Print

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

[Todd Pitts]

Hello all.  I posted this in the wrong forum earlier and hope this is the correct one.  Any suggestions/assistance you may have is appreciated.

I have a scenario I need some assistance with if you will indulge me.  I am a member of a 6 piece band that has a couple small tours scheduled. On several of the routing stops we will be providing our own sound which is a first for me with a project of this scope.  Venues are inside and out with roughly 200 people per. Here is what I have to work with.

    * A&E MW3 16:2
      2 channel 32 freq EQ with dedicated sub out
      3 - JBL PRX535
      2 - QSC HPR181i
      1 - Lexicon MX200
      1 - BBE 482i
      1 - Behringer  MDX4600
      1 - Behringer EP2500
      5 - Wireless IEM systems
*


We need to be able to flush out 6 independent monitor mixers if possible with this set up. I could spend a couple hundred bucks if needed but don't want to go much beyond that. I have been racking my brain and think..... I may have a scenario that will work. Here goes:

Use all 6 aux channels for monitor mixes. Send aux 6 to PRX535 for drummer others to EIM transmitters.
Pan vocals left and go out the left master to the lexicon and back in through ST5 left.
Pan kick, bass, keys etc right and go out the right master to the EQ channel 1 then BBE CH1 then subs thus using similar to an aux fed sub system.
Use the "M" fader as the master with summed left and right out to EQ channel 2 then BBE CH2 then the main PRX 535s.

Is this a viable scenario? Given the gear is there a better way? Using inserts, direct outs....? Am I missing something?

Any and all assistance is appreciated.

[Bob Leonard]

If you use all of your aux sends for monitors what will you use for effects or other outboard gear if needed. I might question why you need that many monitors or IEMs in the first place based on the size venues you're going to play. 200 people is not a large venue and unless everyone is doing something with vocals this may be a case of overkill. You might also be better suited to using 3,4 wedges properly placed where needed most. You could also look into another small board and use that for monitors. Myself? I would look towards the floor wedges first and save the money used for IEMs for something else like maybe a more capable board.

[Robert Weston]

Yep - 6 monitor mixes is too much.  Not everyone in the band needs their own mix; that just adds other issues and more complexity (hence the reason for your post!)  Determine who needs to listen to about the same content and put those people on one mix; do the same for the other band members. 

As a side note, it may be best NOT to use a BBE in the final output stage.  You're already using it for for some channels early on.  That's a bit too much "processing" and I'm sure it already sounds overly processed.  If you are relying on the BBE to get some type of "sound" out of your system, you may need look at the overall setup/gain structure/EQ'ing of the entire system.  BBE units may be ok for certain things, but the way it is being used in your system sort of raises a red-flag with how your system is configured.

[Jamin Lynch]

Hello all.  I posted this in the wrong forum earlier and hope this is the correct one.  Any suggestions/assistance you may have is appreciated.

I have a scenario I need some assistance with if you will indulge me.  I am a member of a 6 piece band that has a couple small tours scheduled. On several of the routing stops we will be providing our own sound which is a first for me with a project of this scope.  Venues are inside and out with roughly 200 people per. Here is what I have to work with.

    * A&E MW3 16:2
      2 channel 32 freq EQ with dedicated sub out
      3 - JBL PRX535
      2 - QSC HPR181i
      1 - Lexicon MX200
      1 - BBE 482i
      1 - Behringer  MDX4600
      1 - Behringer EP2500
      5 - Wireless IEM systems
*


We need to be able to flush out 6 independent monitor mixers if possible with this set up. I could spend a couple hundred bucks if needed but don't want to go much beyond that. I have been racking my brain and think..... I may have a scenario that will work. Here goes:

Use all 6 aux channels for monitor mixes. Send aux 6 to PRX535 for drummer others to EIM transmitters.
Pan vocals left and go out the left master to the lexicon and back in through ST5 left.
Pan kick, bass, keys etc right and go out the right master to the EQ channel 1 then BBE CH1 then subs thus using similar to an aux fed sub system.
Use the "M" fader as the master with summed left and right out to EQ channel 2 then BBE CH2 then the main PRX 535s.

Is this a viable scenario? Given the gear is there a better way? Using inserts, direct outs....? Am I missing something?

Any and all assistance is appreciated.

I would think having everyone on IEM's would be a good idea for smaller shows to help keep the stage volume down and simplify setup. I kinda like no wedges on stage. There's going to be some trade off's though.

For 5 mixes/6 IEM's, you can get just a body pack and tune it to the same frequency as somebody else, but they will both have the same mix, and aux 5 will be post fader. Or you can move the enternal jumpers to make 5 & 6 pre fader for 6 IEM's. But then you will not have an aux for effects. I've sometimes used the mono out for an IEM mix before, but it's post channel and main faders. You can also come out of the A/B for a post fader stereo mix.

I don't think I would have 5 on IEM's and 1 on a wedge.

If this mixer is always going to be used for IEM's I would move the enternal jumpers to pre fader/post EQ.

[Garry Wilson]

Hello all.  I posted this in the wrong forum earlier and hope this is the correct one.  Any suggestions/assistance you may have is appreciated.

I have a scenario I need some assistance with if you will indulge me.  I am a member of a 6 piece band that has a couple small tours scheduled. On several of the routing stops we will be providing our own sound which is a first for me with a project of this scope.  Venues are inside and out with roughly 200 people per. Here is what I have to work with.

    * A&E MW3 16:2
      2 channel 32 freq EQ with dedicated sub out
      3 - JBL PRX535
      2 - QSC HPR181i
      1 - Lexicon MX200
      1 - BBE 482i
      1 - Behringer  MDX4600
      1 - Behringer EP2500
      5 - Wireless IEM systems
*


We need to be able to flush out 6 independent monitor mixers if possible with this set up. I could spend a couple hundred bucks if needed but don't want to go much beyond that. I have been racking my brain and think..... I may have a scenario that will work. Here goes:

Use all 6 aux channels for monitor mixes. Send aux 6 to PRX535 for drummer others to EIM transmitters.
Pan vocals left and go out the left master to the lexicon and back in through ST5 left.
Pan kick, bass, keys etc right and go out the right master to the EQ channel 1 then BBE CH1 then subs thus using similar to an aux fed sub system.
Use the "M" fader as the master with summed left and right out to EQ channel 2 then BBE CH2 then the main PRX 535s.

Is this a viable scenario? Given the gear is there a better way? Using inserts, direct outs....? Am I missing something?

Any and all assistance is appreciated.

I'll just focus on your IEM mix. Here's something I did, it works if your IEM system has two channels and the inputs have loop through connectors on the transmitters. The IEM should be capable of changing from stereo to mono, so that inputs 1 and 2 can be mixed and heard in both ears. The pan control now becomes your mix level between the two sources.

This really works great for vocals or anyone that uses only a single channel into the mixer.

Now to the the two sources. Lets use Aux 1 for what would be called a band mix, with everyone mixed as if it was going to a recording device.

You take aux 1 output and connect it to IEM transmitter #1, channel 1, then loop out of channel 1 to transmitter #2, channel 1, loop out into unit#3 and so on. This should not be used on the drummer or anyone else that uses more than one input on the mixer.

Now you take the direct out from the appropriate channel; let say you have 3 singers and they are on channels 11,12,13. Connect a TRS cable from the direct out chan 11 to the first singer's IEM transmitter on channel input #2. Now this singer has the Aux 1 band mix on IEM channel 1 and himself on channel 2, anytime he/she wants "more me" they rotate the pan control on the body pack more to the channel 2 side, continue same setup with remaining singers. You can do the same thing for an instrumentalist that does not sing and only uses one input to the mixer. The will save you some auxes, it is a compromise, but I used it successfully, until I got a mixer with more auxes. At the time I was using the GL2400-4 on a 10pc band, that has 4 singers. Here was my aux assignment

A1- Band mix
A2- Stage right wedge
A3- Stage left wedge
A4- Drummer/wired IEM
A5- Efx
A6- aux fed subs

Later I had some other creative stuff going on, but don't want to convolute the OP.

The other GREAT solution would be to buy the Allen & Heath MixWizard WZ3-12M,16 Input Monitor Mixer.


Garry W.

[Geoff Doane]

Yep - 6 monitor mixes is too much.  Not everyone in the band needs their own mix; that just adds other issues and more complexity (hence the reason for your post!)  Determine who needs to listen to about the same content and put those people on one mix; do the same for the other band members. 

And whatever you do, don't let them put a pillow in the bass drum!  How dare a musician make any decisions about the sound of his instrument.  (Sorry Robert, I couldn't resist.)

We are service providers in this business.  I don't think it is my place to tell a band that "they don't need" 6 monitor mixes, even if I do believe it myself.  I might need to explain to them that they will have to pony up some more cash if they want 6 mixes and effects.  That often brings people back to reality when they're spending their own money.

Garry's solution is a good example of thinking outside the box, and sounds like it could work.  My only concern is that it might be a bit confusing for the musicians to figure out, and they still can't have totally independant mixes.

If I had to make it work with the equipment at hand, I'd probably set all 6 auxes to pre fade, and use those as the monitor feeds.  The left output of the console would be the mono PA mix, and the right output would be a mono send to the single FX unit.  The FX unit would return to the console and only be routed to the left mix bus.  The pan controls then become the FX send for each channel.  It's not ideal of course.  The level in the main mix will drop slightly as the FX send is increased, and then drastically if you go beyond 12 o'clock, although you shouldn't have to go that far if the gains are set up properly.  The loss of gain would have to be compenstated for with the main fader.

There's no opportunity for aux fed subs with this setup.  You'll need a crossover downstream of the system EQ.

GTD

[Todd Pitts]

Yep - 6 monitor mixes is too much.  Not everyone in the band needs their own mix; that just adds other issues and more complexity (hence the reason for your post!)  Determine who needs to listen to about the same content and put those people on one mix; do the same for the other band members. 

As a side note, it may be best NOT to use a BBE in the final output stage.  You're already using it for for some channels early on.  That's a bit too much "processing" and I'm sure it already sounds overly processed.  If you are relying on the BBE to get some type of "sound" out of your system, you may need look at the overall setup/gain structure/EQ'ing of the entire system.  BBE units may be ok for certain things, but the way it is being used in your system sort of raises a red-flag with how your system is configured.

@ Bob and Robert. Thanks for your help.

I agree that 6 mixes seems to be overkill and would like to reduce that for my own sanity.  With the exception of the drummer the other players are vocalists as well. All guitars, bass and keys go direct into the PA so everyone needs to hear their voice and instrument hotter in the mix. Wedges would be fine other then added weight, amps and using floor space I don't think we will have for these shows.

I might be able to get the drummer and bass player to share a mix though. That would seem to be the most logical to combine.

Signal chain noted. I will probably eliminate the bbe all together.

[Todd Pitts]

I would think having everyone on IEM's would be a good idea for smaller shows to help keep the stage volume down and simplify setup. I kinda like no wedges on stage. There's going to be some trade off's though.

For 5 mixes/6 IEM's, you can get just a body pack and tune it to the same frequency as somebody else, but they will both have the same mix, and aux 5 will be post fader. Or you can move the enternal jumpers to make 5 & 6 pre fader for 6 IEM's. But then you will not have an aux for effects. I've sometimes used the mono out for an IEM mix before, but it's post channel and main faders. You can also come out of the A/B for a post fader stereo mix.

I don't think I would have 5 on IEM's and 1 on a wedge.

If this mixer is always going to be used for IEM's I would move the enternal jumpers to pre fader/post EQ.

So Jamie that's part of the reason we have the IEMs. It seems this is less about the IEMs and more about the desires/needs of the players. With the gear we have it just might not be possible to do what is desired. I'll give it my best shot and reevaluate accordingly.

[Todd Pitts]

I'll just focus on your IEM mix. Here's something I did, it works if your IEM system has two channels and the inputs have loop through connectors on the transmitters. The IEM should be capable of changing from stereo to mono, so that inputs 1 and 2 can be mixed and heard in both ears. The pan control now becomes your mix level between the two sources.

This really works great for vocals or anyone that uses only a single channel into the mixer.

Now to the the two sources. Lets use Aux 1 for what would be called a band mix, with everyone mixed as if it was going to a recording device.

You take aux 1 output and connect it to IEM transmitter #1, channel 1, then loop out of channel 1 to transmitter #2, channel 1, loop out into unit#3 and so on. This should not be used on the drummer or anyone else that uses more than one input on the mixer.

Now you take the direct out from the appropriate channel; let say you have 3 singers and they are on channels 11,12,13. Connect a TRS cable from the direct out chan 11 to the first singer's IEM transmitter on channel input #2. Now this singer has the Aux 1 band mix on IEM channel 1 and himself on channel 2, anytime he/she wants "more me" they rotate the pan control on the body pack more to the channel 2 side, continue same setup with remaining singers. You can do the same thing for an instrumentalist that does not sing and only uses one input to the mixer. The will save you some auxes, it is a compromise, but I used it successfully, until I got a mixer with more auxes. At the time I was using the GL2400-4 on a 10pc band, that has 4 singers. Here was my aux assignment

A1- Band mix
A2- Stage right wedge
A3- Stage left wedge
A4- Drummer/wired IEM
A5- Efx
A6- aux fed subs

Later I had some other creative stuff going on, but don't want to convolute the OP.

The other GREAT solution would be to buy the Allen & Heath MixWizard WZ3-12M,16 Input Monitor Mixer.


Garry W.

Much appreciated Garry! I think these suggestions are going help significantly. Everyone in the band has multiple inputs but I still see the light at the end of the tunnel. If I can persuade the 2 lead guitar players to share a basic they can then choose either to have their guitar or vocal routed from the direct out to their wireless unit. A compromise but one I'm willing to make :-).  That would free up one aux feed. Same thing with drummer and bass player and now we have 2 free auxes and mission accomplished.

Thanks again man.

Thanks again.

[Todd Pitts]

If I had to make it work with the equipment at hand, I'd probably set all 6 auxes to pre fade, and use those as the monitor feeds.  The left output of the console would be the mono PA mix, and the right output would be a mono send to the single FX unit.  The FX unit would return to the console and only be routed to the left mix bus.  The pan controls then become the FX send for each channel.  It's not ideal of course.  The level in the main mix will drop slightly as the FX send is increased, and then drastically if you go beyond 12 o'clock, although you shouldn't have to go that far if the gains are set up properly.  The loss of gain would have to be compenstated for with the main fader.

There's no opportunity for aux fed subs with this setup.  You'll need a crossover downstream of the system EQ.

GTD

Thanks Jamin. If I am able to reduce the monitor mixes to 4 and then use aux 5 and 6 for effects, can I use the scenario you describe as a sort of sub bus? 

If not, will the sub woofer out (with adjustable crossover) on the Behringer FBQ3102 Ultragraph PRO suffice to break out the sub signal from the main?

[Patrick Tracy]

A little history should put this "everyone must have his own mix" thing in perspective.

In the early days of amplified music you heard yourself from your amp. This included vocals. There were no monitors and no monitor mix.

When they added monitors it was generally just a speaker split from the amp. A fancy setup would take the line out from the amp to another amp for separate volume and tone.

The first dedicated monitor mix was one mix for stage that was different from the mix for the house, generally on side fills shared by the band.

Then came wedges and more stage mixes and the expansion of stage monitoring to what we have today, with IEMs thrown in for fun.

The point is that there is no reason each and every person on stage must have their own dedicated mix. At your level getting four mixes is a bit of a luxury. Two mixes would not be atypical. I would have the band reevaluate its priorities and find a way to share mixes to get them down to four.

That does leave some possibility for conflicts with vocal levels. Singers really do need to hear themselves disproportionately loud in their mix (not as true for instruments). I would think about providing a shared stereo mix, with panned instruments, and one of the various "more me" options for vocals. Probably the most affordable device for this would be the Behringer HA4700 headphone amp. You'll need to build four custom "more me" cables to go from the respective direct outs to the Aux Inputs of the HA4700 (unbalanced cable connected to tip of the mixer end and tip and sleeve of the headphone amp end). Auxes 1 and 2 can be left/right into the headphone amp. Auxes 3 and 4 can be for people who need more personalized mixes, like the primary singer.

[Geoff Doane]

Thanks Jamin Geoff. If I am able to reduce the monitor mixes to 4 and then use aux 5 and 6 for effects, can I use the scenario you describe as a sort of sub bus? 

If not, will the sub woofer out (with adjustable crossover) on the Behringer FBQ3102 Ultragraph PRO suffice to break out the sub signal from the main?

The same scenario could be used for "aux" fed subs.  You still need something that will bandwidth limit the signals going to the speakers though.  This doesn't normally happen in the mixer itself.

I couldn't open the block diagram on the BearRinger site, so I'm not sure how that crossover works.  If the amp is really a clone of the QSC, like everyone claims, you might be able to accomplish the crossover function with the filter switches.

I should point out a mistake in my explanation above.  When turning the pan control clockwise to increase the FX send, the channel fader (not main fader) will need to be increased to make up for the slight loss of gain through the channel.

GTD

[Bob Leonard]

Todd,
I'm willing to say that if the tour is specific to clubs catering to 200 people it's time for one of those band meetings where priorities are discussed. Patrick noted above that a large number of monitor mixes at this level is somewhat of a luxury, and to this I agree. There are plenty of suggestions here, all of which add complexity to a small system, and for a band I am going to venture is just starting out. 

One suggestion that I'll make based on my 45 years is to eliminate, as Patrick notes also, as much complexity as possible. Doing so will ultimately add to the bands ability to perform at it's best, reduce setup time, and enhance the bands overall enjoyment with the experience. When you start to travel you'll be faced with possible hardware failures and unforseen problems will arise, making a complex or hard to manage system on your first tour not something you want to deal with.

I'm sure that not every one o the six band members is considered the "lead" vocalist, and unless the band spends an ornate amount of time practicing I would also be fairly sure that 6 part harmonies are not an every song event. Following this logical line of thought it makes sense to reduce the IEM count, or monitor count, by sharing same, or by reducing the IEM count to those who must absolutely have IEM, and with other members of the band sharing a floor wedge or two supporting the full mix.

If the band still insists IEMs are required by all members then I would stear clear of trick routing and patching. Also note that regardless of the outcome the band will in all likelyhood need to pony up for some additional gear, all part of the "tour" and something they need to embrace if they want to succeed.

My suggestion, and what I believe to be the correct approach for this need, and again based on plenty of experience, would be to purchase a low cost eight channel, or twelve channel board and wye cables as needed. Run the incoming signals to both boards and each IEM will have it's own channel seperate from FOH. Other benefits will be the ability to alter tone as required, sum the mix as required, mute as required, etc.. And, in the end you have added little complexity, not changed the main board setup, and left your aux sends on the main board for FOH and effects. (Dump the BBE).

Boards of this size are very inexpensive new and used.
 
And by the way. My first dedicated monitor "system" was a 1965 Fender Bandmaster and an expansion cabinet taking it's input from a Bogen amplifier and a wye cable. The entire 11 piece band, including horn section, was in hog heaven.

[Todd Pitts]

That does leave some possibility for conflicts with vocal levels. Singers really do need to hear themselves disproportionately loud in their mix (not as true for instruments). I would think about providing a shared stereo mix, with panned instruments, and one of the various "more me" options for vocals. Probably the most affordable device for this would be the Behringer HA4700 headphone amp. You'll need to build four custom "more me" cables to go from the respective direct outs to the Aux Inputs of the HA4700 (unbalanced cable connected to tip of the mixer end and tip and sleeve of the headphone amp end). Auxes 1 and 2 can be left/right into the headphone amp. Auxes 3 and 4 can be for people who need more personalized mixes, like the primary singer.

Thanks for the history lesson Patrick. If only the audience hadn't become more sophisticated (and players more spoiled) as the years have rolled on as well.

I like the idea of using the HA4700 alot.  Would it be practical to provide the FOH mix to the 4700, then, using me as example, my vocal direct out of MW16:2 into my 4700 channel's aux in for "more my vox" then out to my IEM units channel 1 (which is 2 channel BTW) and finally direct out from MW16:2 of my guitar into the 2nd channel on my EIM unit (for more my gtr) and blend to taste?

Also is the custom cable required? I'm sure there is a reason but they both appear to be Balanced TRS connectors.

Thanks,

Todd

[Todd Pitts]

Todd,
I'm willing to say that if the tour is specific to clubs catering to 200 people .......

Hi Bob. For the stops where we are providing PA (4 out of 10) that's the case. The remaining shows will outdoor festivals types with 1000+ attending. These larger shows have been the norm for this project.

One suggestion that I'll make based on my 45 years is to eliminate, as Patrick notes also, as much complexity as possible. Doing so will ultimately add to the bands ability to perform at it's best, reduce setup time, and enhance the bands overall enjoyment with the experience.

I couldn't agree more!!!

I'm sure that not every one o the six band members is considered the "lead" vocalist, and unless the band spends an ornate amount of time practicing I would also be fairly sure that 6 part harmonies are not an every song event.

We are an Eagles tribute band. 4 lead singers and 4 part harmonies on virtually all the songs with 5 part harmonies on others. I am trying to use my cover bands PA to accommodate the routing shows we scheduled to make use of days in between the larger events. make a little extra money along the way, cover fuel costs, not be bored etc. 

My suggestion, and what I believe to be the correct approach for this need, and again based on plenty of experience, would be to purchase a low cost eight channel, or twelve channel board and wye cables as needed. Run the incoming signals to both boards and each IEM will have it's own channel seperate from FOH. Other benefits will be the ability to alter tone as required, sum the mix as required, mute as required, etc.. And, in the end you have added little complexity, not changed the main board setup, and left your aux sends on the main board for FOH and effects. (Dump the BBE).

I will seriously ponder the suggestion (BBE is dumped) of adding a second board. It could be used for duo/solo gigs as well instead of dragging out the MW16:2 rack.

Thanks for the help.

Todd

[Patrick Tracy]

Thanks for the history lesson Patrick. If only the audience hadn't become more sophisticated (and players more spoiled) as the years have rolled on as well.

I like the idea of using the HA4700 alot.  Would it be practical to provide the FOH mix to the 4700, then, using me as example, my vocal direct out of MW16:2 into my 4700 channel's aux in for "more my vox" then out to my IEM units channel 1 (which is 2 channel BTW) and finally direct out from MW16:2 of my guitar into the 2nd channel on my EIM unit (for more my gtr) and blend to taste?

Also is the custom cable required? I'm sure there is a reason but they both appear to be Balanced TRS connectors.

Thanks,

Todd

I think your scheme would work, but it is getting further from the keep-it-simple idea.

The Aux In on the HA4700 is a stereo input. The cable I described would work for stereo monitoring by taking the hot from the balanced out and connecting it to the left and right channels on the aux in. If your idea above means you get a mono mix then an unbalanced cable might suffice for getting the direct out to the aux in. If you do run the main mix through the headphone amp then you'll need something downstream to control the volume in the house because changing it on the board would mess with your headphone mix.

Personally, I would rather put together a stereo mix on Aux 1-2 with your guitar and other instruments panned and add the "more me" vocal.

[Jay Barracato]

Hi Bob. For the stops where we are providing PA (4 out of 10) that's the case. The remaining shows will outdoor festivals types with 1000+ attending. These larger shows have been the norm for this project.
I couldn't agree more!!!
We are an Eagles tribute band. 4 lead singers and 4 part harmonies on virtually all the songs with 5 part harmonies on others. I am trying to use my cover bands PA to accommodate the routing shows we scheduled to make use of days in between the larger events. make a little extra money along the way, cover fuel costs, not be bored etc. 
I will seriously ponder the suggestion (BBE is dumped) of adding a second board. It could be used for duo/solo gigs as well instead of dragging out the MW16:2 rack.

Thanks for the help.

Todd

Routing dates are often the compromise dates. I would be thinking of ways to also make your life easier for the big shows. Somewhere on the old boards is a thread where Evan Kirkendall described several IEM rigs he has put together. I think what would make your life the easiest is if you can get ahold of a dedicated monitor board to use for ALL of your shows regardless of who is providing FOH.

Having a dedicated monitor board would free up your FOH auxes for the other things you want to use them for, as well as saving lots of soundcheck time of dialing in 6 mixes. Frankly 6 mixes is nothing significant for a monitor engineer, it is a PITA to try to do from FOH on a different zeroed board at each show.

Personally, if I could shake the money free, I would go for a rack mounted LS9-16, with my own drop snakes, splitter, and tails. A O1V or a Studiolive 16:4:2 will also work with a little creative I/O. In the analog world, I like both the MixWiz monitor or the Crest XRM (if one of those comes up for sale, you may have to fight me for it). For higher end analog the APB ProRack monitor is probably the Rolls Royce of rack mounted monitor boards.

Even a second Mix Wiz with a splitter dedicated just for monitors would make patching into a variety of house systems easier without having to relevel the in ear mixes every show.

[Bob Leonard]

I have to agree with Jay, and being an Eagles tribute band tells me about all I have to know as far as the vocals are concerned. Think hard about the simplicity of carrying a dedicated board for the IEMs and standardizing the setup from one venue to the next regardless of venue size. In my own opinion I would stay with an analog solution, and owning an APB board narrows my recommendation to the Crest XRM, or as Jay said the Rolls Royce, the APB Pro Rack Monitor, which by the way can be easily expanded. The Crest and the APB are designed for monitor world and the APB can be found traveling and in house with a very large number of well known people and acts. APB was formed by a number of ex-Crest employees and the product is simply light years above the competition.

http://www.audiolines.com/Pro-Audio/Mixing-Consoles-PA-Mixers/Analog-Mixing-Consoles/Crest-XRM-X-Rack-Monitor-Console

http://www.apb-dynasonics.com/products/Products_ProRackMonitor.html
 
Here's a very good buy for a Crest monitor mixer on Ebay available for 2 more days.
 
http://www.ebay.com/itm/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=330599984150

[Jay Barracato]

Here's a very good buy for a Crest monitor mixer on Ebay available for 2 more days.
 
http://www.ebay.com/itm/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=330599984150

Please don't show me that when the toy fund is as low as it is currently.

[ProSoundWeb Community]