Advice on analog mixer

[ruibr]

Good morning,

 

I have one of those usual questions, where I want to buy a certain piece of kit but would like some external advice as to what would be a good choice.

 

In these days of digital consoles, I'm still thinking about buying an analogue mixer. The reason for this is that I believe the good digital desks are very expensive for my line of work (mostly corporate events and medium sized gigs, occasional stuff, no tours...). And the ones that are affordable don't seem to quite have the sound quality I look for.

As a practical example, I bought an LS9-32 from Yamaha, and I am very happy with it. The amount of things you can do on a such a small package is amazing, and most of it's features are really helpfull. In the event market, FOH is a foreign term. Usually it's SOH or BOH (side of house/back of house) or the worst BOS (back of stage). So being able to control the desk with a laptop and wi-fi router is a really valuable tool. The thing is, after a few events working with our main PA and the LS9, we had a more traditional, outdoor gig for Carnival, in Lisbon's main square. We took our Venice320 and I was amazed at the sound quality improvement from one desk to the other. So basically, I would definitely buy another LS9 to keep handling events where it's functionality scores big, but we are trying to buy a really good FOH/MON desk, and the digital ones I can afford, i.e. M7CL, just don't give me a good feeling on the sound quality department.

 

That said, we were looking for a Soundcraft desk, having borrowed from a friend an MH3 for a big event we were blown away with the quality and features. So we went looking for the prices. Taking into consideration that we also needed new MON Eq's and compressors and gates and FX to go along with the new desk we came to a number of over 20.000Euros, (being that the desk is close to 15.000Euros). Pretty close to the going rate of an M7CL, I know, but nowhere close to a good quality sounding digital desk. Like the Vi4, or even the new SD8 or Si3 which still run for over 30.000Euros or more. But still, this is a bit over our head, so we looked for the MH2 desk, that announces the same mic pre-amps, and construction of the MH3/4, but with less features, and at a price tag of 8.900Euros.

 

Finnaly comes the advice question. Of those of you who have handled both desks, are the MH3 features worth the 6.000Euros difference? For me, the only downsize seems to be less AUX outs (2) and some features on the EFX returns. But I would value your opinion before making a final decision.

 

Thank you for your patience, I'll be waiting to hear from you guys.

 

Thanks, Rui

[Simon Lewis]

Rui,

 

You have gone through the arguments in a logical and sensible manner. However, would a good condition second hand MH4 or MH3 be suitable?

 

Bob Kelly has a few available at present...

 

Simon

[ruibr]

Rui,

 

You have gone through the arguments in a logical and sensible manner. However, would a good condition second hand MH4 or MH3 be suitable?

 

Bob Kelly has a few available at present...

 

Simon

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

That's something worth considering. I'll take a look at it.

 

Thanks again.

[ian_gibbs]

Sorry if this throws a spanner in the works and I know you have pretty much already settled on analogue, but have you had a look at the new I-Live T series from Allen & Heath. I haven't had a change to play with one myself yet but I've heard good things and the spec looks good for the money.

 

It lists at about the same as an M7CL for a 48 channel version (if not a bit cheaper) but from the looks of it you get quite a bit more for the money, digital snake etc, oh and if space is a real issue you can plug you computer straight into the stage box as it looks after all of the DSP, the desk is just a control surface.

 

Ian

[ruibr]

Sorry if this throws a spanner in the works and I know you have pretty much already settled on analogue, but have you had a look at the new I-Live T series from Allen & Heath. I haven't had a change to play with one myself yet but I've heard good things and the spec looks good for the money.

 

It lists at about the same as an M7CL for a 48 channel version (if not a bit cheaper) but from the looks of it you get quite a bit more for the money, digital snake etc, oh and if space is a real issue you can plug you computer straight into the stage box as it looks after all of the DSP, the desk is just a control surface.

 

Ian

 

Hi,

 

Yes, I've looked at them, and I am still waiting on a price quote from the Portuguese distributor. However, I would really prefer, at this time, to go for something more like the M7CL or Si3/Si2 who don't require a digital snake to operate, because I've recently invested on the Roland digital snake for my analogue desks and I am looking to expand what I already have with more from their line.

Basically modularity is also a feature that I value, and one of these desks that use analogue or other companies digital snakes is preferable because than the money that goes into a digital snake only for that desk can be applied in smaller digital snakes that I can use with any other desks on my stock, digital or analogue, Midas or Behringer.

 

Rui

[handyandi]

I have an MH2. Was bought used & was up against an LS9-32 but went the S/H analogue route because I just could not justify(with planned work load) the extra money since I already own all the outboard. I still wish it was the same size & weight as an LS9 but them again it does have VCA's etc that the LS9 does not. I have found the sound quality to be superb it completely opened up the sound of my rig, (before was using s/craft K1.)

So I would say as long as you are not bothered about the missing modularisation of the MH2 versus the MH3/4 & less aux etc it will do what you want.

Also a 32ch MH3 here @ Crystal pro

 

Andi

[Bobbsy]

It's hard to advise between he MH2 and the MH3. The extra features are only worth it if you need them--and only you can answer whether your work requires them. If you DO need the extra bits and pieces, then they're essential.

 

The one thing I'd say is that, if I was looking for an analogue console in that price range, I'll also be looking at A&H, either the GL or ML series depending on your needs and budget. You started off mentioning the sound quality and, though the Soundcrafts are good, I think the A&H have the edge and are right up there with the Venice that you raved about.

 

Bob

[handyandi]

We previously did have an A&H ML3000 & it was nice & compact but in the 3 years I used it for kept blowing VU meter lamps, PSU went & it developed a really bad grounding issue. The MH2 has all the things the ML3000 didn't, better channel metering, VCA solo's more AUX's solo clearing, etc & I would say sounds miles better. The A&H are good desks but I think the MH series are better!

 

Andi

[Matt Riley]

Maybe have a look at a second hand midas XL200/XL3 - just incase one comes up at the right price? The MH series are definitely better if you're comparing ML and MH. The difference between the MH3 and 2 is principally regarding the modularity of the desk, and the existence an inbuilt PSU on the 2. I like both, but I'm not paying the bills. Probably since you're not intending to tour it too hard, I'd go for the MH2.

 

WRT the sound quality of the yamaha ls9, I know some people have had a lot of success either going straight into the amps digital stylee. Or alternatively using an external DA for the main outs. Apparently the inbuilt DAs are the real weak point. Never know - might be worth a try!

 

Matt

[MarkPAman]

Sorry to add to the thread with yet another digital desk suggestion, but

.....I've recently invested on the Roland digital snake for my analogue desks and I am looking to expand what I already have with more from their line.

 

Have you looked at the M400 ? If so, I'd be interested to know why you've rejected it.

[ruibr]

First of all, let me thank everyone for your input. It's been clear, to the point and I believe really helpfull.

 

As for the questions raised above:

 

Allen&Heath, I really don't have any problems with A&H, but my partner/brother/mainsoundtech has a thing for them, the wrong way. He just doesn't like them, and don't bother asking him why, because he can't explain it. He just shrugs his shoulders and walks away...

Which is really annoying because we are friends with the owner of the company distributing A&H in Portugal for almost 20 years and he gives us great discounts and conditions but still, he says he doesn't want one.

 

I went looking on the Bob Kelly website for used desks and found what could be the perfect choice. He has an MH4/48 used for around 10.000Euros. I contacted him on e-mail for details and am waiting for his reply. Maybe something comes out of it. I appreciated the feedback related to MH3 vs MH2 comparisons, and it's nice to hear that despite the obvious differences which are announced, on the sound quality issue they are very much similar.

 

As for the Roland desk... I haven't heard it yet, so I won't say anything about sound quality. I just handled it on a shelf. It was on, but not connected to any PA. I took a litlle tour on the menus, trying to figure out my way around them without a manual. Usually you need to read a manual to really work the gear, but I believe you should be able to get some things working instinctively, (I was trying to assign EQ's and EFX to aux channels and outs), and that didn't happen on the M400. It uses a lot of proprietary technology and terminology which really complicates things for occasionnal users. Also, when shifting through fader positions, it doesn't slide smoothly like the LS9, it kind of stumbles and makes a scratching noise. Also, it feels very plastic and fragile to touch. I haven't discarded it completely, the rep in Lisbon is waiting for another demo desk and I already asked him to test-drive it in a suitable gig, but, once again, when you look at other brand digital desks and what they cost, and then you look at Roland that has almost no tradition in sound desks selling a product that does so much at such a low cost...You can't help but wonder how good can it really be? The only thing I can say to it's favour is the experience I've been having with the Digital Snake that really surprises me on the quality and strength of the signal coming out of the box. So maybe, if the snake is good, the desk is also good, and I will definitely try it before buying a new LS9. I'll keep in touch about this issue.

 

I take the opportunity to take this topic a bit further and ask for opinions about the rest of the gear I need to buy to complete the kit.

 

I'm thinking on buying LA Audio EQ's for monitoring, and Drawmer Quad Gates and Compressors, for monitoring and FOH. As for EFX I'll stick to the usual suspects, TC M2000/M-One XL and Yamaha SPX2000, which I allready have and really appreciate.

Please feel free to give me your thought on this issue also.

 

Thanks again, Rui

[drsound]

Interesting on the LA Audio EQs, they're not something that comes up much on riders and if you're thinking festivals with guest engineers you might be expected to wheel out KT, BSS or XTA. Also while you can't really go wrong with Drawmer (or KT/BSS) for your comps and gates you might be wise to stick with the slightly more rider-friendly two channel DS201/DL241 options than with quad units.

 

Again in terms of rider acceptibility you'll find that Midas still rules the roost of analogue desks. Money spent on an XL3 rather than a newer Soundcraft will possibly give better ROI but it depends just how much of this type of work you want to do. The downside to any large format analogue desk is the sheer size and weight. If we're taking two Midas desks to a job they will pretty much take up a Luton on their own and the MH3/MH4/ML5000 options aren't that much smaller. Add your outboard racks and a couple of PSUs and you're talking near enough 1000kg.

 

I agree completely with your laudable and slightly unfashionable view on the smaller digital desks just not sounding 'right' through a decent PA. People seem almost scared to admit it sometimes since "everybody knows that digital is better". M7CL into V-dosc, d&b Q or any other decent system just doesn't work in my view. I guess this is almost entirely down to the quality of the ADCs and DACs employed.

[ruibr]

Interesting on the LA Audio EQs, they're not something that comes up much on riders and if you're thinking festivals with guest engineers you might be expected to wheel out KT, BSS or XTA. Also while you can't really go wrong with Drawmer (or KT/BSS) for your comps and gates you might be wise to stick with the slightly more rider-friendly two channel DS201/DL241 options than with quad units.

 

Again in terms of rider acceptibility you'll find that Midas still rules the roost of analogue desks. Money spent on an XL3 rather than a newer Soundcraft will possibly give better ROI but it depends just how much of this type of work you want to do. The downside to any large format analogue desk is the sheer size and weight. If we're taking two Midas desks to a job they will pretty much take up a Luton on their own and the MH3/MH4/ML5000 options aren't that much smaller. Add your outboard racks and a couple of PSUs and you're talking near enough 1000kg.

 

I agree completely with your laudable and slightly unfashionable view on the smaller digital desks just not sounding 'right' through a decent PA. People seem almost scared to admit it sometimes since "everybody knows that digital is better". M7CL into V-dosc, d&b Q or any other decent system just doesn't work in my view. I guess this is almost entirely down to the quality of the ADCs and DACs employed.

 

Hi,

 

Thanks on your input on the LA Audio. Nothing new however, but I am allways a bit frustated when I buy 4 Eq's at 1500Euros a piece and then the monitor guy has them on bypass, and then goes on to say they are really good Eq's!!!

So, it's a bit hard to balance price/quality, especially when you know that the LA audio eq's are just as good as the DN360. But since they don't have KT writen on it, they suck...

But this is still a work in progress, and I'll probably go with the KT's DN360, since I allready have 3. But I need at least 4 more to get 12 channels of Eq for monitoring.

Thank you on the Drawmer tip, you know that I look at the price/size question and it makes more sense to get 4 in a 1U rack space, phisically and finantially speaking.

I now have 2 KT-SQ1 Dynamics on the FOH rack, but I was thinking of getting something different, maybe more user friendly. Anyway, these Sq1 are an obvious choice for the money conscious gang, and being KT they are very well accepted by just about anyone.

 

As for the desk suggestions, I have been around the block a few times...I know what it's like to have one van filled with just the desks and racks. I do have a 40 channel desk, very poor one, but I've carried it around enough times to know the bane of big desks.

The suggestions you make, well, they are the obvious ones, I am also well aware that Midas is universally accepted. And I wish I could get there. The fact is, even a used XL3, or similar desk is to expensive for me. That's why I was looking at Soundcraft. And also, the whole festival thing is a whole different ball park than my scene.

I am not entirely rider dependent, I just need something with enough baggage to shut people up when I don't give them "exactly" what they want. The MH3 or MH2 style of desk is something whose necessity arose from past experiences on events and shows, not something I would buy to satisfy someone's rider. I've seen enough companies go down because of, pardon the redundancy, riding the rider!!

Also, for my immediate and future needs, I believe the Sienna would do nicely :)

 

On another note, your comments on the digital desks is right on, and I didn't need a high profile, very expensive PA system like the ones you mention to see this. Just my TT+ line array was enough. What is funny, not, is that sometimes I get riders that stipulate the FOH mixer choices as, XL3 or Series 5 or M7CL!?!

It's like saying your choices of forwards are Cristiano Ronaldo, Drogba and Van der Saar!!

Or saying you prefer Ferraris, Porches and Vauxhall Vectras!

It just doesn't make sense.

The logic is that they can work with an M7CL easy enough, but any sound quality demands that follow this argument are void.

 

But thank you again on your comments regarding the Eq's and the compressors.

 

Rui

[drsound]

Ah, the joys of gear snobbery. I always wonder how many people writing the riders even know the difference between the brands of kit. It's a refereshing change when you get one that has actually had a bit of thought put into it. I'm sick of providing the massive FOH racks demanded and then seeing 3 out of the 24 channels of compression actually being used but I guess that's not going to change. It is amusing lugging around a Heritage 3000 to allow four guys to mime to a minidisc. Seriously, it happened. It took us ages to talk them out of a monitor desk.

 

I'm sure nobody on the Blue Room could ever be accused of gear snobbery though.

 

For your work I agree that an MH3 is probably more use than an XL3 but I'm not convinced that there's much difference in the money. Mark at Bonza has an XL3 in for £8.5k (about 9.5k Euros I guess) which can't be much more than an MH3.

 

It sounds like you're on the right track anyway, very similar thought processes that we use when deciding on kit upgrades and we seem to end up with the right stuff. Best of luck with it all.