Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 28, 2008, 11:05:40 AM
Post by: Dan Johnson on November 28, 2008, 11:47:39 AM
You should look for someone in your area that has a Yamaha LS9-32 and see if they'll show you around the console. Download the editor software from Yamaha's website and start looking at what the console is capable of. Remember, you're not just buying a 32-channel console. you're also getting 4 FX units, up to 8 graphic EQs, 2 dynamics processors (compressor, gate, etc.) on every channel, as well as 4-band fully parametric EQs on each channel just to name a few things.
It doesn't sound like a new console is an immediate NEED. You could keep saving until after next semester when you've had more experience with digital. I think you would be glad you did.
Post by: Daniel Nickleski on November 28, 2008, 11:57:10 AM
Post by: Scott Helmke (Scodiddly) on November 28, 2008, 12:07:15 PM
Post by: Rob Timmerman on November 28, 2008, 12:25:10 PM
I've never been a huge fan of the Venice, as I find the setup of the auxes to be somewhere between limiting and annoying. The board also lacks any form of matrix. I believe that the APB Pro-Desk is in the same price range as the Venice, and is worth a look.
The Venice is a good sounding board, though, and I think it sounds better than the LS9 (at least in a non-blind test in a semi-controlled environment). In a live situation, the extra features of the LS9 will allow you to have more control over the sound though, and far outweigh the slight decrease in sound quality. In a recording environment, this may not be the case. This also presumes that the rest of the signal chain is capable of reproducing the difference.
Post by: Dick Rees on November 28, 2008, 12:54:48 PM
I have ended up using it primarily for recordings and remote broadcast work with the occasional use for live sound when I have a monitor desk on stage.
If you're going to do monitors from FOH as I suspect you'll do a majority of the time I would suggest something with more auxes. Also with more sub-groups. There are many good used boards with 8-10 auxes and eight sub-groups which you can pick up for the price of the Venice AND get a road case in the bargain. I've seen Crest GT or VT consoles as low as $2K used.
Scott.....
I don't know why the EQ didn't work for you. Two of the reasons I went with the Venice in the first place were the head amps and the EQ. The Q is narrower on the Venice than on my A & H boards.
What I don't like (really don't like) is the lack of polarity flip in the channel strip. The awkward positioning of the phantom enable switches I can live with
DR
Post by: Joseph Yoon Jr. on November 28, 2008, 01:28:29 PM
the GL2400-32 can be had for about $2K.
Post by: Dan Johnson on November 28, 2008, 02:54:46 PM
Northern Sound & Light has great pricing on both of these. You get a lot more features than the Midas at a better price. And A&H is definitely a nice step up soundwise from the Mackie (if that is indeed what you are running now).
Post by: Bjørn Henriksen on November 28, 2008, 02:55:00 PM
Post by: SteveKirby on November 28, 2008, 03:54:07 PM
But I think this works in their market better than it would in the general world. Folks in their market may have heard of Midas but often aren't as conversant with the range of models.
I'm not sure given the rest of my system, that there would be a marked SQ improvement over my GL with a Venice. And I certainly like working with the A&H control surface better.
If I was going to drop that kind of money, I would be leaning much harder towards an LS9-32. I'm not a fan of digital in general, but the performance advantages of all the extra buses and processing are worth more in a small system than a little bit of extra warmth. Particularly since most compression driver based mains are not exactly "warm" to begin with.
Post by: Steve Milner on November 28, 2008, 03:56:13 PM
All of that being said, the Venice series are fantastic sounding boards in my experience. It never hurts to have MIDAS on your gear list for clients, so if the features and layout fit your needs I think you will be very happy.
The APB Prorack stuff on the other hand totally kicks ass!!! If digital went away tomorrow, I would be on the phone ordering one of these first thing!! The layout is pretty perfect for me, and I love the way the APB stuff sounds. They fit and finish on the APB products is second to none, and it seems obvious to me that they have spend a fair amount of time making the layout really work in such a small package. It seems like every time I get behind an APB I find some cool little detail that I had not noticed before.
I wish you good luck finding the right console for your needs, it might be worth the trouble to call around and rent one of each for a few gigs before dropping the dollars to buy.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 28, 2008, 04:18:51 PM
Post by: Tim Padrick on November 28, 2008, 07:28:29 PM
I must jump on the LS9 bandwagon. I always thought I'd want "all the knobs right there" until I mixed on a Yammie digital. Does the digital sound as good? I don't know. But I believe that if one knows what he's doing, he'll get a better sound with the Yammie than the other guys will get from the Midas.
Post by: Dan Johnson on November 28, 2008, 07:45:45 PM
| Tim Padrick wrote on Fri, 28 November 2008 18:28 |
Does the digital sound as good? I don't know. But I believe that if one knows what he's doing, he'll get a better sound with the Yammie than the other guys will get from the Midas. |
In my experience with the LS9, it seems to be fairly transparent as far as sound goes. I don't feel like I'm getting any coloring to the sound from the console. It's really hard to A/B two consoles because you don't often get to run both consoles in the same room with all the other gear exactly the same. But Tim basically got to do that with the A&H and Midas with the only difference being the Rane EQ on the Midas setup (unless you would argue that the Rane was keeping the Midas from it's full potential). That's all the more reason to go with an analog console with more features or a better price if you're going to stay analog. I don't think you would be unhappy with the sound of the LS9 if you went digital either.
Post by: Rick Stansby on November 28, 2008, 08:30:58 PM
| Daniel Nickleski wrote on Fri, 28 November 2008 08:57 |
I agree save your money for an LS9. |
I love my LS9. If I was looking for an analog board I would buy it used from one of the people upgrading to digital. You should be able to get a used Venice or GL2200 for a lot less than a new LS9.
Post by: Dick Rees on November 28, 2008, 08:56:01 PM
| Tim Padrick wrote on Fri, 28 November 2008 18:28 |
On a live gig a few years ago, band A was on a Venice through a Rane EQ into the DR480. Band B was on a GL2200 straight into the DR480. (Mic package was the same.) I was very surprised that I could not discern any meaningful qualitative difference between the two FOH setups. |
Tim....
With all due respect I would suggest that there are a lot more factors involved which would make a qualitative assessment difficult.
1. Quality and proper placement of input devices.
2. Speaker system/amps.
3. System tunings/DSP in the 480.
4. The room.
Just because most things were the same does not necessarily mean that each board was a part of a fully optimized system. If one board was "cleaner" than the other, would it make an SM58 sound noticeably better? Maybe so, maybe not so much.
I have and use both the GL series boards and the Midas. I prefer the GL for live sound for reasons of practicality, not the least of which is the availability of the polarity flip. For pure sound quality I'll take the Midas any day. That said, the times when pure sound quality is the determinant come under the headings of broadcast and recording.
DR
Post by: dave stojan on November 28, 2008, 09:01:11 PM
I never cared much for the eq on a GL2200 but did mix once on a GL2800 once and found it quite nice - better than the GB8 the following night - but they were different venues and definitely not an apples to apples comparison.
FWIW. Good luck!
Post by: Steve Payne on November 28, 2008, 10:35:39 PM
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 28, 2008, 11:54:57 PM
We have mentioned the AH-GL2200 and the APB ProDesk
Post by: Dick Rees on November 29, 2008, 12:16:50 AM
| Evan Hunter wrote on Fri, 28 November 2008 22:54 |
it sounds like you guys are saying that the Midas's sound quality does not make up for the features it lacks |
No. If you read carefully you'll find that the Midas is recommended for highest-quality analog sound. The feature set for live sound is critiqued for:
1. Layout. It differs from other boards, but everything is there....somewhere. More a drawback for live sound if you're used to other boards and have to do something fast. Same objection can be made for digital boards.
2. Limited auxes/sub-groups. You just have to decide what's enough for you. More is better, but if you want more Midas, you're gonna spend more $$$$.....seriously more.
3. Lack of polarity flip. The only really serious objection. I bought some in-line polarity switches for use on critical channels.
Bottom line is they are dynamite for recording. They do have some things you have to get used to for live sound, but if you want the best pre-amps, go Midas.
Post by: Art Welter on November 29, 2008, 12:17:55 AM
I don’t think you will find a better sounding board than the Venice new for under 6K.
That said, there are plenty of good sounding large format consoles going used that have more features than the Venice, but you will need help lugging them around, and they take up a lot of real estate.
As far as lack of features, the missing polarity reverse can be accomplished with a couple adapters.
Are there any other features you are looking for that the Venice lacks?
The layout is a bit odd, and the faders are short, but sonicly the board is great.
Art
Post by: Mark Jastrzebski on November 29, 2008, 12:24:59 AM
What makes the layout "strange"?
I own both the Venice and an GL2400, I don't see any real layout differences between the layouts of these consoles.
OK, I'll admit I wished the Venice had 100mm faders.
By the way, I love the way the Venice sounds.
Post by: Dick Rees on November 29, 2008, 12:33:12 AM
| Mark Jastrzebski wrote on Fri, 28 November 2008 23:24 |
What makes the layout "strange"? By the way, I love the way the Venice sounds. |
1. The sweep and the boost/cut in the EQ are reversed compared to almost all other boards.
2. The auxes are set up as monitor, EFX and other. Not really positionally different like the EQ's, but just a tad odd instead of just laying them out as a section and letting you decide which way you want them to function by assigning them pre/post.
3. Some people find the color coding scheme to be distracting. At least those who aren't color-blind. Doesn't bother me, though.
Post by: Aaron Kovacik on November 29, 2008, 12:40:56 AM
Post by: Mark Jastrzebski on November 29, 2008, 12:41:04 AM
After 4 years of using the Venice almost exclusively, the layout of the Venice became the standard.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 29, 2008, 12:55:47 AM
| Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 28 November 2008 23:16 | ||
No. If you read carefully you'll find that the Midas is recommended for highest-quality analog sound. The feature set for live sound is critiqued for: 1. Layout. It differs from other boards, but everything is there....somewhere. More a drawback for live sound if you're used to other boards and have to do something fast. Same objection can be made for digital boards. 2. Limited auxes/sub-groups. You just have to decide what's enough for you. More is better, but if you want more Midas, you're gonna spend more $$$$.....seriously more. 3. Lack of polarity flip. The only really serious objection. I bought some in-line polarity switches for use on critical channels. Bottom line is they are dynamite for recording. They do have some things you have to get used to for live sound, but if you want the best pre-amps, go Midas. |
Thanks Dick, I see what you mean. Agreed.
Post by: Steve Milner on November 29, 2008, 01:31:22 AM
| Mark Jastrzebski wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 00:24 |
There have been a lot of replies to this thread that mention the "strange layout" of the Midas Venice. What makes the layout "strange"? |
I said it in my first post that I will admit to being spoiled by digital mixers... so when I get behind the Midas 320 the EQ feels very limited to me. Going from the Yamaha digital EQ offerings to a fixed High and Low feels super limited. Going from Yamaha's information and data rich channel interface (I run studio manager & use a Tablet PC to mix often) to a set of two sweepable mids which in my opinion are poorly labeled feels limited also.
I also prefer to have 8 auxiliary outs when possible, and I really do prefer that they are all switchable (pre/post) independently.
All of that being said, none of my feelings about the console are in any way show-stoppers or reasons not to enjoy using the Venice line. Like I said before, they do sound fantastic and even with the limitations, I can always get the job done and have fun.
I think Dick Rees hit the nail on the head with "but if you want more Midas, you're gonna spend more $$$$.....seriously more."
On a side note.... I thought it was funny to see the comment about it being faster to dial in a band with an analog console and outboard gear... If someone asked me which I was faster on, I would say Digital... Hands Down!
Just last week I had a super time crunched load-in for a corporate event.... we set and patched everything quickly and I got the band onstage. I took my Tablet PC and walked across the stage ONCE. Worked with each musician for a moment or two at their position dialing in wedges very quickly. (It is WAY easier when you can actually hear them
). In just a few minutes I had set all the wedges and walked the room while building my house mix. In just over 10 minutes I was able to hand the room back to the other sound company who were having a tough time dialing in the podium system. The other FOH crew stopped by my mix position later to thank me for giving them more time with the difficult room, and to give the Tablet mixing a quick test drive! We all had a fun time. Post by: Dick Rees on November 29, 2008, 10:36:02 AM
If I had the luxury of taking time to actually sound check a band I'd consider digital. In the world of instant audio I'll stick to analog. If I get more than a 5 minute line check I'm amazed.
And the first # on everyone's program has the same title:
"SOUND CHECK"
Post by: dave stojan on November 29, 2008, 10:37:17 AM
| Steve Milner wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 06:31 |
On a side note.... I thought it was funny to see the comment about it being faster to dial in a band with an analog console and outboard gear... If someone asked me which I was faster on, I would say Digital... Hands Down! |
(∆ Strokes)/(∆ Folks)
While much of it lies in the realm of familiarity, when it comes to some digital consoles (01V96 in this particular example) the console's interface is slower and more cumbersome than a complete surface. I can see where using a tablet interface improves things somewhat. In the end personal preferences are just that; subjective, not objective.
Post by: Dick Rees on November 29, 2008, 10:48:32 AM
| dave stojan wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 09:37 |
(∆ Strokes)/(∆ Folks) |
Dave.....
Love your formula. Here's one of mine, developed in collaboration with Labster Tom Tschantz:
ear > gear
DR
Edit:
attribution
Post by: Chuck Augustowski on November 29, 2008, 11:12:36 AM
Chuck Augustowski
APB-DynaSonics
Post by: Steve Payne on November 29, 2008, 12:54:12 PM
With all due respect to everyone else's personally valid opinions, it is my opinion that the Venice is overall a very poor professional tool. I have owned and used one for several years. It sounds very good. That is pretty much the end of it's strong points.
- phantom power switch on the back of the console next to the xlr inputs, no polarity reverse, no pad, fixed freq hp filter, 60mm faders, no aux inserts, limited aux pre/post selection, STUPID "you'll do this our way or not at" all aux master send/return section, inconsistent aux send connector types - This console was designed for weekend musicians that don't have a clue. It has done very well in the pro market because it has the Midas name and nothing else on the market sounds as good at this price point. Until APB. If you can wait a month or so to buy, I think, at it's price point, the APB ProDesk is going to be very hard to beat for sound, features, build quality and support. That's how it looks to me.
Best of luck with whatever you decide on.
Post by: Daniel Nickleski on November 29, 2008, 01:12:54 PM
| Chuck Augustowski wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 10:12 |
In reply to Steve Payne's suggestion of looking at the APB ProDesk, the ProDesk-4 will start shipping later this month (December) after delays by one of our parts suppliers who was negatively affected by the economy. We are doubling our planned production in January trying to make up for our late delivery of back orders. Our web site will be update at the end of this month with much detailed information. Chuck Augustowski APB-DynaSonics |
I received a pricing list from someone on the APB Pro-Desk the other day and I believe the 32 channel version has a MAP price way above what the venice is. Everyone keeps saying that they are close to the same price, but not according to this listing. Is this an old price list?
Post by: dave stojan on November 29, 2008, 02:12:15 PM
| Steve Payne wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 17:54 |
If you can wait a month or so to buy, I think, at it's price point, the APB ProDesk is going to be very hard to beat for sound, features, build quality and support. That's how it looks to me. |
Have you heard one or are you assuming it sounds similar to another APB model?
Post by: Dave Dermont on November 29, 2008, 03:00:32 PM
| Steve Payne wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 12:54 |
Evan, With all due respect to everyone else's personally valid opinions, it is my opinion that the Venice is overall a very poor professional tool. I have owned and used one for several years. It sounds very good. That is pretty much the end of it's strong points. - phantom power switch on the back of the console next to the xlr inputs, no polarity reverse, no pad, fixed freq hp filter, 60mm faders, no aux inserts, limited aux pre/post selection, STUPID "you'll do this our way or not at" all aux master send/return section, inconsistent aux send connector types - This console was designed for weekend musicians that don't have a clue. It has done very well in the pro market because it has the Midas name and nothing else on the market sounds as good at this price point. Until APB. If you can wait a month or so to buy, I think, at it's price point, the APB ProDesk is going to be very hard to beat for sound, features, build quality and support. That's how it looks to me. Best of luck with whatever you decide on. |
Mr. Payne is a very wise man.
I understand the need/want for the best sound quality, but what ya gots ta ask yerself is if a marginally better preamp is worth the amount of usable features you trade to get it.
Consider the difference in quality one might get if they pay 50% less for a mixer, and put the savings into better microphones, or pay the same amount of money for a mixer with more/better features that allows them to provide a better mix to both the audience and the musicians.
Not to start up the age-old pre/post EQ monitor send debate gain, but anyone who has had to tame an unruly acoustic guitar or satisfy a demanding lead vocalist while doing monitors from FOH will tell you that a post-EQ send is a wonderful thing. You can't do that on a Venice unless you get inside and do some cutting and soldering. APB satisfies all comers with the push of a button. Ya gotta love those guys!
If you want the best sounding analog available, and want something less "toyish" than a Venice, I agree that waiting for the APB is the thing to do.
Another product to consider is the Soundcraft GB4. They pack in two extra auxes, a couple matrix outputs, and four mute groups all at a price that falls somewhere between the Allen & Heath GL2400 and the Venice or APB.
Post by: Steve Payne on November 29, 2008, 03:18:12 PM
I have not heard a ProDesk. It is my understanding that the ProDesk essentially has the same major circuit designs as the ProRack (which of course borrows heavily from the Spectra). (Chuck or JP, please correct me if I'm wrong.) I have plenty of seat time behind the other APB consoles and am basing my ASSumption regarding the ProDesk's performance on that experience. I know that everyone that works for me will choose the ProRack over the Venice if the channel count will get the job done. We have had a 24 channel ProDesk on backorder since it was announced.
Cheers.
Post by: Steve Payne on November 29, 2008, 03:22:13 PM
Keep in mind that the Venice "320" is a 24 channel board. Using Midas method of counting channels, the ProDesk 32 is a 40 input console.
Post by: Dave Dermont on November 29, 2008, 03:54:26 PM
| dave stojan wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 14:12 | ||
Have you heard one or are you assuming it sounds similar to another APB model? |
Dave,
Cut the fucking guy a break, will ya?
There is something to be said for experience. When you consider the experience of Steve Payne as well as the experience of everyone involved with APB, it's really not much of a stretch to assume that the ProDesk will sound at least as good as the model positioned below it.
Some of the guys around here really do know what the hell they are talking about. I'll go out on a limb and say that I think Steve Payne might be one of them.
Post by: dave stojan on November 29, 2008, 04:54:14 PM
Post by: Phil LaDue on November 29, 2008, 05:04:13 PM
| Dave Dermont wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 15:54 |
When you consider the experience of Steve Payne as well as the experience of everyone involved with APB, it's really not much of a stretch to assume that the ProDesk will sound at least as good as the model positioned below it. |
(I am an occasional APB Spectra user)
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 29, 2008, 05:20:21 PM
| Steve Payne wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 11:54 |
Evan, With all due respect to everyone else's personally valid opinions, it is my opinion that the Venice is overall a very poor professional tool. I have owned and used one for several years. It sounds very good. That is pretty much the end of it's strong points. - phantom power switch on the back of the console next to the xlr inputs, no polarity reverse, no pad, fixed freq hp filter, 60mm faders, no aux inserts, limited aux pre/post selection, STUPID "you'll do this our way or not at" all aux master send/return section, inconsistent aux send connector types - This console was designed for weekend musicians that don't have a clue. It has done very well in the pro market because it has the Midas name and nothing else on the market sounds as good at this price point. Until APB. If you can wait a month or so to buy, I think, at it's price point, the APB ProDesk is going to be very hard to beat for sound, features, build quality and support. That's how it looks to me. Best of luck with whatever you decide on. |
Thanks, I will take that really pretty seriously... Im planning on purchasing this summer.
Post by: Dick Rees on November 29, 2008, 05:26:51 PM
I still maintain that the most user-friendly configuration involves lots of auxes and 8 subgroups. Matrix sends and VCA are plusses beyond that. Give me all the bells and whistles I can handle.
I'd love to have a Spectra T. If business is good for another year or two I may have a go. But I'll still take my Venice out for remotes and recordings.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 29, 2008, 05:28:32 PM
Im sure this will get shot down, but Mackie Onyx 40-48 channel boards are in the price range....?
Thanks for your input guys i really appreciate it!
Post by: Dan Johnson on November 29, 2008, 05:58:50 PM
| Evan Hunter wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 16:28 |
alright guys. Well it sound like with an APB console I could get Same/Better? sound quality AND more features is that what im hearing? I have only briefly heard of this company and dont know anything about them other than what you guys are saying and a brief trip to their website. I am interested if they have a 24-32 channel board in that price range (I think someone mentioned one in here somewhere) |
The only 24 channel APB near the price range of the Venice would be the Pro-Desk (not sure on actual pricing but the Spectra would be well above the range). It's not totally clear on their site but it looks like the 24 channel version might have 24 mono channels plus 4 stereo channels (is this right Chuck?). That would make the 24 channel Pro-Desk a better comparison to the Venice 320 as far as channel counts go. The Venice 320 has 24 mono channels and 4 stereo channels.
Have you checked out all the reviews of APB products here on PSW on the Road Test and Product Review pages? These include reviews of the Pro-Rack line which would basically be the baby brother of the Pro-Desk so to speak. I can't think of a single negative review that I've seen and everybody comments on how great they sound. The entire product line definitely has peaked my interest.
Post by: Dick Rees on November 29, 2008, 06:10:30 PM
| Evan Hunter wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 16:28 |
Im sure this will get shot down, but Mackie Onyx 40-48 channel boards are in the price range....? |
BANG!!!!!!!
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 29, 2008, 06:43:32 PM
| Dan Johnson wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 16:58 |
Have you checked out all the reviews of APB products here on PSW on the Road Test and Product Review pages? These include reviews of the Pro-Rack line which would basically be the baby brother of the Pro-Desk so to speak. I can't think of a single negative review that I've seen and everybody comments on how great they sound. The entire product line definitely has peaked my interest. |
Im starting to lookin more into them now...
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 29, 2008, 06:44:56 PM
| Dick Rees wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 17:10 | ||
BANG!!!!!!! |
ahahaha i knew that was coming!
Post by: John Petrucelli on November 29, 2008, 07:13:33 PM
Some basic info about the ProDesk:
It uses the (exact) same channel plug-in cards (Preamp/EQ and Fader-Amp) as the ProRack-FOH mixer.
We basically took the limited-format ProRack (we only had 19" to work with) and expanded it to a bigger desk-top console (up to 48 Mono channels).
The channels strips are effectively the same with some added mute groups, the Master section is now full-featured because we have the room.
As far as sonics, it sounds like a ProRack; it uses the same components and circuits as our other consoles.
Construction-wise, it mimics a Spectra; looks like someone took a shrink-ray and aimed it at one of our bigger consoles.
As Chuck mentioned earlier, we're experiencing some production delays because one of our vendors wasn't able to deliver some assemblies; we've got that covered now.
We'll keep the website updated as new info is available.
Thanks,
JP
Post by: Tim Padrick on November 29, 2008, 08:57:21 PM
| Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 28 November 2008 19:56 | ||
Tim.... With all due respect I would suggest that there are a lot more factors involved which would make a qualitative assessment difficult. 1. Quality and proper placement of input devices. 2. Speaker system/amps. 3. System tunings/DSP in the 480. 4. The room. Just because most things were the same does not necessarily mean that each board was a part of a fully optimized system. If one board was "cleaner" than the other, would it make an SM58 sound noticeably better? Maybe so, maybe not so much. I have and use both the GL series boards and the Midas. I prefer the GL for live sound for reasons of practicality, not the least of which is the availability of the polarity flip. For pure sound quality I'll take the Midas any day. That said, the times when pure sound quality is the determinant come under the headings of broadcast and recording. DR |
This was a multi-band gig. I did one band on the A&H, my friend did the rest on the Midas. The only things that changed were the bands and the consoles - mics, wedges, backline placements were the same on all bands.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 29, 2008, 10:03:03 PM
Post by: dave stojan on November 29, 2008, 10:54:29 PM
I appreciate your post very much. Best of luck with APB's endeavors - you have a very well thought out products. I look forward to having the chance to give them a good listen / workout soon.
Post by: Steve Payne on November 29, 2008, 11:12:21 PM
Are you still looking to satisfy your original criteria? you said:
"I keep hearing how Midas is soooo good and I do end up seeing them a lot. If not, what other boards (no more expensive) would you recommend? I don't really need a BIGGER board. The 320 has 24 mono, 4 stereo..that should be fine. Im looking for a really high quality board to use for live sound and in the studio."
from A&H's website regards the ML3000:
"Never before has a fully equipped VCA desk been accessible to so many people. Once again we’ve applied our design skills to making a previously exclusive technology affordable to people on a real world budget."
There are a tremendous number of features included in the ML3000.
Keep in mind that there is no free lunch, and you get what you pay for (sometimes less, as another poster pointed out that his grandma taught him ).
Sooooo, depends on what you want.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 30, 2008, 12:02:54 AM
| Steve Payne wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 22:12 |
Evan, Are you still looking to satisfy your original criteria? you said: "I keep hearing how Midas is soooo good and I do end up seeing them a lot. If not, what other boards (no more expensive) would you recommend? I don't really need a BIGGER board. The 320 has 24 mono, 4 stereo..that should be fine. Im looking for a really high quality board to use for live sound and in the studio." from A&H's website regards the ML3000: "Never before has a fully equipped VCA desk been accessible to so many people. Once again we’ve applied our design skills to making a previously exclusive technology affordable to people on a real world budget." There are a tremendous number of features included in the ML3000. Keep in mind that there is no free lunch, and you get what you pay for (sometimes less, as another poster pointed out that his grandma taught him ). Sooooo, depends on what you want. |
What i was wondering is would the AH ML3000 rival or come close to a midas venice in sound quality AND have the added features? Its not very much more expensive and only has 8 more channels. So if it still have all the quality sound with the features it appears that wit would work fine in the studio and in live sound.
Post by: Steve Payne on November 30, 2008, 12:25:42 AM
Post by: Rick Stansby on November 30, 2008, 12:33:50 AM
| Steve Payne wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 20:12 |
Keep in mind that there is no free lunch, and you get what you pay for (sometimes less, as another poster pointed out that his grandma taught him ). |
The funny thing is the bold part is what my grandpa always said. I suppose the two phrases are closely related - just like my grandparents:-)
Post by: Daniel Nickleski on November 30, 2008, 01:17:02 AM
| Steve Payne wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 14:22 |
Daniel, Keep in mind that the Venice "320" is a 24 channel board. Using Midas method of counting channels, the ProDesk 32 is a 40 input console. |
I was comparing the price of the 24 channel Pro Desk to the Venice. The sheet that I have has the MRSP/MAP pricing coming in around $3,000 more than a Venice. All I am wondering is if there is a new price list that has come out or not. The 32 channel is close to $5,000 over the Venice price.
Post by: Dan Johnson on November 30, 2008, 01:53:42 AM
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on November 30, 2008, 05:49:43 AM
| Steve Payne wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 18:54 |
Evan, With all due respect to everyone else's personally valid opinions, it is my opinion that the Venice is overall a very poor professional tool. I have owned and used one for several years. It sounds very good. That is pretty much the end of it's strong points. - phantom power switch on the back of the console next to the xlr inputs, no polarity reverse, no pad, fixed freq hp filter, 60mm faders, no aux inserts, limited aux pre/post selection, STUPID "you'll do this our way or not at" all aux master send/return section, inconsistent aux send connector types - This console was designed for weekend musicians that don't have a clue. It has done very well in the pro market because it has the Midas name and nothing else on the market sounds as good at this price point. Until APB. If you can wait a month or so to buy, I think, at it's price point, the APB ProDesk is going to be very hard to beat for sound, features, build quality and support. That's how it looks to me. Best of luck with whatever you decide on. |
Someone finally said it! I always get the "Behringer feel" when I'm working on a Midas Venice
The whole board just "feels wrong". I'm sure it sounds fine though. FWIW, a local "cultural" venue just exchanged theirs for a Soundcraft GB8.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 30, 2008, 08:21:23 AM
Post by: Scott Helmke (Scodiddly) on November 30, 2008, 09:50:12 AM
| Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 28 November 2008 11:54 |
Scott..... I don't know why the EQ didn't work for you. Two of the reasons I went with the Venice in the first place were the head amps and the EQ. The Q is narrower on the Venice than on my A & H boards. |
I don't know either - I'd have something that wanted a bit of EQ, I'd turn the knobs, but nothing really useful would be happening.
Post by: Steve Payne on November 30, 2008, 10:07:01 AM
| Kristian Johnsen wrote on Sun, 30 November 2008 05:49 |
Someone finally said it! I always get the "Behringer feel" when I'm working on a Midas Venice The whole board just "feels wrong". I'm sure it sounds fine though. FWIW, a local "cultural" venue just exchanged theirs for a Soundcraft GB8. |
Kristian,
We each have our own perceptions, but I definitely never remotely compared the Venice to a B######er product. Everything B. makes is a complete POS. The Venice is a well made, good sounding little console. It certainly feels no more Mattel like than the lower end SCs, ie, GB8, et al. My big gripe with the Venice, after several years of use, is that it was obviously designed to meet the needs of weekend musos and not pro users. The feature set and layout are crippling. I knew this when I bought it, but the Midas name has more than made up for it's stupid "logic". It has been well accepted and a money maker. That is a bottom line that is hard to argue with. I now see a much better option on the horizon for my needs and am planning to move in that direction. Obviously, this is all strictly my opinion only, and therefore worth the paper it is written on. YMMV.
Cheers.
Post by: Bruce Gering on November 30, 2008, 10:18:03 AM
| Scott Helmke (Scodiddly) wrote on Fri, 28 November 2008 11:07 |
I haven't been very impressed with the Venice. The EQ doesn't seem to do much... |
Really? Serious? I've never heard that said before and I think the EQ is very responsive without being harsh. With that said, if the layout wasn't so impracticle and had more auxes and maybe a few matrices, it would be a much nicer board. +1 for the LS-9/32.
Post by: Steve Payne on November 30, 2008, 10:18:10 AM
| Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 28 November 2008 12:54 |
Scott..... I don't know why the EQ didn't work for you. Two of the reasons I went with the Venice in the first place were the head amps and the EQ. The Q is narrower on the Venice than on my A & H boards. DR |
Dick -
I can't swear to this, but I am pretty sure if a Midas design engineer were sitting in the room with you when you called their mic pres head amps, they would barf on you...
Post by: Andy Peters on November 30, 2008, 12:04:40 PM
| Evan Hunter wrote on Fri, 28 November 2008 09:05 |
Hey guys, me again, I'm thinking that when I purchase my ZX3s I also want to upgrade my mixer. I'm looking at the Midas Venice 320... is it worth the money? I keep hearing how Midas is soooo good and I do end up seeing them a lot. If not, what other boards (no more expensive) would you recommend? I don't really need a BIGGER board. The 320 has 24 mono, 4 stereo..that should be fine. Im looking for a really high quality board to use for live sound and in the studio. I don't want digital YET...I like the feel of an analogue console in front of me, for now. I am learning some of the digital stuff next semester hopefully but for now I want a good solid analogue console...Midas Venice 320 worth it, or are there better for the money? |
Every time I've run into a Midas Venice, it's been attached to a really shitty PA system, as if somehow the magical Midas mic preamps will make everything OK. Which only goes to prove the point that you should spend your money on the speaker cabinets and proper amplification, because that has a significant impact on the result, whereas the preamps are really a detail.
The 60 mm faders suck (funny how Midas gets away with it but Mackie was excoriated for using the same size faders on their consoles), the EQ is pretty much the same thing one finds on a Soundcraft 200B, the lack of polarity reverse is just like a Soundcraft 200B, and the phantom power switch is in the same location as it is on a Soundcraft 200B. But it has two more sends, so I guess it's "better" than a 200B. (OK, to be fair, when you PFL a channel in the cans on the Venice, that channel doesn't bleed into the monitors.)
Given the choice between the Midas Venice and an A+H GL2400, I'll take the 2400 any day. Better yet, give me the 2800, and I'll get 10 sends, a matrix, eight groups, and I still have money left over to buy a couple of really good mics.
The ML3000 is a neat little VCA desk, but I suspect A+H ran into the same problem that Crest ran into with the X-VCA -- the market in which it plays wants Mackie SR prices and doesn't need VCAs.
-a
Post by: Charlie Jeal on November 30, 2008, 01:26:24 PM
IMHO its no different to rebadging Daewoos as Chevys.
Charlie.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 30, 2008, 01:34:51 PM
| Andy Peters wrote on Sun, 30 November 2008 11:04 | ||
Every time I've run into a Midas Venice, it's been attached to a really shitty PA system, as if somehow the magical Midas mic preamps will make everything OK. Which only goes to prove the point that you should spend your money on the speaker cabinets and proper amplification, because that has a significant impact on the result, whereas the preamps are really a detail. The 60 mm faders suck (funny how Midas gets away with it but Mackie was excoriated for using the same size faders on their consoles), the EQ is pretty much the same thing one finds on a Soundcraft 200B, the lack of polarity reverse is just like a Soundcraft 200B, and the phantom power switch is in the same location as it is on a Soundcraft 200B. But it has two more sends, so I guess it's "better" than a 200B. (OK, to be fair, when you PFL a channel in the cans on the Venice, that channel doesn't bleed into the monitors.) Given the choice between the Midas Venice and an A+H GL2400, I'll take the 2400 any day. Better yet, give me the 2800, and I'll get 10 sends, a matrix, eight groups, and I still have money left over to buy a couple of really good mics. The ML3000 is a neat little VCA desk, but I suspect A+H ran into the same problem that Crest ran into with the X-VCA -- the market in which it plays wants Mackie SR prices and doesn't need VCAs. -a |
No offense but the ZX3s are extremely nice speakers for what I am doing as well as I am powering them with a crest CD3000 amps OR i may sell it and get an Itech 4000 for them they sound really quite good and will assume stage monitor duty when i outgrow them. Remember i also do a lot of studio work as well. I am steering away from the Midas though. And after looking more i really like the soundcraft GB8. I used an AH GL2800-40 today running a church service and the EQ on it was very responsive and i could get it to do anything i needed. So right now i think its between a Soundcraft GB8 and some Allen Heath right around that range. Im interested in an APB but it sounds like it will be over my price range when it comes out.
Post by: Steve Milner on November 30, 2008, 02:48:45 PM
| Kristian Johnsen wrote on Sun, 30 November 2008 05:49 |
Someone finally said it! I always get the "Behringer feel" when I'm working on a Midas Venice The whole board just "feels wrong". I'm sure it sounds fine though. FWIW, a local "cultural" venue just exchanged theirs for a Soundcraft GB8. |
In the words of John Goodman....
OVER THE LINE!!!
What "feels" wrong about the Venice? I have always thought that although the (layout/feature set) is a bit funky for me, the "FEEL" of the console is top shelf!! The built quality falls somewhere in the (lightly armored tank) division, compared to other consoles of its size.
Perhaps you just have a bunch of REALLY well made Behringer gear!!
Post by: Rob Timmerman on November 30, 2008, 03:53:40 PM
| Steve Milner wrote on Sun, 30 November 2008 14:48 |
What "feels" wrong about the Venice? I have always thought that although the (layout/feature set) is a bit funky for me, the "FEEL" of the console is top shelf!! The built quality falls somewhere in the (lightly armored tank) division, compared to other consoles of its size. Perhaps you just have a bunch of REALLY well made Behringer gear!! |
Until you open it up...
And find that unlike the Allen-Heath and APB consoles (I can't speak for the Soundcrafts) in the same league, the Venice uses what is effectively a single PC board for the entire console, making it difficult to repair if there is a problem. And find that such mundane things as switching the direct outputs to pre-everything (like is needed for a recording feed) require cutting circuit board traces.
Post by: Steve Milner on November 30, 2008, 04:11:13 PM
I have never opened one up.... so I'll trust your experience under the hood. It's unfortunate to hear that they are trouble to work on or modify... but so seems to be the way these days.
My comments were more in response to the "it feels like a Behringer" idea. I still think that comparing it to a Behringer product is over the line.... mark that frame a zero.
Post by: Chad Johnson on November 30, 2008, 05:02:45 PM
| Evan Hunter wrote on Fri, 28 November 2008 08:05 |
Hey guys, me again, I'm thinking that when I purchase my ZX3s I also want to upgrade my mixer. I'm looking at the Midas Venice 320... is it worth the money? I keep hearing how Midas is soooo good and I do end up seeing them a lot. If not, what other boards (no more expensive) would you recommend? I don't really need a BIGGER board. The 320 has 24 mono, 4 stereo..that should be fine. Im looking for a really high quality board to use for live sound and in the studio. I don't want digital YET...I like the feel of an analogue console in front of me, for now. I am learning some of the digital stuff next semester hopefully but for now I want a good solid analogue console...Midas Venice 320 worth it, or are there better for the money? |
Evan, I'm not sure you really know what you want. Multiple people have already shared their opinion on the product you inquired about and their logic for their opinion. I'm not sure this type of question can ever be answered because everyone has different priorities and decision making logic. I have heard good and bad shows on a Midas Venice and every other console, The Venice will break and need to be fixed just like every other console. I know lots of good shops that use the Venice and lots of good shops that use Soundcrafts and Allen & Heaths.
I have owned, installed, and from time to time use rented Venices. They are a fine mixer. How are you planning on using the analogue desk in the studio? You don't have experience with digital yet but you are taking digital classes next semester? You might be making a really expensive purchase right now that you will regret in a few months. An O1V with a card and an AD8000 can give you 16 tracks in realtime via firewire into your studio gear for less than a Venice.
No one knows what your demands are for flexibility, what feature sets you need, how much money you have to part with, or what else you are going to need. I think the Venice is for people who need a Midas but don't have the requirements or $ for their bigger boards. A Venice to a 32 ch ML3000 is a totally different tool, you need to revisit what you trying to do. For most scenarios, I do not think the Venice is a wise purchase over other consoles.
- A good deal for the wrong item is a bad deal.
- A better sounding EQ in a channel strip does not trump the need for 8 or 10 aux busses or other features. (Especially if it costs more.)
- Figure out what you need and buy as your wallet dictates.
- Deciding apples to apples for yourself is easier than apples to oranges. Opinions on apples to oranges are nearly impossible for others.
After you figure it all out, you'll probably buy an LS9. Hopefully it won't be an upgrade with a Venice on trade.
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on November 30, 2008, 05:10:17 PM
So, no offence intended to anyone who puts this desk to good use, I'm sure it's making money, and I'm sure it's build quality is very much up to par. Reason I said it "feels a bit Behringer" is largely the illogical routing, inconsistent choice of pots and meters for "aux"-masters AND the short faders. Skimping out on polarity reverse and having a very simple channel high-pass is also right along the feature set I associate with Behringer.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on November 30, 2008, 06:40:00 PM
| Chad Johnson wrote on Sun, 30 November 2008 16:02 | ||
Evan, I'm not sure you really know what you want. Multiple people have already shared their opinion on the product you inquired about and their logic for their opinion. I'm not sure this type of question can ever be answered because everyone has different priorities and decision making logic. I have heard good and bad shows on a Midas Venice and every other console, The Venice will break and need to be fixed just like every other console. I know lots of good shops that use the Venice and lots of good shops that use Soundcrafts and Allen & Heaths. I have owned, installed, and from time to time use rented Venices. They are a fine mixer. How are you planning on using the analogue desk in the studio? You don't have experience with digital yet but you are taking digital classes next semester? You might be making a really expensive purchase right now that you will regret in a few months. An O1V with a card and an AD8000 can give you 16 tracks in realtime via firewire into your studio gear for less than a Venice. No one knows what your demands are for flexibility, what feature sets you need, how much money you have to part with, or what else you are going to need. I think the Venice is for people who need a Midas but don't have the requirements or $ for their bigger boards. A Venice to a 32 ch ML3000 is a totally different tool, you need to revisit what you trying to do. For most scenarios, I do not think the Venice is a wise purchase over other consoles. - A good deal for the wrong item is a bad deal. - A better sounding EQ in a channel strip does not trump the need for 8 or 10 aux busses or other features. (Especially if it costs more.) - Figure out what you need and buy as your wallet dictates. - Deciding apples to apples for yourself is easier than apples to oranges. Opinions on apples to oranges are nearly impossible for others. After you figure it all out, you'll probably buy an LS9. Hopefully it won't be an upgrade with a Venice on trade. |
Hey Chad, I get what you are saying, thanks for the info. But i have said what I wanted. I said i wanted an analogue board that has VERY good sound quality, i had mentioned within the 6k price range. Once its in the studio i could route it several different ways that each have their own benefits. I agree with what youve said about how each person is going to want different things/features on their sound boards, i had inquired about the Venice because of the Midas name. Thanks everyone for their input you've pointed out some very good points that have changed my thoughts about the Midas Venice board Thus why Ive asked about other boards in that price range. I want a digital board eventually but i also still want to have a pretty high quality analogue board as well. When you guys made some very valid points is when i started looking at other boards (Soundcraft GB8 AH ML3000, and other AH boards.)
Thanks for everyones help as of now i am liking the Soundcraft GB8 so i will try to get my hands on one of those. I think that having the extra features available would be a plus. As i said i just saw a MIDAS console within reach thus i asked.
Post by: Tim Padrick on December 01, 2008, 03:15:14 AM
Post by: SteveKirby on December 01, 2008, 03:27:38 AM
I'm not sure how well a live sound console works for recording. What little recording I've done in recent years has been on a small PT rig, a few inputs at a time. But if you're looking at large scale input tracking, some sort of in-line board with track return flips is the way to go. But fairly useless for live sound.
I don't know how well something like an LS9-32 would function as an in-line recording desk, but I think it would work much better than a budget live sound board.
You could always get some outboard pres for your recording money channels.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on December 01, 2008, 11:38:29 AM
| SteveKirby wrote on Mon, 01 December 2008 02:27 |
I think you may want to look into how you configure for recording, and how you configure for live sound. How the auxes get used (FX, track returns, monitors) and how you use sub groups. I'm not sure how well a live sound console works for recording. What little recording I've done in recent years has been on a small PT rig, a few inputs at a time. But if you're looking at large scale input tracking, some sort of in-line board with track return flips is the way to go. But fairly useless for live sound. I don't know how well something like an LS9-32 would function as an in-line recording desk, but I think it would work much better than a budget live sound board. You could always get some outboard pres for your recording money channels. |
It actually works quite simple. Alot of times it is just a few channels at a time into the DAW but then alot of times i like to bring it from each output of the DAW and mix it from the mixer and record it back to the DAW (subgroup). This works well especially if you are recording at very high sample rates. Then you can still use you auxes for booth mixes or any analogue effects you want to add in your mix down. OR It can simple be you input to the interface (each channel individually), still using your auxes for booth mixes, and mix down/add effects/etc in protools. Then the board can still double as a Live sound board.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on December 01, 2008, 11:41:32 AM
| Tim Padrick wrote on Mon, 01 December 2008 02:15 |
Between the A&H and the Soundcraft, the A&H low mid - that sweeps down to 35 - puts the A&H ahead for me. |
Thanks thanks good to know. I used an Allen Heath board (GL2800 40ch) Sunday mixing a pretty rocking worship service. I found the EQ very responsive and was able to get spoken word as well as all instruments so sound very well with very small adjustments.
Post by: Jeff Babcock on December 01, 2008, 12:48:14 PM
| Evan Hunter wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 17:28 |
Well it sound like with an APB console I could get Same/Better? sound quality AND more features is that what im hearing? I have only briefly heard of this company and dont know anything about them other than what you guys are saying and a brief trip to their website. |
Evan,
If you do some looking you will see that APB is a relatively new company with a VERY strong pedigree. The fine folks at APB have worked on some serious "big boy" desks in the past, and their offerings are truly professional products marketed at PRO users. The thing that interests me about APB is not only the quality of the designs but the very well thought-out feature set. The features on the APB desks indicates to me that they know the industry very well.
They are not "cheap", but for the price they are tremendous bargains IMHO. I hope to have a prodesk and prorack monitor soon.
Post by: Tim McCulloch on December 01, 2008, 01:08:01 PM
| Jeff Babcock wrote on Mon, 01 December 2008 11:48 | ||
Evan, If you do some looking you will see that APB is a relatively new company with a VERY strong pedigree. The fine folks at APB have worked on some serious "big boy" desks in the past, and their offerings are truly professional products marketed at PRO users. The thing that interests me about APB is not only the quality of the designs but the very well thought-out feature set. The features on the APB desks indicates to me that they know the industry very well. They are not "cheap", but for the price they are tremendous bargains IMHO. I hope to have a prodesk and prorack monitor soon. |
Jeff-
I hope you have the opportunity to meet JP, Chuck, Taz, and Olga. They *are* APB;, by far the most responsive designers/manufacturers I've had the pleasure of meeting.
Their gear isn't cheap, but a tremendous value for the quality and feature set. The quality of the folks behind the product is an integral part of the product. If more analog mixers are in our company future, APB is the likely vendor.
Have fun, good luck.
Tim Mc
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on December 01, 2008, 01:14:35 PM
| Tim McCulloch wrote on Mon, 01 December 2008 12:08 | ||||
Jeff- I hope you have the opportunity to meet JP, Chuck, Taz, and Olga. They *are* APB;, by far the most responsive designers/manufacturers I've had the pleasure of meeting. Their gear isn't cheap, but a tremendous value for the quality and feature set. The quality of the folks behind the product is an integral part of the product. If more analog mixers are in our company future, APB is the likely vendor. Have fun, good luck. Tim Mc |
thanks Jeff & Tim... Im still looking into them but I will have to see that price when the ProDesk comes out.
Post by: Dick Rees on December 01, 2008, 04:15:26 PM
These are completed listings. Check Crest Century GT occasionally to see what's for sale currently. At around $2K-$3K for 32 channels this board will probably give you the most pro features for the $$$$.
Post by: Lester Moran on December 01, 2008, 06:03:17 PM
http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/260346/0/?srch=V enice+Les#msg_260346
When it comes to inexpensive-to-midrange desks, I've always slightly preferred Soundcraft. It's probably an EQ familiarity and layout thing...
FWIW
Les
Post by: Grayson Rech on December 02, 2008, 06:37:04 PM
No pad, no polarity switch. Next was the fact that the EQ section is bypassed in the auxes.
That kills this desk as being a fill in small monitor desk. While that might be okay for some, it drives me nutz.
Still the pros are small footprint, smooth sound, midas "name".
It has been a great buy for us and has gotten us work but I did rather have an M7 . . . but not a fair comparison.
You need to look at your market and what the rest of your rig looks like. Our other desks are Crest GT and Crest X-rack. We're selling our GT (52 channel) as it just doesn't go out enough. The venice and x-rack are out multiple times a week. One guy can set up the venice in roadcase. The GT same if you have a tipper. Need 2 guys for the lid though. If channel count is your line the venice isn't going to fly.
If you are buying a used venice then that might be a different story. That changes the game a bit.
Anyway, you must choose wisely.
Grayson
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on December 02, 2008, 09:05:38 PM
| Grayson Rech wrote on Tue, 02 December 2008 17:37 |
Still the pros are small footprint, smooth sound, midas "name". |
Thats what caught me at first, but not so much after what you and others have said on here about limited features. I think for the recording and the live sound i think i would like a more flexible board. Having the ability to use Aux's the way i would like and more of them im thinking looks like a really good thing. Im thinking i would rather have the extra auxs and a few channels extra channels and a very clean sounding board. Im really liking the Soundcraft GB8-32 and the Allen Heath 2800 40 channel boards.
Post by: Tim Weaver on December 02, 2008, 11:14:17 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/SOUNDCRAFT-DELTA-32-INPUTS-WITH-ATA-CASE _W0QQitemZ110315671446QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0? hash=item110315671446&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms =66%3A2%7C65%3A13%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318
Series 2's are in your price range, also the soundcraft 800b or 8000 are both excellent sounding consoles.
The pre-peavey Crest consoles are good too.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on December 02, 2008, 11:39:29 PM
Post by: Dan Johnson on December 03, 2008, 03:57:09 AM
| Dick Rees wrote on Mon, 01 December 2008 15:15 |
http://completed.shop.ebay.com/items/Electronics__Crest-Cent ury_W0QQLHQ5fCompleteZ1QQ_catrefZ1QQ_flnZ1QQ_sacatZ293QQ_trk sidZp3286Q2ec0Q2em283?MA2ShowItems&guest=1 These are completed listings. Check Crest Century GT occasionally to see what's for sale currently. At around $2K-$3K for 32 channels this board will probably give you the most pro features for the $$$$. |
FYI - There's one for sale here in the LAB Marketplace at a good price (not mine...I just noticed it and remembered Dick recommending them).
http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/39909/22040/
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 03, 2008, 05:30:08 AM
| Evan Hunter wrote on Wed, 03 December 2008 05:39 |
Thanks man. The Series 2 Consoles have caught my eyes mores than once.... |
I bought a used Series 2 32 channel for a very reasonable price just 3 weeks ago. I have used it on 3 or 4 gigs so far and in my opinion it's a desk I'm very comfortable with. I especially like having a meter bridge on a mixer this "cheap". Only thing that bothers me SO FAR with this mixer is XLR out on L-R-mono but TRS on AUX/groups.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on December 03, 2008, 10:16:06 AM
I see that compared to a GB8 The MAIN differences are the meter bridge and 11x2 matrix VS. the GB8 has and 11x4 matrix and no meter bridge but a small LED segment by each fader, and a 12 LED segment for each subgroup and L/R/C also have the VU/LEDs. I wonder how different they sound. Have you used the MIDI Mute system on the Series Two board?
Post by: Dan Johnson on December 03, 2008, 12:50:57 PM
I've used a Series TWO many times before. It had a lot of good features and the meter bridge was very nice to have. I didn't feel like the sound quality was necessarily any better than my A&H GL2200 but I never used them in the same setup to do a true A/B test. I did like the mute system but never used MIDI with it. The issue of the aux outs being TRS is the same on the GL2800 unless you do the group/aux reverse. One nice feature on the Series TWO is that each channel's direct out is switchable pre/post fader by a button in the channel strip. In the GL2800 you have to use internal jumpers to change this. The FX returns are a little better on the Series TWO (just because of the tilt control to adjust EQ) but I usually return my FX to a channel to have greater control.
I can't think of any other significant differences between the two. I'm not as familiar with the GB8 to compare the Series TWO to it without going back to look at the GB8 again. I did like the GL2800 a tiny bit more when I was comparing it to the the GB8 previously though.
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on December 03, 2008, 02:22:39 PM
| Dan Johnson wrote on Wed, 03 December 2008 11:50 |
Just for the sake of clarity, there is a "Series 2" Soundcraft which is a 70's model and there is a "Series TWO" Soundcraft which is a more recent model (release in '99 I believe). You may very well see the "Series TWO" advertised as "Series 2" but just be aware of the differences if you are looking at buying this console or looking for information on it. I've used a Series TWO many times before. It had a lot of good features and the meter bridge was very nice to have. I didn't feel like the sound quality was necessarily any better than my A&H GL2200 but I never used them in the same setup to do a true A/B test. I did like the mute system but never used MIDI with it. The issue of the aux outs being TRS is the same on the GL2800 unless you do the group/aux reverse. One nice feature on the Series TWO is that each channel's direct out is switchable pre/post fader by a button in the channel strip. In the GL2800 you have to use internal jumpers to change this. The FX returns are a little better on the Series TWO (just because of the tilt control to adjust EQ) but I usually return my FX to a channel to have greater control. I can't think of any other significant differences between the two. I'm not as familiar with the GB8 to compare the Series TWO to it without going back to look at the GB8 again. I did like the GL2800 a tiny bit more when I was comparing it to the the GB8 previously though. |
Great thanks for the info! I was aware that the series 2 and series TWO are totally different boards! haha. I do like having that option on the Direct outs. How did the board feel? Like were the faders nice? All the knobs turn smooth? How was the channel EQ?
Post by: Dan Johnson on December 03, 2008, 02:54:14 PM
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on December 03, 2008, 03:13:53 PM
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 03, 2008, 07:03:47 PM
The high pass is sweepable from 30 to 400 hz and can be switched off completely.
The faders are the "long throw, easy slide"-style.
If there is an aux/group flip I havent noticed it.
The phantom switches are on the back and don't have an "on" indicator on the control surface
There is a switch on each channel to make the auxs PRE EQ when PREfade is selected.
There are no sweeps on the stereo strip EQs.
There is a mono out with separate master fader with each channel routable to this output via a separate assign switch above each channel fader. Great for "aux-fed" subs.
Build and feel of the console seems fine to me. The feels isn't as exclusive as a Soundcraft MH-console, but nontheless satisfactory for me. Every knob seems consistent in feel compared to the others.
The entire desk needs to be opened for servicing, but I'm told each channel may be dismanteled separately from the inside. Can anyone verify this?
Post by: Evan F. Hunter on December 03, 2008, 09:27:29 PM
Post by: Sage Plakosh on December 05, 2008, 02:52:22 PM
* No polarity
* 60 MM fader? Why?
* Only 6 aux sends / 2 fixed as pre / 2 fixed as post
* Eq is better than some, but not super impressive
* Pad is built into the preamp, there is no -20 button.
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 30, 2008, 10:46:46 AM
The stereo inputs can't be routed to the mono out, which is a shame as this output is great for "aux"-fed-subs. So playback sources must be used on mono strips in this configuration. I use the stereo channels for fx which i don't want in the subs anyway.
It's hard to reach the release button on the L,R,mono XLRs when something is plugged into the matrix outputs.
How hard is it to make all the outputs XLR? Hard, apparantly.... I now have some TRS-XLR shorties living permanently in the doghouse.
The Q of the sweeps seem a bit wide (I don't know off the top of my head what the value is). Then again, sometimes you need it wide. With semi-parametric it's always a compromise, I guess.
The PSU plug is one of those "slow down and concentrate" connectors.
After having done a few jazz and theatre-style gigs it seems the console is not the most noise-free I have worked on. Not a big deal, but if this is your primary use I would read up on some specs and compare. Of course, gain structure is one's friend.
This aside, I'm happy with my investment, it seems to be making money and I feel comfortable on the board.
Post by: Drew Curtis on December 31, 2008, 02:23:07 AM
| Grayson Rech wrote on Tue, 02 December 2008 17:37 |
Next was the fact that the EQ section is bypassed in the auxes. That kills this desk as being a fill in small monitor desk. While that might be okay for some, it drives me nutz. |
The FX sends are post fade and post EQ, and the AUX 1 and 2 outputs are PRE EQ in PRE FADE mode and POST EQ in POST FADE mode. so you could theoretically get 4 post fade and post eq mixes out of the venice in monitor position. which sucks, but the the MON sends and the only outputs that are always pre EQ.