ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 13   Go Down

Author Topic: TT24 - Part 2  (Read 52860 times)

Jens Brewer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 307
Re: TT24 - Part 2
« Reply #30 on: September 27, 2006, 10:34:32 am »

Lee,

Good notes so far; for most part I agree with everything you've mentioned.  One place I disagree with you though is about the on board effects.  I found the Mackie reverbs almost unusable; they reminded me of some of that old dismal ART stuff you'd find in bars 15 years ago.  The Yamaha stuff OTOH is quite usable, especially when you consider the price tag.

A few other things: I found the TT24 significantly noisier overall than the 01v96.  I guess that's why they implemented that system wide noise gate (it needs a little more gentle opening/closing too IMO).  Leaving 6-8 busses open to the stereo mix on my 01v96s is almost imperceptable, even with cans.

I had some problems with using phantom power on two adjacent channels.  I slight high pitched tone would be emitted thru those channels.  If you used phantom on channels space further apart, the problem was not there.

The TT24 LCR graphic eqs were horrendous, I thought, and when I used them last, you couldn't link the L&R ones together.  Huh?!?!

And lastly, I had some weird firmware bugs whereby engaging DSP on more than one group in grps 1-4 or grps 5-8 would kill the send of all groups to the stereo mix.  This was a major PITA for me since I use group EQ all the time in corporate A/V.

I think that most of these issues were related to the fact that I got to use one of the earliest production run units, and they were still working the kinks out.

But the usability and ergonomics are fantastic, flex groups are really usefull, and generally speaking, I think it's a really cool board.  I hope that Mackie gets their QC issues fixed, because this board fills such a nice niche in the corporate A/V world.
Logged

Lee Jacobson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 397
    • http://www.brevardsoundsystems.com
Re: TT24 - Part 2
« Reply #31 on: September 27, 2006, 04:03:04 pm »

Dave,

 I agree, aux mode is very cool. It is also somewhat typical of digidesks to run that way, so it ain't a "big deal". It is very nice to be able to see the mixes though.

Lee
Logged
Lee Jacobson
Technical Director
Brevard Sound Systems
Deltona, FL
386 717 4600

Lee Jacobson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 397
    • http://www.brevardsoundsystems.com
Re: TT24 - Part 2
« Reply #32 on: September 27, 2006, 04:52:51 pm »

Jens,



I have not had the phantom issue you describe. That would be no fun! As for the FX, I said they were usable. I never said they were great! Smile I have not had the noisefloor of the desk be an issue, yet. I will say that most of my events are outdoor street party/small (tiny) festival type things. I can get away with more noise than you could in a ballroom. That said, I don't recall thinking "jeez, this is a noisy SOB" either.  The firmware bugs are a sore spot for me as well. While I am all for upgrades/improvements to gear, I have to say most of the firmware updates on this one have been bug fixes. Yes, the user layer was a new feature. The tap delay still hasn't happened (hey mackie, will this happen soon?? at all??), nor has the Lake output card. On the card, I wouldn't want all my system drive in the desk anyway, so that has never been a feature I have been interested in. It is, however, something that has been promised and not delivered. I can put myself in the shoes of a guy who bought the TT24, expecting the Lake card to make my rig "all in one". If I were that guy, I'd be pissed. Again, lest I seem negative, I am not. Would I buy a TT24 today?? Prolly not. Would I have gotten one a month ago??? Prolly not again. While this desk has some things I REALLY like, nameley the V pots, the flex groups, and the non-following computer feature, it lacks a few things I find important for the way I like to work. Those things include the tap delay, more flexible routing with the adat I/O, and the lack of bugs. This one had something of a ghost in the machine, which I was able to figure out and clean up. Oddly, aux 4 had no output of its own. The output of aux 4 was aux 3's mix! The level was controlled by the aux 4 master, however. Please note, the auxes were NOT linked. I had to link/unlink the auxes several times, and finally got aux 4 back. I had a few (like 3 pair) of channels that were ghost linked like that too, where you'd select or solo one, and they'd both light up, and yet they were NOT linked. The fix seemed to be link/unlink them several times and finally they broke the ghost bond.

There seem to be more than a few TT24 owners over at the Mackie forum who are talking up the new LS9 as "the answer". To me, that one isn't enough different from the TT24 to warrant a move. The TT24 has the VCAs, which are VERY cool. The V pots as well, the EQ is all on separate knobs on the TT24, where the LS9 has the 01v type EQ, one set of 3 knobs, and 4 switches for low/low mid/highmid/high. To me, in order to get everything I want in a digidesk, one would need to spend well over twice what the TT24, bumped out to 48channels would cost. If the TT24 does what you need, and it is VERY close for me, it is a very cool product. With computers growing by leaps and bounds every few months, and with AES right around the corner, I am looking forward to any new offerings. It is easy to forget that the TT24 is a few years old, as it does play nicely with some newer offerings. I'd like to see some updates, but then who am I???....

AES reference is not a "hint" in any way. I have no knowledge of anything showing there, just being optimistic!



Lee


Logged
Lee Jacobson
Technical Director
Brevard Sound Systems
Deltona, FL
386 717 4600

Jens Brewer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 307
Re: TT24 - Part 2
« Reply #33 on: September 27, 2006, 07:03:18 pm »

Lee Jacobson wrote on Wed, 27 September 2006 21:52

 The TT24 has the VCAs, which are VERY cool.


The 01v96 has DCAs (functionally the same) and I would assume the LS9 had them as well.  The don't have their own dedicated faders like the TT24 but with the User Layer available, I don't think it matters much.
Logged

Lee Jacobson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 397
    • http://www.brevardsoundsystems.com
Re: TT24 - Part 2
« Reply #34 on: September 27, 2006, 07:40:44 pm »

Jens,

 The 01v96 has the DCAs, but AFAIK the LS9 lacks them.

FWIW,

Lee
Logged
Lee Jacobson
Technical Director
Brevard Sound Systems
Deltona, FL
386 717 4600

Bennett Prescott

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8924
    • http://www.adraudio.com
Re: TT24 - Part 2
« Reply #35 on: September 27, 2006, 08:08:27 pm »

Last I checked the LS9 has the same user layer available that the 01V96 does.
Logged
-- Bennett Prescott
Director of North American Sales
ADRaudio d.o.o.
Cell: (518) 488-7190

"Give me 6dB and I shall move the world." -Archimedes

Michael 'Bink' Knowles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4279
    • http://www.binkster.net/index.shtml
Re: TT24 vs. LS
« Reply #36 on: September 27, 2006, 10:51:51 pm »

Quote:

...talking up the new LS9 as "the answer". To me, that one isn't enough different from the TT24 to warrant a move...


Yeah, it's arguably a lateral move. Based on some of the Yamaha mic preamp sounds I've heard from recent budget Yammie offerings I'd worry that the LS9 (which I haven't heard) has less than wonderful pres. I find the Mackie TT24 pres to be easy to work with in that they are pretty neutral to my ear; not crunchy or noisy or hyped. Didn't hear the phantom whine thing... One thing that may drive folks into such a lateral move is the Yamaha name on your proposal and the expected reliability. Of course we don't yet know if the LS9 is going to prove as reliable as others of its family...

I think the Mackie dedication to Two Touch user interfacing is a good thing even though it limits how deep you can get into the guts and change the config to suit. No, I don't like routing my video delayed audio out two group/matrixes and back into two Line Inputs but if I could reroute it internally then the next guy would have no idea what's going on and the simple Two Touch ideal would dissolve.

-Bink
Logged
Michael 'Bink' Knowles
www.binkster.net

Paul E Fenelon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 321
Re: TT24 vs. LS
« Reply #37 on: October 01, 2006, 12:08:59 am »

Michael 'Bink' Knowles wrote on Thu, 28 September 2006 12:51

Quote:

...talking up the new LS9 as "the answer". To me, that one isn't enough different from the TT24 to warrant a move...


Yeah, it's arguably a lateral move. Based on some of the Yamaha mic preamp sounds I've heard from recent budget Yammie offerings
-Bink


Hi Bink

Always good to read your posts as I know you use a lot of different gear and have been contributing to this board for many years. I have been using the 01v96 for most of this year. It was my first digital desk and I would like to move up soem time in the near future. I have the additional Adat card and run two ADA8000's for 32 inputs. One of my regular bands needs 28 Channels at FOH. I also use a KTDN360, PCM90 and a DBX160x on lead vox. Many guys I work with rave about the TT24 but as I need more than 24 channels I have not considered it. I find that the 01v96 preamps are useable but not outstanding and in my opinion prefer the A&H GL2200 pre's. Venice pre's better again but the sheer functionality of the EQ, comps, gates etc has kept me using the 01v96.
Have you heard the M7CL preamps and would you consider it to be in the same league (sound quality) as a venice or analogue board. It will be interesting to hear the LS9-32 when it comes out but the EQ layout may keep me away from it. \

Thanks as always
Paul
Logged
ADR Audio - KV2

East Coast Touring Services
Australia, since 1992


www.adraudio.com.au

Michael 'Bink' Knowles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4279
    • http://www.binkster.net/index.shtml
Re: TT24 vs. 01v96
« Reply #38 on: October 01, 2006, 04:08:52 am »

Quote:

...I have been using the 01v96... It was my first digital desk... I have the additional Adat card and run two ADA8000's for 32 inputs... I find that the 01v96 preamps are useable but not outstanding and in my opinion prefer the A&H GL2200 pre's. Venice pre's better again but the sheer functionality of the EQ, comps, gates etc has kept me using the 01v96...


Yeah, it's hard to go back to one or two sweeps per channel when you've had a taste of four fully parametric filters. The ability to extensively tailor your source's sound trumps a slightly better preamp. I achieve better mixes with four PEQs on so-so pres than I do with two sweeps on nicer pres. After tweaking for harshness or feedback you still have a filter or two left over for carving pockets in one instrument to create breathing room for another instrument.

As far as mic preamps go, I don't have tons of experience on any one mixer--like you say I see a lot of models. In my short experience with Yamaha's 01v96, I thought there was a little too much machine whine down in the noise floor of the onboard pres. I haven't used the ADA8000s with a 01v96 so I can't compare them to anything else. Using the Presonus DigiMAX with it made me swap channels around so that the more important stuff was on Yamaha's preamps--that particular Presonus product gave me yet more buzz and whatnot underneath my signal.   Mad    Mackie's 800R outboard preamps connected via Lightpipe to the TT24 never made me rethink my input layout--the outboard pres are the exact same clarity as the onboard ones.

The GL2200 preamps are better than most budget digital pres since they don't have digital artifacts like rizz and clock noise but I like the GL3300 preamps better than GL2200. I imagine that the newest A&H GL offerings are based on the GL3300 pre... The GL3300 pre is roughly equal to (Dynacord's) Midas Venice, in my opinion. I guess we agree about the Venice pre being a hair better than the GL2200.

It's hard to compare digital preamps with analog ones if the digital pres are budget models that come with crunchy crud blended into the noise floor. I'd rather have Honest Analog Hiss or Clean Digital Air than the usual whines and clicks and chirps you hear down at the bottom of cheap digital stuff. But four filters of PEQ combined with comp and gate on every channel is hard to leave behind.  Confused


Quote:

...Have you heard the M7CL preamps and would you consider it to be in the same league (sound quality) as a venice or analogue board...


I've heard the M7CL but not enough to solidify an opinion. First impression is that it's a bit better than 01v96 but not quite as clean as PM5D. Hard to say if it's better or worse than TT24... I need more flight time on the M7 before I commit.

Happy giggin' -

-Bink
Logged
Michael 'Bink' Knowles
www.binkster.net

Lee Jacobson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 397
    • http://www.brevardsoundsystems.com
Re: TT24 - Part 2
« Reply #39 on: October 09, 2006, 08:02:05 pm »

Well, at least I wasn't on a ship.....


So, not unlike Marty's TT24 experience, "mine" died on me at not a good time. Gig: a regular gig with the city, this one was at the new location, in a parking lot. Vendors on two of the four sides of same, with buildings on the other two sides. We had a 25K Gennie to power my baby rig, stage, and a total of 6 600W cans. This should have been WAY enough power. I have a run of 10/4 tied right into the lugs of the gennie, then fed into a small panel in my 4mix rack, which is acting as THE distro for the stage/PA power. This panel has four 20A circuits, two for internal goodies (dsp, CX404, PL236, PL236) and two fed out powercons on the front. These were used to power ONE EF500P and ONE LS800P per circuit, plus half the stage, and FOH. FOH was the TT24, my RF rack, and two dbx EQs.

This was a battle of bands. Halfway through with the second band's set, we blew a 20A breaker. I pop the back off the 4mix rack, flip the breaker, and all is well, except the TT24 won't boot! After a frantic ten minutes or so, I figure if this event is gonna continue, I need to boogie back to my shop and grab the 01v (original, not '96) and run the show on that. I am gone for 20 minutes or so, and return with the 01v, and my guy tells me the TT24 did boot, so we start again with it. Popped the breaker again, and again, the TT24 won't boot! I rip the inputs out of the TT24, switch to the 01v, lose several channels in the process, but the show goes on.  I have not yet hooked the TT24 up in my shop, I am sure it'll boot. Turns out one of the vendors had plugged in his COMMERCIAL COTTON CANDY MACHINE to my power! Those things have HUGE heaters in them. So, while this was not at all the fault of the TT24, everything BUT said TT24 did start back up, and the 01v started and ran fine on said power. I didn't figure out the candyman was using my juice until much later in the day. Note, the lights were not on the same power, so I had four X 20A for my baby rig, which runs absolutely fine on two normally.

While I would be glad to keep playing with the TT24, and will do so if that is asked, I dunno that I can take it out on a gig. That fact is unfortunate, as it is kind of cool. In the end, I think the fact that it has been out as long as it has, and still has software bugs, is missing key features, and has been surpassed by other, newer computer based desks have all kind of ganged up on the TT24. If it did everything it was advertised to, never locked up, had zero software bugs, and much more routing flexibility, it'd be a real contender.
Logged
Lee Jacobson
Technical Director
Brevard Sound Systems
Deltona, FL
386 717 4600
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 13   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.099 seconds with 20 queries.