ProSoundWeb Community

Church and H.O.W. Forums for HOW Sound and AV - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Church and HOW Forums => Church Sound Archive => Topic started by: Paul Randazzo on September 17, 2007, 08:31:05 PM

Title: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Paul Randazzo on September 17, 2007, 08:31:05 PM
My church is interested in purchasing a new 40 channel mixing board and a Soundcraft GB4 40 was recommended. We are not ready to go digital yet or anywhere in the near future. We are very comfortable with an analog board and have no need for a digital board. If anyone has some knowledge on this particular product or could suggest a comparable board I would greatly appreciate it.
Paul
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Karl P(eterson) on September 17, 2007, 11:38:06 PM
Your post over in audio land should be sufficient Smile

Karl P
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Gordon Prier on October 07, 2007, 12:07:38 AM
Hi Paul,

I have just installed the GB8-32 in a medium sized church and it is working well for them.  A similar product is the Allen & Heath GL2400-40 or GL2800-40.  Once you get to 40 channels I would look at the 8 subgroup mixers as these extra groups can help making mixing easier.  They may take a little while to get into but once mastered you may find that you do not want to operate without the subgroups.
Regards
Gordon Prier
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Don Sullivan on November 18, 2007, 09:56:50 AM
Really, Really Really think about going digital.
You may not think your operators have the knowledge.
They will get it.
You may think it is too complicated. It is not. In the long run, it is easier to have a fader-operator use a digital console than an analog one.

The benefits totally outweigh the learning curve.

Look  at the M7cl. Here is what you get:
48 recallable mic-preamps.
4 built in high quality effects.
4 Patchable 31 band eq's.
compression AND noise gates on EVERY input.
4 band parametric EQ + HPF on EVERY INPUT.

Copious outpus.
DIGITAL DELAY on ALL OUTPUTS! (want to cut feedback? Add 7-10 ms delays on main outputs!)

16 mix busses  + stereo mains + mono (or sub) mix buss.
Mix matrix (if you really need it)

4 stereo effects returns, 8 DCA groups,

I could go on and on.....

Then there are the cool things you simply CANNOT do easily on an ananlog desk.

Take a signal and route it into TWO input channels at the same time (WHY you ask?) Ever have your drums dialed in perfectly for a loud song, only to have them sound terrible for a later quiet song?  Take your overhead mics and bring them into the board AGAIN through a simple digital patch (no cables necessary) EQ them differently, set dynamics differently. Now you have different drum mixes available on the same board.

Really, Really Really think about going digital.








Title: use real, full name when posting
Post by: Tom Young on November 20, 2007, 08:00:01 PM
Please read the rules for posting here, then edit your profile so that your real, full name is displayed when you post.

Thanks.
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: A.J. McGlynn on November 21, 2007, 08:50:34 AM
dswpro wrote on Sun, 18 November 2007 08:56

Really, Really Really think about going digital.
You may not think your operators have the knowledge.
They will get it.
You may think it is too complicated. It is not. In the long run, it is easier to have a fader-operator use a digital console than an analog one.



Not everyone is reaqdy for digital. I can see that dswpro is excited about his M7CL but it is a complicated console for inexperienced operators. It does have great features but analog works great for smaller churches who have smaller budgets. I love my M7CL but it does have drawbacks for my volunteers. They have issues getting around on it and finding what they are wanting to do.
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Gary Creely on November 21, 2007, 01:54:17 PM
Quote:


Look at the M7cl. Here is what you get:
48 recallable mic-preamps.
4 built in high quality effects.
4 Patchable 31 band eq's.
compression AND noise gates on EVERY input.
4 band parametric EQ + HPF on EVERY INPUT.

Copious outpus.
DIGITAL DELAY on ALL OUTPUTS! (want to cut feedback? Add 7-10 ms delays on main outputs!)

16 mix busses + stereo mains + mono (or sub) mix buss.
Mix matrix (if you really need it)

4 stereo effects returns, 8 DCA groups,

I could go on and on.....

Then there are the cool things you simply CANNOT do easily on an ananlog desk.




DSWpro,

Why in the world would you compare a 5k board with a 22k board? That would be like trying to convince me that a BMW M5 is better than a ford focus= of course it is it cost 4 times as much too. I agree the m7 is only as complicated as you make it. If you have sound guys that are starting from nothing than the learning curve would be similar for analog or digital, but when guys are already comfortable on analog it makes for some learning.

AJ,

The GB4 is a good choice, it is better than the mackie offering in that class IMO. I would be comfortable installing that mixer.

Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: James Lawford on November 21, 2007, 06:41:58 PM
If you can stretch to the GB8 I think it would be worth it. You get 4 stereo channels instead of 2, as well as the 4 stereo returns. Plus the auxes can be all switch pre/post on the master section. Also, the extra groups can come in handy, especially if your system is run in stereo.

I've supplied numerous GB4/8's and all satisfied customers, including a 40 channel GB8 to a Church who are especially pleased. Digital ain't everything...and this is a quality board for the money.

James Lawford
LMC Audio Systems Birmingham
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Arnold B. Krueger on November 23, 2007, 01:24:26 PM
dswpro wrote on Sun, 18 November 2007 14:56

Really, Really Really think about going digital.


Agreed.

We made our move almost three years ago, coming up from a Mackie SR32.  The ribbon cables got intermittent, we found a B-stock 02R96 for under $8K, and as they say the rest was history.

Quote:


You may not think your operators have the knowledge.



You may think that you don't have the knowledge, but the digital consoles I've looked at step out of the box with reasonable enough defaults that you can start out treating it a lot like it was a simple analog console

Quote:


They will get it.


Example: I have a 16 year old girl that uses our 02R96 to do an Awana opening with a mic and a DVD player as sources.

All she needed to learn was

(1) How to turn the sound booth on (we reduced that to one switch)
(2) how to pull up a certain scene,
(3) and how to push on the only two faders that are up at all.

Quote:


You may think it is too complicated. It is not. In the long run, it is easier to have a fader-operator use a digital console than an analog one.



Agreed. Yes, there is a ton of capability in the box, but even a sunday morning operator doesn't need how to use but a fraction of it.

Quote:


The benefits totally outweigh the learning curve.



Anybody want to price out what even just a LS9-16 would cost done in analog, even if the analog boxes were all Berhinger?

Quote:


Look  at the M7cl. Here is what you get:
48 recallable mic-preamps.
4 built in high quality effects.
4 Patchable 31 band eq's.
compression AND noise gates on EVERY input.
4 band parametric EQ + HPF on EVERY INPUT.



..and output

Quote:


Copious outputs.



Even more if you want to add outboard expansion units.

Quote:


DIGITAL DELAY on ALL OUTPUTS! (want to cut feedback? Add 7-10 ms delays on main outputs!)



Delay is an EFX function, and also on the studio outputs.

Quote:


16 mix busses  + stereo mains + mono (or sub) mix buss.
Mix matrix (if you really need it)

4 stereo effects returns, 8 DCA groups,

I could go on and on.....

Then there are the cool things you simply CANNOT do easily on an analog desk.

Take a signal and route it into TWO input channels at the same time (WHY you ask?) Ever have your drums dialed in perfectly for a loud song, only to have them sound terrible for a later quiet song?  Take your overhead mics and bring them into the board AGAIN through a simple digital patch (no cables necessary) EQ them differently, set dynamics differently. Now you have different drum mixes available on the same board.



The point that needs to be made is that most of this power is invisible to the casual operator.

Quote:


Really, Really Really think about going digital.



Agreed - especially since the LS9 series have dropped the economic bar so low.
Title: Output delay
Post by: Mac Kerr on November 23, 2007, 01:40:58 PM
Arnold B. Krueger wrote on Fri, 23 November 2007 13:24

Delay is an EFX function, and also on the studio outputs.
Delay is available through the FX devices, but it is also available on every output port, all the XLR outs, and all 32 slot outs.

Mac
Title: Re: Output delay
Post by: Gary Creely on November 23, 2007, 03:41:05 PM
I just want to comment again that the the issue of digital versus analog was not really the question here, and I would also mention the digital solutions mentioned are significantly more costly. Even the 8k b stock board is only 16 channels out of the box, it would be an other few thousand to get up to 40 channels, and then you would have to run sound paging through 3 pages.

I love the LS9, but even that would need expansion to get to 40ch, pushing the cost over 10k, and requiring and other page of channels.

If you have the budget digital is a more sensible choice, in some situations it is actually easier to use than analog.

Paul,

Quote:

We are not ready to go digital yet or anywhere in the near future.


I think this is what has the guys going on about digital. When would you be ready for digital? , and what's to get ready for ? I have installed the LS9 in to liturgical churches that are venturing into contemporary, whose sound guys were clueless and it has performed brilliantly. When set up correctly they can actually reduce the margin of error of the operator.

If your reasoning to not go digital is budget than you have a strong argument, however if it because you are simply not ready for it, that I would suggest getting ready if yo can afford it.
Title: Re: Output delay
Post by: Arnold B. Krueger on November 23, 2007, 08:44:58 PM
Mac Kerr wrote on Fri, 23 November 2007 18:40

Arnold B. Krueger wrote on Fri, 23 November 2007 13:24

Delay is an EFX function, and also on the studio outputs.
Delay is available through the FX devices, but it is also available on every output port, all the XLR outs, and all 32 slot outs.


Thanks for the clarification. However, aren't there 3 slots with up to 16 outputs per, for a total of 48 slot outs?



Title: Re: Output delay
Post by: Mac Kerr on November 23, 2007, 10:38:07 PM
Arnold B. Krueger wrote on Fri, 23 November 2007 20:44


Thanks for the clarification. However, aren't there 3 slots with up to 16 outputs per, for a total of 48 slot outs?
Yeah, somehow i thought we had meandered over to an LS9. An M7CL/48 has 3 slots.

Mac
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: karuna madhusudana on November 26, 2007, 07:50:49 AM
firstly,
please introduce,
im karuna, from indonesia,,

Paul Randazzo,
if ur church have enough budget,
why dont u choose Soundcraft MH4..
with VCA features,its better than GB8.
i've been using soundcraft for years,
and i find GB8 not good enough than MH4.
now im using SeriesFIVE.
if u ready to go digital, i recomended the D5
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Mike Sveda on November 26, 2007, 12:45:06 PM
Well, we really like our Midas Verona 560.  Handles our needs just fine. The EQ works great and you don't worry about mackie preamp crackle when you get a hot signal.
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: karuna madhusudana on November 27, 2007, 06:39:04 AM
Midas VERONA is also acceptable..
but for some people, it is un familiar...
for Midas console,
i think its better heritage,,  Very Happy

i've been using VERONA with several audiorent,
and i can't get a good mix..
one day i handle a meeting using verona,
i cant do a god mixing with verona,
but in the next day, the audio rent gives me
a Heritage 3000..
and that day became a great musical mix with Heritage
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Gary Creely on November 27, 2007, 01:36:21 PM
Do you guys really think a midas verona, M7CL, or MH4 are really boards that that would make sense for a guy coming out of a mackie looking to go into an entry level soundcraft GB4? Is this a who has the best taste in sound boards contest, or an attempt to actually give Paul some useful advice.
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Dave Bode on November 27, 2007, 06:39:11 PM
I have a Crest Century GT-40 board that we are looking to sell.  We want to up grade to a digital board.

Specs can be found with this PDF it is a GT series.

http://www.crestaudio.com/media/pdf/fohman11-3-97.pdf

Let me know if you are interested in checking it out.  Really nice board.
Title: use real, full name when posting here
Post by: Tom Young on November 27, 2007, 08:39:10 PM
Please read the rules, edit your profile and use your real, full name when posting here.

Thanks.
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Christopher Buehring on November 28, 2007, 11:27:45 AM
Paul Randazzo wrote on Mon, 17 September 2007 19:31

My church is interested in purchasing a new 40 channel mixing board and a Soundcraft GB4 40 was recommended. We are not ready to go digital yet or anywhere in the near future. We are very comfortable with an analog board and have no need for a digital board. If anyone has some knowledge on this particular product or could suggest a comparable board I would greatly appreciate it.
Paul


Knowing the number of inputs you need is a start but you also need to determine how many outputs you will need.
Are you using this board for FOH only or is it doing more(monitors, recording...).  
If you are going to be running any FX (reverb...) you will likely want to have post-fade auxes available.  For monitors you would need pre-fade auxes and for recording either post-fade auxes or some kind of matrix output.

Remember to look at all of the features you might need in a board.

-Chris
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Arnold B. Krueger on December 01, 2007, 05:37:12 AM
Gary Creely wrote on Tue, 27 November 2007 18:36

Do you guys really think a midas verona, M7CL, or MH4 are really boards that that would make sense for a guy coming out of a mackie looking to go into an entry level soundcraft GB4?



That was exactly our situation when we got our 02R96. Our Mackie SR32 came down with ribbon cable disease.  We were three volunteers, 2 with some other SR experience, all on smaller analog boards.

When the O2R came in, we set it up with a CD player as a source driving headphones, played around with the channel strips, the layers, and the like, found out that it was broken, had it repaired, installed it ourselves, and went live on a Sunday morning.

Quote:


Is this a who has the best taste in sound boards contest, or an attempt to actually give Paul some useful advice.


For us it was not about taste, it was about getting the job done.

I wish that smaller boards were available in digital for reasonable prices. It is my understanding that some patent issues are holding that back, possibly until 2012.




Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Gary Creely on December 01, 2007, 10:18:20 AM
Arnold,

Your board was not among the ones I mentioned, but these days it would be more sensible to go with an LS9. Some folks were suggesting he look consider mixers which that cost 35k. This guy had a $1200 mixer and was thinking about  a $5700 mixer. My concern was some of the suggestions did not take into account that he was looking for an opinion on the GB4, and probably would welcome suggestions for mixers of a similar ilk.

Paul,

One mixer not mentioned that would also be in that range is the Allen and Heath GL2800, it's similar quality but you get 8 subs, and 10 aux sends and it is just a couple hundred more than the GB4.
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: K. Granger on December 01, 2007, 10:12:33 PM
Hi Paul,
To respond to your question, our church has been using the Soundcraft GB4 since we opened our new sanctuary two years ago.  The GB4 has worked flawlessly in that period of time.  The learning curve for teaching new sound guys is minimal, as the board is pretty straight forward and easy to get around.  
We also use the Soundweb London digital snake with a ton of extras.  That part is harder to teach the newbies, but that is not what you asked about.
I agree with one of the other posts that recommends the GB8...if you can swing it.  Having 8 subs would make some things a little easier...like Easter and Christmas productions.
Bottom line, the GB4 has been a great board for the money.  I have no complaints with it.
Hope this helps.

Kelly Granger
Director of Technical Ministries
South Valley Community Church  
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Arnold B. Krueger on December 02, 2007, 08:46:53 AM
Gary Creely wrote on Sat, 01 December 2007 15:18

Arnold,

Your board was not among the ones I mentioned,



Quote:


Agreed. It's relevant because it is a board that is generally regarded to have more of the classic ease-of-use issues than the ones you mentioned. The point being that people who come from Mackies can easily overcome these issues.



Quote:


but these days it would be more sensible to go with an LS9.



In general I might agree with you, but our case illustrates the folly of making recommendations and dis-recommendations without knowing all the relevant facts. 32 inputs isn't enough for us, and a LS9-32 would be waaay too wide. We do video, lighting, sound and two flavors of recording on a shallow desk that is about 15 feet long. Oh, and we store supplies for the users, too.

Quote:


Some folks were suggesting he look consider mixers which that cost 35k. This guy had a $1200 mixer and was thinking about  a $5700 mixer.



I see your point. OTOH we had a $2400 mixer and started thinkng about a $10,000 mixer which was actually a little less extreme. TWe had the money for an A-stock mixer but we did B-stock in the spirit of stewardship.

Quote:


My concern was some of the suggestions did not take into account that he was looking for an opinion on the GB4, and probably would welcome suggestions for mixers of a similar ilk.



The real truth is that everytime I see a church installing a brand new analog mixer in the $5,500 range and up, I think
"They could have spent a tad more and gone digital".  Really.
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Brad Weber on December 02, 2007, 04:49:37 PM
Arnold B. Krueger wrote on Sun, 02 December 2007 08:46

In general I might agree with you, but our case illustrates the folly of making recommendations and dis-recommendations without knowing all the relevant facts.

Quote:

The real truth is that everytime I see a church installing a brand new analog mixer in the $5,500 range and up, I think "They could have spent a tad more and gone digital".  Really.

I agree with the first comment, but the second comment seems to inherently conflict with the first one as it appears to be jumping to a recommendation without even considering any relevant facts about the application.

'Analog' or 'digital' should never be a real factor by itself, if that is the basis for a decision then it is being made for all the wrong reasons.  I would never recommend a console simply because it is analog or digital, the basis should be what works best for the application and that includes factoring in what the church wants regardless of whether that is your personal preference.  Digital consoles are a great solution for many churches, but I shudder when I see people apparently making that decision based simply on it being a digital console.
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Gary Creely on December 02, 2007, 06:09:02 PM
Quote:

our case illustrates the folly of making recommendations and dis-recommendations without knowing all the relevant facts.


Your statement alone is correct, but in the context of the original post is not in play. He was not asking for a recommendation of a mixing console in general, that would require "all the relevant facts", but rather an opinion on a particular unit.

I agree with Brad that digital for digital sake does not benefit all situations. I like digital consoles, and in many circumstances they are the best solution, but not always. It does seem a little ironic that that you speak of the "folly of making recommendations and dis-recommendations without knowing all the relevant facts" yet you are willing suggest a digital solution for everyone spending more than $5500.
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Jeff Plumblee on December 02, 2007, 06:10:33 PM
$30,000 is not "a tad more."  
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Arnold B. Krueger on December 03, 2007, 10:28:06 PM
Brad Weber wrote on Sun, 02 December 2007 21:49

Arnold B. Krueger wrote on Sun, 02 December 2007 08:46

In general I might agree with you, but our case illustrates the folly of making recommendations and dis-recommendations without knowing all the relevant facts.

Quote:

The real truth is that everytime I see a church installing a brand new analog mixer in the $5,500 range and up, I think "They could have spent a tad more and gone digital".  Really.


I agree with the first comment, but the second comment seems to inherently conflict with the first one as it appears to be jumping to a recommendation without even considering any relevant facts about the application.



You could read what I wrote: "everytime I see a church installing a brand new analog mixer in the $5,500 range and up,
I think "They could have spent a tad more and gone digital"." as meaning that I'm not considering the relevant facts, or you could consider the part where I said that I *see* the church installing, which means that I'm considering the relevant facts, which is what I meant.


Quote:


'Analog' or 'digital' should never be a real factor by itself, if that is the basis for a decision then it is being made for all the wrong reasons.


I don't know about that. Absent the Behringer DDX3216 which pushed the entry price even lower, almost every time someone pays more than about $2,500 for a mixer, obtaining a digtital mixer (e.g. the 01V96) was a possible choice.

The mixers that we've compared often show the analog mixer giving up valuable functions like 4-band parametric eq, delay, dynamics processing, expandability, scenes, computer interfacing and remote control.

Quote:


I would never recommend a console simply because it is analog or digital,



I agree with that, but that is never the only difference.

Quote:


the basis should be what works best for the application and that includes factoring in what the church wants regardless of whether that is your personal preference.



Totally agreed. But it begs the question, why would someone *not* want the advantages listed above?  I guess one answer might be "simplicity", but what is more intimidating to look at, a LS9 or a GB8-32?  The LS9 looks really simple to me. I love the fact that the knobs I don't want junior ops to mess with aren't on the front panel.

Quote:


>  Digital consoles are a great solution for many churches, but I shudder when I see people apparently making that decision based simply on it being a digital console.


I don't think anybody is saying that you should buy digital just because its digital and digital is the wave of the future. The digital advocates seem to be saying - look what you get for either the same money or a reasonable amount more.
Title: Re: 40 channel mixing console
Post by: Gary Creely on December 04, 2007, 12:01:23 AM
Arnold,

Quote:

The digital advocates seem to be saying - look what you get for either the same money or a reasonable amount more.


Digital boards are only a good value when you are going to tap into the functionality they offer. Most church sound guys I find could not explain what a parametric eq is, or have the first idea where to start to use a compressor. For a church with one service and sound guys like I described it seems like a waste to use up a larger part of the budget selling them a mixer that is over kill when I could maybe bump the speakers up a class or two instead.

There are still some rather compelling advantages with analog. Most notably price 32ch LS9 $10,000 compared to $2500 A&H GL2400 32ch. The pre amps on the $2500 Allen and Heath to me sound better than the one's on a $25,000 M7CL IMO. I would say digital is just not in the cards for a lot of churches if for no other reason than budget. Digital is great, but it is frequently not the right solution.


Quote:

You could read what I wrote: "everytime I see a church installing a brand new analog mixer in the $5,500 range and up,
I think "They could have spent a tad more and gone digital"." as meaning that I'm not considering the relevant facts, or you could consider the part where I said that I *see* the church installing, which means that I'm considering the relevant facts, which is what I meant.


not to be a jerk but, huh?