Print

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

[Kent Thompson]

We will hopefully be going digital on our mixer in the next few months. There are many choices of course but, we seem to be centering in on the 2 above consoles due to supplier availability.

Both would give us the required channel count 48, aux busses don't seem to be an issue either there are plenty there ditto matrix, and sub outs plenty there. The only things I can see that are different are the obvious things like the mc7 having all those faders and the ls9 needing to bank. Also the ls9 seems to have a ganged master output instead of individual left and right control (maybe it does but I just haven't found it yet) and size. There is the cost difference as well but, if there is a justification for the cost difference we are cool with that. They both seem to fit the bill for us on the surface.

So I guess I want to know the reasons you would purchase one over the other. The ls9 seems to have the edge money wise but what do you loose with it that you have on the mc7.

Our system is a left right system which runs in mono in reality I have been using left for mains and right for front fills hence my concern about separate left right output faders but I can change that. I am sure there are other ways to do it with either of these boards anyways.

Thanks for your responses.

[Mac Kerr]

What you lose with the LS9 is usability. The M7 is much easier to navigate. I have just done my first 2 shows on an LS9, usually an M7 is the smallest console I see. I found the LS9 a real pain compared to an M7, or better yet a PM5D.

Navigating around the screen with arrow keys to get to each function you need is plain silly. The touch screen of the M7, or the actual knobs of the PM5D are much better.

The lack of DCAs on the LS9 is also a big loss.

The Centralogic area that lets you access DCAs, input fader banks, output fader banks, and matrix masters, while keeping all the input faders available is far superior to the LS9 layer swap to get to outputs.

For future expansion the 3 slots on the M7 are better than the 1 remaining after you have used 1 to expand the LS9-32. Unless you use a $2000 AD8HR 8ch mic pre you will not have control of the 8 expansion mic pres from the console, so no HA recall.

You may guess I am not a fan of the LS9.

Mac

[Kent Thompson]

With the LS9 it’s pretty obvious when you expand it you just punch the bank button but to access the added channels. If you expand the mc7 past 48 how do you access the expansion channels? Is it similarly as easy? What are the limitations if any on the MC7L-48 expansion channels?

To get the ls9-32 to 16 expansion channels I would need 2 of those AD8HRs then. So that adds $4.5k or so to the price just to have the same channel count. I am assuming that puts the board at somewhere around $15k total? That's getting pretty close to the mc7.

So does the ls9 have any advantages except for the obvious entry price?

The DCA issue is a good one, but at this point anything is better than a now 34 channel sr40.8.2 .

I am hoping someone chimes in with something else I have not thought about.

[Lee Buckalew]

There is no expansion of active channels beyond 48 (plus 4 stereo) on the M7CL-48.

You can add channels but, you would have to have them come up on your 48 (plus 4 stereo) available faders.  This also means you have to disable something for that to happen.  It works very well for folks who change out instruments in different songs but you cant get more mixing channels.

I would also say that there is little to add to Mac's comments about ease of operation.  If you are actually mixing and not just turning things up and down the M7CL wins hands down.  
If having all faders available at once is not critical and you can work with layers and linking channels from layer to layer then the DM2000 offers expansion up to 96 channels (has 6 expansion slots) and lets you run at 96K.  
The O2r96 allows 48 channels but has 4 expansion slots. The built in pre's on the DM series don't have recallable head amps.

His,
Lee Buckalew
Pro Sound Advice, Inc.

[Taylor Phillips]

The media director at my church says he'd rather have the LS9-32 consoles from the youth and childrens' areas in the sanctuary rather than the M7CL-48. With the LS9-32 you have a a total of 64 inputs and on the M7CL-48 your limited to 48.  I have never ran the board in the sanctuary, so I can't say for sure, but looks like the M7 is the easier board to operate with VCA's and the touch screen, though.  Yamaha has newer versions of the M7 than the one we have, though, and I'm not sure about what all they changed that might have been other reasons why my guy prefers the LS9.

[Michael Robertson]

I would take a M7 over an LS9 any day assuming the channel count is appropriate. The M7 is MUCH easier to navigate, especially for digital newbies. As mentioned previously it also has VCA's, touch-screen and a little more flexibility.

If you continue running your system the same way I believe you could attenuate your stereo outputs separately in the output section.

[Mac Kerr]

Kent Thompson wrote on Thu, 11 February 2010 18:33

With the LS9 it’s pretty obvious when you expand it you just punch the bank button but to access the added channels. If you expand the mc7 past 48 how do you access the expansion channels? Is it similarly as easy? What are the limitations if any on the MC7L-48 expansion channels? To get the ls9-32 to 16 expansion channels I would need 2 of those AD8HRs then. So that adds $4.5k or so to the price just to have the same channel count. I am assuming that puts the board at somewhere around $15k total? That's getting pretty close to the mc7. So does the ls9 have any advantages except for the obvious entry price? The DCA issue is a good one, but at this point anything is better than a now 34 channel sr40.8.2 . I am hoping someone chimes in with something else I have not thought about.

There is more to console expansion than input channels. The M7 is limited to 56 input control channels, 48 mono and 4 stereo. The slots let you attach other equipment to the console. A common scenario is up to 48 digital outs to a multitrack recorder, and 48 digital ins from that recorder for virtual soundcheck, or other recording purposes. You can also use the slot to access any outboard gear you may want to continue to use. You can even add additional mic inputs, that get switched in and out of the console on a scene by scene basis.

AFAIK there are no inherent advantages to an LS9 over an M7 except for price and physical footprint.

You may not care much about DCAs now, having not used them before, but with more channels, and more experience with them, you won't want to use a console without them.

Mac

[Mac Kerr]

Taylor Phillips wrote on Thu, 11 February 2010 18:45

The media director at my church says he'd rather have the LS9-32 consoles from the youth and childrens' areas in the sanctuary rather than the M7CL-48. With the LS9-32 you have a a total of 64 inputs and on the M7CL-48 your limited to 48.

Do the events in your youth and children's areas use more than 48 mono input channels? If so, the additional 16 possible on an LS9 may be important, but the loss of the ease of use from an M7 is a giant step backward. I'd love to know why your media director thinks the LS9 is better.

Mac

[Mac Kerr]

Kent Thompson wrote on Thu, 11 February 2010 17:46

Our system is a left right system which runs in mono in reality I have been using left for mains and right for front fills hence my concern about separate left right output faders but I can change that. I am sure there are other ways to do it with either of these boards anyways.

Neither the LS9, nor the M7, or for that matter the PM5D or PM1D have separate left and right output faders. With these consoles you will probably end up using matrix outs, which let you set up as many as 8 different mixes of your groups, or auxes, or even input channels, to feed different locations, or record feeds.

Mac

[Ron Balsom]

Hi Kent, just to add to what good things already said about the choice.  Yes, the M7 will certainly be more appreciated.  You mentioned the need for some 48 counts. Sounds if your talking those numbers, your definately 'busy' on the platform.  No question, the M7 is the way to go. We have the M7/48 and can say this from experience.  The learning curve is much easier and the ease to navigate for adjustments is quicker than the LS.  Blessings,  Ron Balsom  HPCC  Casper, Wyoming.

[ProSoundWeb Community]