SceneMaster Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 Hi, I know this I a very broad question but what are people general experiences of the Yamaha MG24/14fx. Is there anything drastically wrong with them? They are obviously (I would hope) good build as they it is Yamaha they have a nice amount of aux sends 6 of them. 4 of which are pre or post fade and the last two I am not sure on. The eq seems standard for a desk that size and it has some fairly basics but good fx built in. The situation which I am planning on possibly placing this desk in is a church (fairly small) which already has a fairly decent speaker system EV speakers with Yamaha amp and a Australian monitor mixer running services not requiring an operator to mix. I have a budget of £900 at the moment to get a decent sound desk with expansion possibility we need about 12-16ch minimum but anything more is overkill and as many decent mics with the remainder left over. Something like the Allen and heath mix wizard seemed ideal but it is slightly over my budget if I want two decent mics as well. Does this Yamaha desk sound like a solution? It seems to compare fairly well with the spec of the mix wizard. Thanks for you input, Edit: What are the fader sizes 100mm or 60mm I can't find it in the manual anywhere and the Yamaha website doesn’t have a spec sheet with it on. :wub: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Pearce Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 If its the same as the 16 channel version, the faders are 60mm, and are quite nice. They have enough resistance to feel right. The onboard reverbs are just about usable in a busy mix, I wouldn't want to use them in a guitar+singer situation, but they cope fine when on vocals against a busy backing track. Watch out though, the 16 channel only has 10 mic inputs and the 24 channel is also acting up, although I can't remember the amount of mic inputs on it. A reasonable budget desk, better quality than the spirit folio range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
si pie Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 yeah, thry're good little desk's. If you wanted an A&H how about the PA series? I can get hold of mix wizards for about £700 if you really wanted one. Email me if you want any information. Simon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SceneMaster Posted September 21, 2005 Author Share Posted September 21, 2005 Ok, So the 60mm faders people don’t tend to find a problem. On desks in the past that I have used with 60mm they don’t give you enough room to work but these are ok? I don’t usually use the onboard effects anyway but it’s nice to know they are there in case you do need anything extra. Would people buy one of these instead of the mix wizard if they had the choice between one or the other only? I was looking at the Spirit SX but decided that it didn’t really suite the situation. Thanks for you advice so far… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevieR Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 We bought in a couple of the Yamaha desks (12:4 and 16:6FX) for use as compact and general purpose desks. So far I have been quite impressed with them. The build quality for the price is excellent, they have rackmount kits as standard, and they are pretty quiet for a budget mixer. The only thing I'm not fully convinced about is the EQ but that tends to be a personal taste anyway. I used to be a Soundcraft fan but have been disappointed with their budget range of desks of late. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Pearce Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 The SX is a good desk, and I like having the 100mm faders but the faders are cheap and have no resistance, every time I use one I worry that if I sneeze all the faders will fly to max! Well its not quite that bad, but you do get that feeling. I had to use the yamaha for a show this month and I was dreading the 60mm faders, but I hardly noticed the difference. The EQ frequencies are a bit odd, but they work well enough for a budget desk. It also has XLR outs, which is good for a budget desk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SceneMaster Posted September 21, 2005 Author Share Posted September 21, 2005 Would you say the Spirit LX7 is a contender and would compare with the Yamaha Desk for or is the Yamaha still better? On the subject of the PA series I am not that impressed with them. Firstly it doesn’t have as many auxiliaries as either the Yamaha or the LX7 so it is out of the question. So thoughts on the LX7 or can anyone think of any desks which fall into the same category and price range? (About £600 excluding vat) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Pearce Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 The LX7 is a nice desk, but suffers from the same cheap faders as the SX. The EQ is quite nice, it has plenty of auxes, and I like having the master section in the middle of the desk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueShift Posted September 22, 2005 Share Posted September 22, 2005 id be inclined to get a mackie onyx 16 channel jobbie. they have beautiful preamps - arguably better than the A&H ML series!16 proper mic inputs, plus the usual returns and stuff. 6 aux sends I believe. 4 groups and will fit in a 19" rack!doesnt have internal fx, but a cheapie Alesis midiverb is gonna be much better than onboard FX...Even has a firewire interface option so you can multitrack your services! http://mackie.com/products/onyx1640/index.html if your budget cant stretch to that, get a 1620... Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SceneMaster Posted September 23, 2005 Author Share Posted September 23, 2005 Yes... well I had looked at it and it does look nice. But it has less Auxs. The only thing I can see better about this desk than the MG24/14FX is that is the EQ maybe and you can with an extra option connect by fire wire to a pc (something I don’t wish to do…). Can anyone else tell me the benefits of a Makie 1640 (which is about £300 out of my mixer budget) over the MG24/14FX (which also has effects which the 1640 doesn’t). Thanks, Edit: The 1640 does have 6 Auxs I was looking at the 1620 spec when I was looking at the Auxs send count and for some reason read the 1640 price. Still I the 1640 has the 16 mono channels we need but I don't think we can afford it and the 1620 only has 8 mono channels which is too little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueShift Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 The onyx 1640 is 929.99 from turnkey uk (inc VAT) the MG series dont even compare to the mackies - the onyx preamps are fantastic and the perkins eq in the onyx desk is also much better than the mg series eq.granted you dont get any FX built in - but you are much better to have better quality channel strips than having FX. Your always gonna be using the channel strips, FX are optional - so invest in quality in the fundamental components. the mackie also has groups which is gonna start becoming very useful when mixing 16 channels in a church situation. Alternativly, if you must have FX, then the A&H mixwizard 16:2 is 889.99 inc VAT from turnkey and that doesnt have quite as good preamps but does have internal FX and direct outs as well as the same number of auxes and mono channels. you lose the groups though... So essentially, in a 900 pound budget those would be my 2 big contenders (assuming you are buying new). They are both excellent quality, much better than an MG desk and offer a good balance of features for their form factor and price. If second hand is an option, you could look at buying an allen & heath gl2200 (been recently replaced) which would give you a bigger desk. The mixer is the core of your system - while id prioritise speakers and mics over a desk, you still cant afford to skimp on quality. A bad desk will affect the whole sound, a cheap DI or Mic or CD player only affects a segment. Church money also comes very rarely so its always worth getting a desk that will cope with expansion in a couple of years m- if you occasionally use 12 channels now, a 16 channel desk wouldnt be a bad idea considering how long its gonna be around for. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SceneMaster Posted September 23, 2005 Author Share Posted September 23, 2005 Ok what are other people's views on the Mackie desk. Plus Yamaha are very good and have you Chris had experience of the MG series (I presume you have) what I have heard about them so far is that they are very good just the Eq is slightly different to the norm. I am getting a 16 mono channel desk with the stereo inputs on top. I wouldn’t call skimping on a desk buying a Yamaha. I would call buying a Behringer skimping on a desk. According to the previous posts some of the Soundcraft desks aren’t as good as this Yamaha desk and I still have great respect for them Soundcraft so this desk must be fairly good. (the pro theatre (feeding the west end pro) I work at as a casual has several Soundcrafts). I agree with you that the mix-wizard is very good and I have consider it but it doesn’t have groups and I just don’t like the feel it however good the sound is (very good :() it just doesn’t suit my way of working. I think it is just the compact size. It is great for a rack mounted small tour or mobile kit but I am looking for a FOH desk which will only be used once a month. I want something which set out with a bit more space. Anyway if the Yamaha is better than some of the mid range Soundcrafts then I think it must be a good desk and that it’s preamps must sound decent otherwise I don’t think others on this forum would have said it was any good. I just can’t see what the Mackie has to offer me apart from better EQ (actually I should just say different EQ… there may be nothing wrong the Yamaha EQ just it isn’t the norm). :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.