Garoutte:

--- Quote from: Brian Jojade on May 20, 2024, 11:31:27 PM --- Dante adds complexity and is harder to troubleshoot if things go wrong. If you donít have strong networking skills, avoid it.

--- End quote ---
Plus adds a grand or so to the cost.

Helge A Bentsen:

--- Quote from: Brian Jojade on May 20, 2024, 11:31:27 PM ---
The audible difference in going Dante vs analog is not going to be noticeable.

--- End quote ---

Depends on the number of wireless channels.
For one, not much difference.
With six you start to notice a drop in background noise level.
Beyond 20 it's a real difference in background noise with all the channels open.
I've done a few choir shows with 40+ channels of wireless on at the same time, the difference in background noise wasn't subtle.

Brian Adams:
The build quality of the M32 is a step above the X32, so I'd recommend the Midas over the Behringer if you can afford it. There's an audible difference as well, but it's subtle. The M32R will do everything the full size will do, just with fewer onboard inputs and outputs. With a stagebox like a DL32 they're basically the same. The full size M32 has a few extra buttons that make life a little easier, as well as a lamp socket, so if you can deal with the larger size it's a better choice. About the only times I use my M32R are when I need to lift it myself.

I get a lot of use from my M32's, and they work really well. That said, the design is getting a little long in the tooth, and there's a lot more competition on the market for that size console. I started moving away from Midas/Music Group when their service department went way downhill a few years ago, and while they've bounced back a bit, I don't think they'll ever win me back. In any case, you'll benefit from learning and running an M32, because there are a million of them out there. They have a lot of routing options, which is great, but you can also get lost in the weeds and things can go bad quickly if you don't know the board inside and out. These days I often point people towards Allen & Heath. The SQ series is a great alternative to the M32, and the workflow is a lot better, but it doesn't have quite as many bus options as an M32 and can't support as many attached devices (like Ipads and stuff). The Avantis does everything an M32 can do, and a lot more, but it's pricing is in a slightly different league. It's a great console to work with though.

ULXD is great, and a nice step up from QLXD, especially with the quad receivers. The diversity on ULXD is a little better, the transmitters are 20mw instead of 10, and the transmitters boot up a bit faster, in my experience. The QLXD is a great system, and can use the same lithium batteries and chargers, so you can get a lot of the same performance for less cash. You'll definitely need more antenna distros though, compared to the quad receivers, and it'll take up quite a bit more rack space. I can't say whether you'll regret getting QLXD over ULXD, as it's still nice stuff, but depending on how many channels you need ULXD could easily be the better choice. 8 channels of ULXD will take up 2RU, while 8 channels of QLXD will take 6RU, including 2 4-channel antenna distros. If you just need 1 or 2 channels it might be hard to justify the cost of ULXD, but any more than that and I think it becomes a better choice.

Don't run Dante unless you need to. There's really no benefit to using Dante on an M32, although the Avantis and D-Live have some nice Dante integration that's pretty handy.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version