New Behringer digital mixer

[Arny Krueger]

It's called the X32.

32-Channel 16-Bus Digital Total Recall Live/Recording Mixing Console
Total recall
32 channels with inserts
16 mix busses with inserts
6 aux sends and returns
8 stereo FX returns
6 matrix mixers with inserts
6 mute groups
8 DCA groups
Full-recording / multi-channel networking via FW/USB expansion cards*
48-channel "digital snake" via ultra-low latency AES50 ports*
Fully programmable, high-end mic preamps
25 low-noise 100mm motorized faders
Super-easy user-interface with direct access
No confusing menus
High-resolution 7" colour TFT display
Individual LCD displays per channel, DCA and Bus
Full dynamics and EQ per channel, busses and matrices
Adjustable line-delays on all inputs and outputs
Virtual FX rack with 8 FX slots
Powerful scene management for shows
On-board recorder for uncompressed WAV files on USB flash drive
Remote editor software to control via USB or Ethernet
Extensive channel strip controls with user-definable control sections
Connections to BEHRINGER P-16 personal monitoring system
AES/EBU stereo digital output and full MIDI implementation
Super-compact and lightweight

$2999.99 USD

[Sean Conolly]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> It's called the X32.
>
> 32-Channel 16-Bus Digital Total Recall Live/Recording Mixing Console
> Total recall
> 32 channels with inserts
> 16 mix busses with inserts
> 6 aux sends and returns
> 8 stereo FX returns
> 6 matrix mixers with inserts
> 6 mute groups
> 8 DCA groups
> Full-recording / multi-channel networking via FW/USB expansion cards*
> 48-channel "digital snake" via ultra-low latency AES50 ports*
> Fully programmable, high-end mic preamps
> 25 low-noise 100mm motorized faders
> Super-easy user-interface with direct access
> No confusing menus
> High-resolution 7" colour TFT display
> Individual LCD displays per channel, DCA and Bus
> Full dynamics and EQ per channel, busses and matrices
> Adjustable line-delays on all inputs and outputs
> Virtual FX rack with 8 FX slots
> Powerful scene management for shows
> On-board recorder for uncompressed WAV files on USB flash drive
> Remote editor software to control via USB or Ethernet
> Extensive channel strip controls with user-definable control sections
> Connections to BEHRINGER P-16 personal monitoring system
> AES/EBU stereo digital output and full MIDI implementation
> Super-compact and lightweight
>
> $2999.99 USD

Don't see it on their site yet, do you have a link?

Sean

[Kevin Aylward[_4_]]

>"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

>It's called the X32.

>32-Channel 16-Bus Digital Total Recall Live/Recording Mixing Console
>Total recall
>32 channels with inserts
>16 mix busses with inserts
>6 aux sends and returns
>8 stereo FX returns
>6 matrix mixers with inserts
>6 mute groups
>8 DCA groups
>Full-recording / multi-channel networking via FW/USB expansion cards*
>48-channel "digital snake" via ultra-low latency AES50 ports*
>Fully programmable, high-end mic preamps
>25 low-noise 100mm motorized faders
>Super-easy user-interface with direct access
>No confusing menus
>High-resolution 7" colour TFT display
>Individual LCD displays per channel, DCA and Bus
>Full dynamics and EQ per channel, busses and matrices
>Adjustable line-delays on all inputs and outputs
>Virtual FX rack with 8 FX slots
>Powerful scene management for shows
>On-board recorder for uncompressed WAV files on USB flash drive
>Remote editor software to control via USB or Ethernet
>Extensive channel strip controls with user-definable control sections
>Connections to BEHRINGER P-16 personal monitoring system
>AES/EBU stereo digital output and full MIDI implementation
>Super-compact and lightweight

>$2999.99 USD


Bu I would guess, unserviceable if its like a lot of their other kit. It
goes wrong, and you have to throw it away.



Regards

Kevin Aylward B.Sc.

www.kevinaylward.co.uk
"Live Long And Prosper \V/"

[Mike Rivers]

On 12/31/2010 10:13 AM, Arny Krueger wrote:
> It's called the X32.

So, will it replace your Yamahas?


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Mike Rivers]

On 12/31/2010 11:54 AM, Sean Conolly wrote:

> Don't see it on their site yet, do you have a link?

You need to know the secret URL:
http://www.behringer.com/EN/Products/X32.aspx

The official release is at the NAMM show in a couple of
weeks. Not much more info than what Arny posted. Interesting
part is that it's not yet approved for sale in the US and
Canada pending FCC certification.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Arny Krueger]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message


> On 12/31/2010 10:13 AM, Arny Krueger wrote:

>> It's called the X32.

> So, will it replace your Yamahas?

With only 32 channels?

Nahhh!

Besides, why replace what's working so well?

If I needed a mixer for the chapel or youth room...

[Arny Krueger]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message

> On 12/31/2010 11:54 AM, Sean Conolly wrote:
>
>> Don't see it on their site yet, do you have a link?
>
> You need to know the secret URL:
> http://www.behringer.com/EN/Products/X32.aspx
>
> The official release is at the NAMM show in a couple of
> weeks. Not much more info than what Arny posted.
> Interesting part is that it's not yet approved for sale
> in the US and Canada pending FCC certification.

The "P16 Personal Mixer" has even less doc at this time. I wonder if it will
force Aviom to rethink their price structure.

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 12/31/2010 11:54 AM, Sean Conolly wrote:
>
>> Don't see it on their site yet, do you have a link?
>
> You need to know the secret URL:
> http://www.behringer.com/EN/Products/X32.aspx
>
> The official release is at the NAMM show in a couple of weeks. Not much
> more info than what Arny posted. Interesting part is that it's not yet
> approved for sale in the US and Canada pending FCC certification.
>
> --
> "Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without a
> passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be operated
> without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson
>
> http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and interesting audio stuff

This is no secret. been in development for more than 2 years. I have touched
one and it is amazing, even offered some suggestions to some ability to set
global parameters that are now part of this version , glad I sold off my ls9
while it still appeared to have value, theprice of digital domain mixing is
now taking it's quantum step lower
I like the interface on this but am also working up a full SAC rig at this
time

George

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 12/31/2010 10:13 AM, Arny Krueger wrote:
>> It's called the X32.
>
> So, will it replace your Yamahas?
>
Yes
I sold my ls9 when I first got to alpha test and consult on this mixer
there is going to be a awful lot of over priced digital product out there
shortly

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/1/2011 6:50 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:
>
>> This is no secret. been in development for more than 2 years. I have
>> touched
>> one and it is amazing, even offered some suggestions to some ability to
>> set
>> global parameters that are now part of this version
>
> How do you get to do that? I've wished that I had been asked to have some
> input on stuff that I see, stuff that just has a few really stoopid things
> that would be easy to correct if only someone who had actually worked with
> such a product had taken a closer look at it. They know who I am, but I
> guess they're afraid to ask me for an opinion. <g> Of course i'd like to
> get paid for it, too.

It goes way way back, when everyone was talking crap and repeating the urban
legends that all behringer did was copy other peoples stuff I actually took
the time to sort the truth from the rumors. I have never claimed behringer
was going to replace XTA or BSS in the market but I also did not join the
"lets bash them without out understanding world business practices" either

I am a strong supported of choosing the tools that fit the job, and more
often than not this is a unit that will turn you a profit within its
designed life. Behringer dos that as least as well as anyone.
and I support them for that reason, they make me TONS of money and allow me
to satisfy my clients.
This is the same reason I support Meyer Sound Labs
>
> My problem with the smaller format digital consoles, and this isn't really
> something that's going to get fixed until they establish a higher price
> point, is that they're missing a large part of what a console really is.
> Not only is a console a set of controls, it's a set of indicators. You
> shouldn't have to push a button, or worse, select something from a menu,
> to see at a glance whether anything's coming out an Aux send, or whether a
> low cut filter is switched in or not.
>
most small mixers, analog or digital do not come with full always on
metering, how would you know what level a aux was sending on a LX7 or 500B
without pressing the afl button, I really see no diffrenece, a press is a
ress is a press on calls up one selected channel on a led ladder(analog)
the other opens a entire output meter screen(digital)

I was a early adopter of digital mixing and still can not find a single down
side to it
it is just a skill set I need to have ready as a live sound company owner, I
do meet lots of engineers who are challenged by learning how to actually mix
and they put up mental blocks about learning a new skill
that is a career ending decision IMO
George

>
> --
> "Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without a
> passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be operated
> without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson
>
> http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and interesting audio stuff

[[email protected]]

On 2011-01-02 said:
>> My problem with the smaller format digital consoles, and this
>>isn't really something that's going to get fixed until they
>>establish a higher price point, is that they're missing a large
>>part of what a console really is. Not only is a console a set of
>>controls, it's a set of indicators. You shouldn't have to push a
>>button, or worse, select something from a menu, to see at a
>>glance whether anything's coming out an Aux send, or whether a
>low cut filter is switched in or not. >
>most small mixers, analog or digital do not come with full always on
>metering, how would you know what level a aux was sending on a LX7
>or 500B without pressing the afl button, I really see no diffrenece,
>a press is a ress is a press on calls up one selected channel on a
>led ladder(analog) the other opens a entire output meter
>screen(digital)
INdeed, and this is a paradigm that the blind guy has dealt
with even in the analog world. AFter all, we had to patch
our audible or vibratory metering across the channel whose
level we wished to monitor. even with those little vibrator
motors built into metering as I've described here in the
past you couldn't monitor 8 simultaneously even. This meant
you did your gainstaging carefully during sound check and
gave yourself some head room.

Having said that, I still like my old analog iron, with
*every* control available from the panel. ONe of us can be
sound checking talent which isn't going to air yet while the
other is mixing the live feed, etc.





Richard webb,

replace anything before at with elspider
ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

> wrote in message
...
>
> On 2011-01-02 said:
> >> My problem with the smaller format digital consoles, and this
> >>isn't really something that's going to get fixed until they
> >>establish a higher price point, is that they're missing a large
> >>part of what a console really is. Not only is a console a set of
> >>controls, it's a set of indicators. You shouldn't have to push a
> >>button, or worse, select something from a menu, to see at a
> >>glance whether anything's coming out an Aux send, or whether a
> >low cut filter is switched in or not. >
> >most small mixers, analog or digital do not come with full always on
> >metering, how would you know what level a aux was sending on a LX7
> >or 500B without pressing the afl button, I really see no diffrenece,
> >a press is a ress is a press on calls up one selected channel on a
> >led ladder(analog) the other opens a entire output meter
> >screen(digital)
> INdeed, and this is a paradigm that the blind guy has dealt
> with even in the analog world. AFter all, we had to patch
> our audible or vibratory metering across the channel whose
> level we wished to monitor. even with those little vibrator
> motors built into metering as I've described here in the
> past you couldn't monitor 8 simultaneously even. This meant
> you did your gainstaging carefully during sound check and
> gave yourself some head room.
>
> Having said that, I still like my old analog iron, with
> *every* control available from the panel. ONe of us can be
> sound checking talent which isn't going to air yet while the
> other is mixing the live feed, etc.

and how is that diffrent with a digital desk?
you just use your solo stacking feature and deselect the routing to any
outputs
George
>
>
>
>
>
> Richard webb,
>
> replace anything before at with elspider
> ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com
>
>

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"George's Pro Sound Co." > wrote in message
rlakestechnologygroup...
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> On 2011-01-02 said:
>> >> My problem with the smaller format digital consoles, and this
>> >>isn't really something that's going to get fixed until they
>> >>establish a higher price point, is that they're missing a large
>> >>part of what a console really is. Not only is a console a set of
>> >>controls, it's a set of indicators. You shouldn't have to push a
>> >>button, or worse, select something from a menu, to see at a
>> >>glance whether anything's coming out an Aux send, or whether a
>> >low cut filter is switched in or not. >
>> >most small mixers, analog or digital do not come with full always on
>> >metering, how would you know what level a aux was sending on a LX7
>> >or 500B without pressing the afl button, I really see no diffrenece,
>> >a press is a ress is a press on calls up one selected channel on a
>> >led ladder(analog) the other opens a entire output meter
>> >screen(digital)
>> INdeed, and this is a paradigm that the blind guy has dealt
>> with even in the analog world. AFter all, we had to patch
>> our audible or vibratory metering across the channel whose
>> level we wished to monitor. even with those little vibrator
>> motors built into metering as I've described here in the
>> past you couldn't monitor 8 simultaneously even. This meant
>> you did your gainstaging carefully during sound check and
>> gave yourself some head room.
>>
>> Having said that, I still like my old analog iron, with
>> *every* control available from the panel. ONe of us can be
>> sound checking talent which isn't going to air yet while the
>> other is mixing the live feed, etc.
>
> and how is that diffrent with a digital desk?
> you just use your solo stacking feature and deselect the routing to any
> outputs
> George
>>
and while I have done that once or twice, most often if that is needed it is
well known before hand and you bring seperate desks for the reason.
I can not think of one single occasion that I could "soundcheck" a not yet
on stage band while a band is playing
you just can't make the noise, even with no routing to monitors or house
sound
George

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> It's called the X32.
>
> 32-Channel 16-Bus Digital Total Recall Live/Recording Mixing Console
> Total recall
> 32 channels with inserts
> 16 mix busses with inserts
> 6 aux sends and returns
> 8 stereo FX returns
> 6 matrix mixers with inserts
> 6 mute groups
> 8 DCA groups
> Full-recording / multi-channel networking via FW/USB expansion cards*
> 48-channel "digital snake" via ultra-low latency AES50 ports*
> Fully programmable, high-end mic preamps
> 25 low-noise 100mm motorized faders
> Super-easy user-interface with direct access
> No confusing menus
> High-resolution 7" colour TFT display
> Individual LCD displays per channel, DCA and Bus
> Full dynamics and EQ per channel, busses and matrices
> Adjustable line-delays on all inputs and outputs
> Virtual FX rack with 8 FX slots
> Powerful scene management for shows
> On-board recorder for uncompressed WAV files on USB flash drive
> Remote editor software to control via USB or Ethernet
> Extensive channel strip controls with user-definable control sections
> Connections to BEHRINGER P-16 personal monitoring system
> AES/EBU stereo digital output and full MIDI implementation
> Super-compact and lightweight
>
> $2999.99 USD
Here is a little better picture of it from a few months ago when this was
"officially" annpounced
http://www.mio.co.za/article/behringer-readies-new-digital-mixer-2010-11-29

[philicorda[_9_]]

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 13:37:32 -0500, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> It's called the X32.
<snip>
>> $2999.99 USD
> Here is a little better picture of it from a few months ago when this
> was "officially" annpounced
> http://www.mio.co.za/article/behringer-readies-new-digital-
mixer-2010-11-29

Isn't that an old Yamaha analog desk? Or perhaps a TEAC or fostex from
the same era. I'm sure I recognise it from somewhere.

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"philicorda" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 13:37:32 -0500, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> It's called the X32.
> <snip>
>>> $2999.99 USD
>> Here is a little better picture of it from a few months ago when this
>> was "officially" annpounced
>> http://www.mio.co.za/article/behringer-readies-new-digital-
> mixer-2010-11-29
>
> Isn't that an old Yamaha analog desk? Or perhaps a TEAC or fostex from
> the same era. I'm sure I recognise it from somewhere.

Yes, I just wanted people to take a look at the feature list a bit closer

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"George's Pro Sound Co." > wrote in message
rlakestechnologygroup...
>
> "philicorda" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 13:37:32 -0500, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:
>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> It's called the X32.
>> <snip>
>>>> $2999.99 USD
>>> Here is a little better picture of it from a few months ago when this
>>> was "officially" annpounced
>>> http://www.mio.co.za/article/behringer-readies-new-digital-
>> mixer-2010-11-29
>>
>> Isn't that an old Yamaha analog desk? Or perhaps a TEAC or fostex from
>> the same era. I'm sure I recognise it from somewhere.
>
> Yes, I just wanted people to take a look at the feature list a bit closer
The behringer is in a rack mount frame ,last I saw from about a year ago

[[email protected]]

On 2011-01-02 said:
>>>>screen(digital) INdeed, and this is a paradigm that the blind
>>>guy has dealt with even in the analog world. AFter all, we had
>>>to patch our audible or vibratory metering across the channel
>>>whose level we wished to monitor. even with those little
>>>vibrator motors built into metering as I've described here in the
>>> past you couldn't monitor 8 simultaneously even. This meant
>>> you did your gainstaging carefully during sound check and
>>> gave yourself some head room.
>>> Having said that, I still like my old analog iron, with
>>> *every* control available from the panel. ONe of us can be
>>> sound checking talent which isn't going to air yet while the
>>> other is mixing the live feed, etc.
>> and how is that diffrent with a digital desk?
>> you just use your solo stacking feature and deselect the routing
>>to any outputs
RIght, not thinking whole bands so much, as the talking
head while the sporting event is happening but talking head
isn't ready to go to air yet <grin>.
I'm just used to the tool, and working with it with multiple
bodies simultaneously.

GOes back to another thread running ad nauseam this ng
lately, ergonomics and workflow have a lot to do with the
choices we make <grin>. The different workflow because of
metering would be one mental conversion I don't have to make
however, which was my original point <grin>. One patches
one's metering during initial setup, and checks it out
occasionally whilst monitoring sources that require constant
monitoring. Another reason I like working out of my truck.
I can have a couple audible meters, spatial location tells
me which one is sounding off, and a couple more vibrators
situated about my body to monitor others, but there are
still practical limits <grin>.
Three auditory on the meter bridge of the console (good ol'
left center and right) two vibrators in pockets.

I hope you had gear out making you money on amateur's night
but got to stay out of the fray friend.

Regards,





Richard webb,

replace anything before at with elspider
ON site audio in the southland: see www.gatasound.com

[Kevin Aylward[_4_]]

"George's Pro Sound Co." wrote in message
rlakestechnologygroup...

"Mike Rivers" >> wrote in message
...
>> On 1/1/2011 6:50 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:
>>
>>>> This is no secret. been in development for more than 2 years. I have
>>>> touched
>>>> one and it is amazing, even offered some suggestions to some ability
>>>> to set
>>>> global parameters that are now part of this version
>>
>> How do you get to do that? I've wished that I had been asked to have some
>> input on stuff that I see, stuff that just has a few really stoopid
>> things that would be easy to correct if only someone who had actually
>> worked with such a product had taken a closer look at it. They know who I
>> am, but I guess they're afraid to ask me for an opinion. <g>> Of course
>> i'd like to get paid for it, too.

>It goes way way back, when everyone was talking crap and repeating the
>urban legends that all behringer did was copy other peoples stuff I
>actually took the time to sort the truth from the rumors. I have never
>claimed behringer was going to replace XTA or BSS in the market but I
>also did not join the "lets bash them without out understanding world
>business practices" either

Behringer has pros and cons. The pro is that it is cheap, but by and large,
not very serviceable.

I have 2 behringer powered mixers. I have yet to figure out how to dismantle
one of them to replace the master volume pot that got bent a bit.
Furthermore, to get a replacement pot is about $25 all in all.

I now use a Studiomaster powered wedge mixer as its mic input noise
is -127db verses the huge -112dbv of the behringer. The noise of the
Behringer is very noticeable at pub gigs, let along recording.

My gig on this new years eve had a major problem in that a brand new
behringer keyboard combo amp just died in the middle of "brick in the wall".
The output drivers seem to have gone bad.

My brother has one of their 24 channel live mixers. Behringer don't
understand that in normal use, one would like the main output led metering
to actually display the output signals. They don't. You can only get the
meters to read things like soloing of a channel etc. I was absolute stunned
on discovering this. How can anyone get that wrong.

I have a berihnger guitar foot pedal, the knob snapped off. Furthermore,
there is no way to get the foot volume to reduce the sound to off. How can
anyone get that wrong.

I have had an Ernie Ball foot pedal for 9 years. Works fine.

>I am a strong supported of choosing the tools that fit the job, and more
>often than not this is a unit that will turn you a profit within its
>designed life. Behringer dos that as least as well as anyone.
>and I support them for that reason, they make me TONS of money and allow me
>to satisfy my clients.
>This is the same reason I support Meyer Sound Labs

>>
>> My problem with the smaller format digital consoles, and this isn't
>> really something that's going to get fixed until they establish a higher
>> price point, is that they're missing a large part of what a console
>> really is. Not only is a console a set of controls, it's a set of
>> indicators. You shouldn't have to push a button, or worse, select
>> something from a menu, to see at a glance whether anything's coming out
>> an Aux send, or whether a low cut filter is switched in or not.
>>
>most small mixers, analog or digital do not come with full always on
>metering, how would you know what level a aux was sending on a LX7 or 500B
>without pressing the afl button, I really see no diffrenece, a press is a
>ress is a press on calls up one selected channel on a led ladder(analog)
>the other opens a entire output meter screen(digital)

>I was a early adopter of digital mixing and still can not find a single
>down side to it

For live work, ifs its got pots for all the main functions, they are the
best thing since sliced bread. The cheaper ones with no independent pots for
things are a pain in the arse when used in a pub.

Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
www.kevinaylward.co.uk
"Live Long And Prosper \V/"

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

Kevin, if you want to send the truck I can fill it wwith broken and not
cost effective to service stuff from
symetrix,soundcraft,aphex,ashley,yamaha,Dod,and yes even some Meyer
afaik bent knob shafts signal serious abuse and if you can't figure out how
to open a powered mixer, then you have no business inside of it

and resale value, I just bought a large format world class analog Ramsa sx-1
56 channels for less than 5% of its new value 15 years ago, I would guess 5%
is just about scrap value. I doubt whom ever owned ever earned a nickle off
of it.
when you can recoup the cost of gear on its first or second use, who the
hell cares if it lasts for years
once it has doubled you expense sell it and you will not have service
nightmares
and with gear like behring you ought be able to pocket profit within a
month of ownership, well within the 1 year NO QUESTIONS exchange program
they have set up to handle warrentee repairs
slag at them all you want, it is a big open market,I suggest you buy
something else
something else much more expensive, this will allow guys like me to meet
the diminishing budgets that events have and still walk to the bank at the
end of the night while other guys sit and wonder why they cant get work
like they used to.

This audio stuff is a business and until we take the emotion and perdjuice
out of our choices and look at ROI and suitability for the job good buying
decisions are impossible

but if emotion and ego are what drives ones buying decisions then don't fret
over selling a desk that cost 100,000$ selling for 4K in perfect condition
some get their satisfation with name badges, I get mine with bank deposits
george

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/2/2011 12:13 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:
>> >most small mixers, analog or digital do not come with full always on
>> >metering, how would you know what level a aux was sending on a LX7
>> >or 500B without pressing the afl button,

You may not know how many volts you're sending (you'll take
care of that during setup), but on an analog console, you
can tell relative levels simply by looking at the position
of the knobs. And many large format live and studio consoles
have a real meter bridge with meters on the aux outputs.

> and how is that diffrent with a digital desk?
> you just use your solo stacking feature and deselect the routing to any
> outputs

I don't even know what that means. <g>

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/2/2011 12:13 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:
>>> >most small mixers, analog or digital do not come with full always on
>>> >metering, how would you know what level a aux was sending on a LX7
>>> >or 500B without pressing the afl button,
>
> You may not know how many volts you're sending (you'll take care of that
> during setup), but on an analog console, you can tell relative levels
> simply by looking at the position of the knobs. And many large format live
> and studio consoles have a real meter bridge with meters on the aux
> outputs.
>

I do not find knob position a indication of any level being sent
small format desks are just that small format desk, be the analog or
digital, and one must do a tiny bit more to see on a small format desk what
a large format desk has the real estate to display
if I really did not want to select a meter screen or press a afl button I
would deploy the large format mixer, either digital or analog, so I could
have that feature

with 20 auxes( and some dual shaft ones at that) on my big analog desk it
takes quite a bit of attention to determine by knob position what is
what!!!!
George

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/2/2011 2:16 PM, Kevin Aylward wrote:

> My brother has one of their 24 channel live mixers.
> Behringer don't understand that in normal use, one would
> like the main output led metering to actually display the
> output signals. They don't. You can only get the meters to
> read things like soloing of a channel etc.

How strange. Maybe it's always been broken. I have a little
Behringer tabletop sized mixer, a Xenix 1204FX, I think. I
got it for a review and they told me that if I could use it,
to keep it, that it wasn't worth the cost of shipping back.

I suspect that your brother's mixer works the same way as
the one I have. The meters read what you've selected for
monitoring (headphones/Control Room outputs) except when you
press a SOLO button, in which case they show the channel
level. Since normally you'd be monitoring the main mix, when
you press that button, the meters are reading the main mix
level.

What may seem a little kooky is that the meters are ahead of
the main L/R output faders, so what you're seeing is the
level coming out of the summing bus. This is what you really
want to watch to be sure you aren't clipping the bus. You
can hear how loud the PA system is, and presumably you've
calibrated what comes after the mixer so that when the
meters hit the pin with the faders all the way up, you're
still below clipping. With the main faders at their "unity
gain" position, the meters actually do represent the output
level. I'm pretty sure that 0 dB on the meters is +4 dBu, or
at least it's a constant. It's true, you don't see the
meters go downscale when you fade out the mains, but then if
you do that, you want to do it by ear, not by eye.

> I was absolute
> stunned on discovering this. How can anyone get that wrong.

It's just one way of doing it. It's a good way of forcing
you to set up the system for maximum headroom rather than
having to keep the meters down in the bottom quarter of the
scale where they don't tell you anything useful since you
have too much gain on the power amplifiers.

> I have a berihnger guitar foot pedal, the knob snapped off.

The phantom power LED on my Behringer mixer failed (there's
still phantom power) but it's a surface mounted LED on the
main circuit board. I'm not likely to replace it. Stuff breaks.


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Sean Conolly]

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in message
...
> Behringer has pros and cons. The pro is that it is cheap, but by and
> large, not very serviceable.

There's lot's of stuff that fits that description. The problem with most of
it is that it's not that functional or reliable, much less servicable. The
more recent Behringer stuff has been quite reliable for me and I have some
in use at every gig.

I also know exactly what I'm looking for before I start shopping for
something, so I am rarely disappointed with my choices.

Sean

[Trevor]

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in message
...
> My brother has one of their 24 channel live mixers. Behringer don't
> understand that in normal use, one would like the main output led metering
> to actually display the output signals. They don't. You can only get the
> meters to read things like soloing of a channel etc. I was absolute
> stunned on discovering this. How can anyone get that wrong.

Funny, all my Behringers do main output metering (including the SL24's and
UB24's) My Yamaha EMX5000 OTOH *won't* do any PFL metering! How can anyone
get that wrong? Fact is, every mixer I've ever used had some good features,
and ones you really wished it had, but didn't. Part of what makes the
purchasing process difficult.

Trevor.

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/2/2011 3:32 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:

> I just bought a large format world class analog Ramsa sx-1
> 56 channels for less than 5% of its new value 15 years ago,

That sounds like a pretty good deal. I just took a look and
found a 48 channel one for a little over $4,000. I trust you
paid less than that. I would have balked at paying $4K for a
console of that age unless I knew it was in really good
shape and I had work planned for it. I don't know how much
they went for new, I'd guess about $15K but that's based on
size and weight, not a knowledge of what they actually cost.
Or maybe your example of paying $4K for a console that
originally cost $100K refers to this one.

> I doubt whom ever owned ever earned a nickle off of it.

That's not a problem with the console, it's a problem with
the owner.

> when you can recoup the cost of gear on its first or second use, who the
> hell cares if it lasts for years

It's only recently that you've been able to do that, though.
I've had my Soundcraft 600 since it ws new, that's about 25
years now. I'm sure I've paid for it a couple of times over,
but then I'm a part time user. If it went out every weekend
at book rate, it probably would have been paid off in a few
months.

> once it has doubled you expense sell it and you will not have service
> nightmares
> and with gear like behring you ought be able to pocket profit within a
> month of ownership, well within the 1 year NO QUESTIONS exchange program
> they have set up to handle warrentee repairs

Hey, now that's a really good racket. Buy one for $500, use
it for six months of convention gigs at $750/day, send it in
for a new one, and sell it. But it's hard to have any pride
of ownership of your tools when you're working at that level.

> This audio stuff is a business and until we take the emotion and perdjuice
> out of our choices and look at ROI and suitability for the job good buying
> decisions are impossible

No question but that's how you have to work.


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/2/2011 1:37 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:

> Here is a little better picture of it from a few months ago

How unusual to have analog meters on a digital console. I
like it already.


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/2/2011 4:48 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 1/2/2011 1:37 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:
>
>> Here is a little better picture of it from a few months ago

Never mind.


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/2/2011 3:32 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:
>
>> I just bought a large format world class analog Ramsa sx-1
>> 56 channels for less than 5% of its new value 15 years ago,
>
> That sounds like a pretty good deal. I just took a look and found a 48
> channel one for a little over $4,000. I trust you paid less than that. I
> would have balked at paying $4K for a console of that age unless I knew it
> was in really good shape and I had work planned for it. I don't know how
> much they went for new, I'd guess about $15K but that's based on size and
> weight, not a knowledge of what they actually cost.

Mike list on the sx-1 in a config close to mine in size was 96,000.00$
as far as I can reserch
it tested out 100% no noise , no problems , NOTHING!1 it came with 3 power
supplies as well(it take two just to turn it on) nothing except pfl level on
one channel was down 2 dB from the rest
it is a "hey look at me" piece of gear, sound greast but is really slow to
get around on compared to any digital product, and it requires a truck and
at 800 lbs , 8 guys to set it up
it really is more a marketing tool than a "go to" mixer
I do earn quite a bit off it cross renting it to guys who no longer have big
VCA desks but need one, I get 750/day for it
it really shines as a 8 mono + 6 stereo in ears monitor mixer

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

> Hey, now that's a really good racket. Buy one for $500, use it for six
> months of convention gigs at $750/day, send it in for a new one, and sell
> it. But it's hard to have any pride of ownership of your tools when you're
> working at that level.
>

LOL I started with that"pride in ownership" stuff, all crest 8001/2 amps,
soundcraft K2 mixer, BSS analog eq, audix om 7 mics
it all went to **** long before it paid for it's self

Back then I did not understand that all electronics were piles of parts
waiting to break
I bought higher end MI speakers and ex-pensive processing

I have changed my business model to own disposable processing and Meyer
loudspeakers
This earns me ALOT MORE money as speakers go out of fashion much slower
than processing does. and quite frankly I feel I get sound equal or better
than most new companies touting some wiz bang line array that they really
don't deploy properly and try to make it fit every situation
plus I am not trying to serve the 50,000 seat stadium shows, I really do
well and focus on the 2500 seat and less theaters
and imo line arrays just simply are the wrong product for the work I
"mostly" do
george

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:

> Here is a little better picture of it from a few months ago when this
> was "officially" annpounced
> http://www.mio.co.za/article/behringer-readies-new-digital-mixer-2010-11-29

No, looks like something 1980's. A great reminder that a bridge full of real
mechanical vu-meters may in fact be quite helpful if properly aligned.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Kevin Aylward[_4_]]

"George's Pro Sound Co." wrote in message
rlakestechnologygroup...

>afaik bent knob shafts signal serious abuse and if you can't figure out
>how to open a powered mixer, then you have no business inside of it

Why would that be?

I am professional analogue design engineer, and have been so for 30 years. I
am not a mechanical tech, nor am I in the general business of repairing
audio equipment for employment. Sure, whilst at university I did have a fair
bit of on the side repair work for a music shop, a £20 repair was a good
percentage increase on my £45 weekly student grant money, but I no even
longer build what I design. Its a "would you expect an architect to lay
bricks"? Despite this, I have opened and repaired more bits of kit that
probably most in this NG.

So, non expertise in opening boxes, stuffed in china, that are not designed
for servicing, is hardly a good reason to avoid throwing money away by not
trying. If you have some suitable instructions for opening up the PMP1280S I
would welcome your obviously superior knowledge on this matter.

Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
www.kevinaylward.co.uk
"Live Long And Prosper \V/"

[Kevin Aylward[_4_]]

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
...

On 1/2/2011 2:16 PM, Kevin Aylward wrote:

> My brother has one of their 24 channel live mixers.
> Behringer don't understand that in normal use, one would
> like the main output led metering to actually display the
> output signals. They don't. You can only get the meters to
> read things like soloing of a channel etc.

>How strange. Maybe it's always been broken.

That's an interesting possibility.

>I have a little Behringer tabletop sized mixer, a Xenix 1204FX, I think. I
>got it for a review and they told me that if I could use it, to keep it,
>that it wasn't worth the cost of shipping back.
>I suspect that your brother's mixer works the same way as the one I have.
>The meters read what you've selected for monitoring (headphones/Control
>Room outputs) except when you press a SOLO button, in which case they show
>the channel level. Since normally you'd be monitoring the main mix, when
>you press that button, the meters are reading the main mix level.

Its a Eurodesk SL2442FX-Pro. I will have another check when I get over to
see him.


Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
www.kevinaylward.co.uk

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in message
...
> "George's Pro Sound Co." wrote in message
> rlakestechnologygroup...
>
>>afaik bent knob shafts signal serious abuse and if you can't figure out
>>how to open a powered mixer, then you have no business inside of it
>
> Why would that be?
>
> I am professional analogue design engineer, and have been so for 30 years.
> I am not a mechanical tech, nor am I in the general business of repairing
> audio equipment for employment. Sure, whilst at university I did have a
> fair bit of on the side repair work for a music shop, a £20 repair was a
> good percentage increase on my £45 weekly student grant money, but I no
> even longer build what I design. Its a "would you expect an architect to
> lay bricks"? Despite this, I have opened and repaired more bits of kit
> that probably most in this NG.
>
> So, non expertise in opening boxes, stuffed in china, that are not
> designed for servicing, is hardly a good reason to avoid throwing money
> away by not trying. If you have some suitable instructions for opening up
> the PMP1280S I would welcome your obviously superior knowledge on this
> matter.
>
> Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
> www.kevinaylward.co.uk
> "Live Long And Prosper \V/"

If I had one on hand I would look at it , figure it out and tell you
otherwise contact


Jim Savery is the WORLD customer service manager and will get your question
routed to the right department
George

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

If you have some suitable instructions for opening up the PMP1280S I
> would welcome your obviously superior knowledge on this matter.
>
> Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
> www.kevinaylward.co.uk
> "Live Long And Prosper \V/"

Kebin
you have mail
George

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/2/2011 4:58 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:

> Mike list on the sx-1 in a config close to mine in size was 96,000.00$
> as far as I can reserch

> it is a "hey look at me" piece of gear, sound greast but is really slow to
> get around on compared to any digital product, and it requires a truck and
> at 800 lbs , 8 guys to set it up
> it really is more a marketing tool than a "go to" mixer
> I do earn quite a bit off it cross renting it to guys who no longer have big
> VCA desks but need one, I get 750/day for it

Obviously there's still a call for something like that now
and then, and it's good that, as a businessman as well as an
engineer, you're able to supply it. I'm not sure that an
investor today could buy a new console like that.

Considering that your business is to make sure that sound
comes out of whatever you supply, it's important to offer a
wide range of gear at a wide range of prices. Clearly
there's a valid place in your inventory for disposable
mixers as well as classic consoles. There's no reason not to
play the game that way.

But you're not the typical Behringer customer. The typical
Behringer customer doesn't have cash flow. He barely scrapes
enough money together to buy that one $400 mixer that he
hopes to be using until his studio outgrows it, which may be
several years. I see lots of people who are still using the
Mackie CR1604 that they bought nearly 20 years ago and are
concerned that one channel is getting noisy. He will
probably opt for buying a new mixer rather than a ten year
old one.

10-15 years ago, Behringer, regardless of your take on their
"engineering practices," characteristically built their
equipment in the cheapest way possible. They pioneered
Chinese manufacturing of audio equipment and probably should
be given credit for making it work, at least most of the
time. It gave them a big cost advantage over the
competitors. But today nearly everything is built like that
(Yeah, it's a generalization - I know about Manley and Fearn
and Hardy etc.) so it's harder for someone to make a choice
purely on cost.

That being said, I think that the new Behringer digital
console, if it gets out the gate soon enough, and
sufficiently bug-free, will give the PreSonus StudioLive
24.4.2 a good run for the money and may offer an alternative
for people attracted to the Roland system but find it too
pricey. The Behringer seems to be looking at the same sort
of connectivity that Roland (and, sure, Yamaha, too) has
been pushing - integrated digital snake system, integrated
multichannel monitor system, and such.

Can they get a foothold into that market? Hard to tell.
PreSonus seems to be making some headway, but they didn't
come into the marketplace with the "cheap stuff that works
better than you'd expect, until it breaks" reputation.

I wish them luck. Maybe they've beefed up their "pro"
marketing. They keep coming up with what see like might be
decent studio consoles, but with nobody I know using them I
really can't tell if it's a line of business for them or
just an experiment that they dabble in because they can.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/2/2011 11:00 PM, Peter Larsen wrote:

> No, looks like something 1980's. A great reminder that a bridge full of real
> mechanical vu-meters may in fact be quite helpful if properly aligned.

And furthermore, probably cost more than the new Behringer
digital mixer. ;)


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

Mike I see placement of this console squarely in the local confrence and
trade show typeevents
mixing in digital is just too difficult for most weekend bands to put the
time into understanding Parametric eq, discreet monitor mixes , a complete
arsnel of dynamics. mosy weekend bands are lucky if they understand the
trimknob on a analog desk much less the concepts required when one has so
many tools available
so small shows for regional guys like me will be where I see this desk
landing
I will be buying 2 or three of them
I have long predicted that the snake had to be part of the digital systm to
really maximize its attractivness
the next step will be auto gain and fft analysis of each input so the
uneducated user will be able to "get it running" with out understanding gain
structure or eq.
at that point most "soundguys" who have not advanced past the "weekend
bands guy" will be out of business as the console will be better at their
jobs than they are
George

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/2/2011 11:00 PM, Peter Larsen wrote:
>
>> No, looks like something 1980's. A great reminder that a bridge full of
>> real
>> mechanical vu-meters may in fact be quite helpful if properly aligned.
>
> And furthermore, probably cost more than the new Behringer digital mixer.
> ;)
>

Everyone loves the simulated VU on the deq2496 meter selection
George

[Arny Krueger]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message


> On 1/2/2011 12:13 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:
>>> >most small mixers, analog or digital do not come
>>> with full always on >metering, how would you know
>>> what level a aux was sending on a LX7 >or 500B
>>> without pressing the afl button,

> You may not know how many volts you're sending (you'll
> take care of that during setup), but on an analog
> console, you can tell relative levels simply by looking
> at the position of the knobs.

I don't see a lot of difference or if there is a difference any loss between
that and how things work on my digital console. The "knobs" may be on a
menu that has to be displayed but I usually can select that menu by simply
touching the relevant fader. One key to a happy life on a digital console is
knowing how to bring up menus, and wherever possible how to bring them up
with only one or at worst two touches to controls that are highly relevant
to what you want to do.

For example, when I'm mixing live I usually bring up the menu that shows
PFL, eq settings, and a number of other relevant settings. Then, whatever
fader I touch brings up that menu for that channel.

Some people seem to hate layers, but to me layers mean that I never have to
look at more than 24 faders at a time. I put the most frequently adjusted
faders on the first layer, and the rest on the other two.

Similarly, I vastly prefer having just one set of eq controls that jump to
the selected channel when I touch its fader.

Rather than having to thread my way through 448 knobs for aux sends, I only
have to look at the virtual knobs for one aux channel at a time. Or, I have
the option at looking at all of the virtual knobs for the aux sends for one
input channel at a time. In the case where I'm looking at the 56 virtual
knobs for one aux channel, I can select which one by touching the fader knob
for that channel.

> And many large format live
> and studio consoles have a real meter bridge with meters
> on the aux outputs.

My digital console has meters on every input and output. Where there is an
option for what they show, they are usually set to PFL. And that is what I
get with no pysical meter bridge at all. Why would I want a meter bridge
interferring with sight lines to the performers?

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
>
>
>> On 1/2/2011 12:13 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:
>>>> >most small mixers, analog or digital do not come
>>>> with full always on >metering, how would you know
>>>> what level a aux was sending on a LX7 >or 500B
>>>> without pressing the afl button,
>
>> You may not know how many volts you're sending (you'll
>> take care of that during setup), but on an analog
>> console, you can tell relative levels simply by looking
>> at the position of the knobs.
>
> I don't see a lot of difference or if there is a difference any loss
> between that and how things work on my digital console. The "knobs" may
> be on a menu that has to be displayed but I usually can select that menu
> by simply touching the relevant fader.

I tried the touch fader option on my yamahas but found i tend to rest my
fingers on faders even when not in use and was always selecting a channel
other than intended
I perfer the select button option, but it is really 6 of one and 1/2 dozenof
the other according to mpersonal prefrence
George

[Arny Krueger]

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in
message

> Behringer has pros and cons. The pro is that it is cheap,
> but by and large, not very serviceable.

I don't see where Behringer products are any more or less servicable than
competitive products. They may make consoles with relatitvely large circuit
cards in them, but they are hardly unique in that regard.

> I have 2 behringer powered mixers. I have yet to figure
> out how to dismantle one of them to replace the master
> volume pot that got bent a bit. Furthermore, to get a
> replacement pot is about $25 all in all.

I have 2 Behringer mixers, one that cost under $60 and the other than cost
$99. They have served me reliably for enough years that if I had to scrap
them, my cost of ownership would be well under $1 per month. Would I even
pay $10 to fix my cheaper Behringer which is now 6 years old.? If I fix it,
I then have a six year old used mixer that could easily fail some other way
in a few months.

I use tissue paper to blow my noise because neither I nor my wife have any
time to acquite and maintain cotton hankies. So does just about everybody
else in the first world. We need not get into the other things I do with
it... ;-)

> I now use a Studiomaster powered wedge mixer as its mic
> input noise is -127db verses the huge -112dbv of the behringer. The
> noise of the Behringer is very noticeable at pub gigs,
> let along recording.

Given the acoustic noise levels that one sees in real world studios and
stages, I will fearlessly suggest that if you can't get a subjectively noise
free recording with equipment with -112 dB noise, perhaps you need to
rethink your gain staging and/or mic choice and positioning.

The dynamic range of live music is usually around 70 dB or worse. To me
that means that I would have about 50 dB headroom with equipment that
has -112 dB noise. 20 dB headroom, but sometimes as little as 6 dB headroom
usually suffices for me. It is all about how well I can predict what the
talent is going to do.

[Arny Krueger]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message


> That being said, I think that the new Behringer digital
> console, if it gets out the gate soon enough, and
> sufficiently bug-free, will give the PreSonus StudioLive
> 24.4.2 a good run for the money and may offer an
> alternative for people attracted to the Roland system but
> find it too pricey. The Behringer seems to be looking at
> the same sort of connectivity that Roland (and, sure,
> Yamaha, too) has been pushing - integrated digital snake
> system, integrated multichannel monitor system, and such.

I've been pretty vocal with my questions about the PreSonus. Frankly, I
don't see it as being a very powerful tool. I don't see it as exploiting
many of the worthwhile benefits of being digital. Its not that I have a
grudge against PreSonus, I have other gear that they make and it is fine.

While the new Behringer digital mixer seems to be a lot of mystery meat at
this time, what little is known about it it positions it as addressing a
lot of the questions I have about the Presonus. The last Behringer digital
console was pretty much a functional clone of an 01V96 which put it well
ahead of the Presonus in my book.

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

>
>> I now use a Studiomaster powered wedge mixer as its mic
>> input noise is -127db verses the huge -112dbv of the behringer. The
>> noise of the Behringer is very noticeable at pub gigs,
>> let along recording.
>
> Given the acoustic noise levels that one sees in real world studios and
> stages, I will fearlessly suggest that if you can't get a subjectively
> noise free recording with equipment with -112 dB noise, perhaps you need
> to rethink your gain staging and/or mic choice and positioning.
>

I agree, I would also suggest you measure that studiomaster as that figure
seems awful suspect to me
George

[Arny Krueger]

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in
message

> Its a Eurodesk SL2442FX-Pro. I will have another check
> when I get over to see him.

RTFM

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
>
>
>> That being said, I think that the new Behringer digital
>> console, if it gets out the gate soon enough, and
>> sufficiently bug-free, will give the PreSonus StudioLive
>> 24.4.2 a good run for the money and may offer an
>> alternative for people attracted to the Roland system but
>> find it too pricey. The Behringer seems to be looking at
>> the same sort of connectivity that Roland (and, sure,
>> Yamaha, too) has been pushing - integrated digital snake
>> system, integrated multichannel monitor system, and such.
>
> I've been pretty vocal with my questions about the PreSonus. Frankly, I
> don't see it as being a very powerful tool. I don't see it as exploiting
> many of the worthwhile benefits of being digital. Its not that I have a
> grudge against PreSonus, I have other gear that they make and it is fine.
>
> While the new Behringer digital mixer seems to be a lot of mystery meat at
> this time, what little is known about it it positions it as addressing a
> lot of the questions I have about the Presonus. The last Behringer digital
> console was pretty much a functional clone of an 01V96 which put it well
> ahead of the Presonus in my book.

The ddx3216, which I still own and use was considerably easier to config
and operate that any of the yamaha 01 series stuff
George
>
>

[Arny Krueger]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message

> On 1/2/2011 1:37 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:
>
>> Here is a little better picture of it from a few months
>> ago
>
> How unusual to have analog meters on a digital console. I
> like it already.

Compare the picture at

http://www.mio.co.za/article/behringer-readies-new-digital-mixer-2010-11-29

to the one at

http://www.behringer.com/DE/Products/X32.aspx

and notice that they must be two different consoles.

[Arny Krueger]

"George's Pro Sound Co." > wrote in message
rlakestechnologygroup
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> On 1/2/2011 12:13 PM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:
>>>>> >most small mixers, analog or digital do not come
>>>>> with full always on >metering, how would you know
>>>>> what level a aux was sending on a LX7 >or 500B
>>>>> without pressing the afl button,
>>
>>> You may not know how many volts you're sending (you'll
>>> take care of that during setup), but on an analog
>>> console, you can tell relative levels simply by looking
>>> at the position of the knobs.
>>
>> I don't see a lot of difference or if there is a
>> difference any loss between that and how things work on
>> my digital console. The "knobs" may be on a menu that
>> has to be displayed but I usually can select that menu
>> by simply touching the relevant fader.
>
> I tried the touch fader option on my yamahas but found i
> tend to rest my fingers on faders even when not in use
> and was always selecting a channel other than intended

Been there, done that. Making the touch sensitivity work takes a little
light fingered work. Hand size may be part of the equation. My hands and
fingers are unusually small.

> I perfer the select button option, but it is really 6 of
> one and 1/2 dozenof the other according to mpersonal
> preference

Exactly. What works for some does not work for others, and vice-versa. Happy
mixing!

[Arny Krueger]

"George's Pro Sound Co." > wrote in message
rlakestechnologygroup
>>> I now use a Studiomaster powered wedge mixer as its mic
>>> input noise is -127db verses the huge -112dbv of the
>>> behringer. The noise of the Behringer is very
>>> noticeable at pub gigs, let along recording.
>>
>> Given the acoustic noise levels that one sees in real
>> world studios and stages, I will fearlessly suggest that
>> if you can't get a subjectively noise free recording
>> with equipment with -112 dB noise, perhaps you need to
>> rethink your gain staging and/or mic choice and
>> positioning.
>
> I agree, I would also suggest you measure that
> studiomaster as that figure seems awful suspect to me

Normal spec for a Behringer console mic preamp is 120 dB EIN, but I don't
know how that translates into dBV.

[Kevin Aylward[_4_]]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

>Normal spec for a Behringer console mic preamp is 120 dB EIN, but I don't
>know how that translates into dBV.

Different Berhinger models have different performance.

The PMP880 and PMP1280S are bad, spec -112db ein. The SX2442 spec -129db
ein.


Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
www.kevinaylward.co.uk
"Live Long And Prosper \V/"

[Kevin Aylward[_4_]]

"George's Pro Sound Co." wrote in message
rlakestechnologygroup...


>>
>>>> I now use a Studiomaster powered wedge mixer as its mic
>>>> input noise is -127db verses the huge -112dbv of the behringer. The
>>>> noise of the Behringer is very noticeable at pub gigs,
>>>> let along recording.
>>
>> Given the acoustic noise levels that one sees in real world studios and
>> stages, I will fearlessly suggest that if you can't get a subjectively
>> noise free recording with equipment with -112 dB noise, perhaps you need
>> to rethink your gain staging and/or mic choice and positioning.
>>

>I agree, I would also suggest you measure that studiomaster as that figure
>seems awful suspect to me
>George

Not to me it isn't. Studiomaster have always had that sort of noise
performance, ever since I was their chief design engineer in 1982:-)

Its not very difficult to get -127db, getting -132db unweighted @ 200 ohms
is a tad difficult:-)


Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
www.kevinaylward.co.uk
"Live Long And Prosper \V/"

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in message
...
> "George's Pro Sound Co." wrote in message
> rlakestechnologygroup...
>
>
>>>
>>>>> I now use a Studiomaster powered wedge mixer as its mic
>>>>> input noise is -127db verses the huge -112dbv of the behringer. The
>>>>> noise of the Behringer is very noticeable at pub gigs,
>>>>> let along recording.
>>>
>>> Given the acoustic noise levels that one sees in real world studios and
>>> stages, I will fearlessly suggest that if you can't get a subjectively
>>> noise free recording with equipment with -112 dB noise, perhaps you need
>>> to rethink your gain staging and/or mic choice and positioning.
>>>
>
>>I agree, I would also suggest you measure that studiomaster as that figure
>>seems awful suspect to me
>>George
>
> Not to me it isn't. Studiomaster have always had that sort of noise
> performance, ever since I was their chief design engineer in 1982:-)
>
> Its not very difficult to get -127db, getting -132db unweighted @ 200 ohms
> is a tad difficult:-)
>
did not see much studiomaster here in the states and what I did come across
sure was not "up to snuff'
I think the last unit I saw was over 12 years ago and even then it was a
rarity, so a default to your experiance as mine was limited but none too
fondly remembered.

[Arny Krueger]

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in
message

> "Arny Krueger" wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Normal spec for a Behringer console mic preamp is 120 dB
>> EIN, but I don't know how that translates into dBV.

> Different Berhinger models have different performance.

> The PMP880 and PMP1280S are bad, spec -112db ein.

If memory serves those are powered mixers, which are not really comparable
to stand-alone mixing consoles. They usually perform a little worse, if only
because of the big, potentially heavily-loaded power transformer in the box.

> The SX2442 spec -129db ein.

The problem with all of the above is that dBs without a stated reference
level and meausrement bandwidth are meaningless.

Of course, for numbers in the 100+ dB range, the difference between leading
candidate reference levels, either dBu or dBv, don't make that much
difference.

But the actual reference voltage is not given explicitly, and the
measurement bandwidth can only be speculated at.

Usually dBA is about 10 dB better than 20-20K -3 dB weighting. Not that
dBA doesn't make sense, this is all troublesome because we are unsure that
we are comparing apples to apples.

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

It would have been a tough decision to choose which I disliked more
the Kelsey or the studiomaster , now I never owned either, they were what
was on the rental market before I started buying gear
George

[Arny Krueger]

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in
message

> Not to me it isn't. Studiomaster have always had that
> sort of noise performance, ever since I was their chief
> design engineer in 1982:-)


Do you know or know of Graham Stevenson? I believe he has said that he had
some connection with Studiomaster.

[Kevin Aylward[_4_]]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...


> I now use a Studiomaster powered wedge mixer as its mic
> input noise is -127db verses the huge -112dbv of the behringer. The
> noise of the Behringer is very noticeable at pub gigs,
> let along recording.

>Given the acoustic noise levels that one sees in real world studios and
>stages, I will fearlessly suggest that if you can't get a subjectively
>noise free recording with equipment with -112 dB noise, perhaps you need to
>rethink your gain staging and/or mic choice and positioning.

I disagree. -112db ein is a staggering 15db larger than any typical "decent"
mic input stage, and this has been the case for 30 years. Even -127db ein,
when recording, can be very noticeable.

>The dynamic range of live music is usually around 70 dB or worse. To me
>that means that I would have about 50 dB headroom with equipment that
>has -112 dB noise. 20 dB headroom, but sometimes as little as 6 dB headroom
>usually suffices for me.
> It is all about how well I can predict what the talent is going to do.

Its when the band isn't playing that the issue arises.

I can assure you that I did a gig. Just one mic on, sitting there at optimum
gain, drinking my pint when a general punter came up and complained about
the hiss from that Behringer. I was embarrassed, so I bought the
Studiomaster Powerhouse. Its quite nice, has the bass eq down at 60Hz.

Sure, one could pull the faders up and down, or use a mute, and generally
**** about, but that's all agro. I just want the thing to be reasonably
quiet as soon as the band stops playing.

I play in bars a fair bit. I know how to set up audio equipment correctly. I
even have wrote a design tutorial on mic amps
http://www.kevinaylward.co.uk/ee/micampdesign/MicAmpDesign.html. Annoying
background hiss at pubs is always a problem, in my experience.

Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
www.kevinaylward.co.uk
"Live Long And Prosper \V/"

[Kevin Aylward[_4_]]

"George's Pro Sound Co." wrote in message
rlakestechnologygroup...

If you have some suitable instructions for opening up the PMP1280S I
> would welcome your obviously superior knowledge on this matter.
>
> Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
> www.kevinaylward.co.uk
> "Live Long And Prosper \V/"

>Kebin
>you have mail
>George

Yes. Thanks George. I will track it down.

Regards

Kevin Aylward B.Sc.

www.kevinaylward.co.uk
"Live Long And Prosper \V/"

[Kevin Aylward[_4_]]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in
message

>> Not to me it isn't. Studiomaster have always had that
>> sort of noise performance, ever since I was their chief
>> design engineer in 1982:-)


>Do you know or know of Graham Stevenson? I believe he has said that he had
>some connection with Studiomaster.

Yes I know Graham. I joined after he left, then I left, and he rejoined.
However, he did visit the factory whilst I was there. I popped over to see
him not too long ago as he lives only about 20 miles from me. Graham
designed a fair amount of the Studiomaster gear over the years. Graham also
worked at Neve.


Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
www.kevinaylward.co.uk
"Live Long And Prosper \V/"

[Kevin Aylward[_4_]]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in
message

> "Arny Krueger" wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Normal spec for a Behringer console mic preamp is 120 dB
>> EIN, but I don't know how that translates into dBV.

> Different Berhinger models have different performance.

> The PMP880 and PMP1280S are bad, spec -112db ein.

>If memory serves those are powered mixers, which are not really comparable
>to stand-alone mixing consoles.

Exactly.

>They usually perform a little worse, if only because of the big,
>potentially heavily-loaded power transformer in the box.

Input noise, is essentially, determined completely by the thermal and shot
noise of the input transistors in any competent mic front end. However
bad/cheap mic inputs sometimes use resisters in an op-amp configured design.
These generate 1kohms to 2kohms, or thereabouts of thermal noise.


> The SX2442 spec -129db ein.

>The problem with all of the above is that dBs without a stated reference
>level and meausrement bandwidth are meaningless.


db ein is a well recognised and pretty much universal agreed way of specing
mic inputs, and has been for 30+ years.

The input noise of the block is referred to a 0.775V reference, and over a
20Hz to 20Khz bandwidth. This bandwidth is assumed flat, unless the spec
states a weighting such as "A-weighted".

The thermal noise of a resister is sqrt(4kTRB). So a 150 ohm resistor + say,
a nominal 50 ohm of base resistance of the input transistor would generate
round about 0.35uv of noise. Referred to 0.775 it would be ~-127db. Shot
noise of the input transistor might increase this by 1db, or so. To get
better numbers, frequency weighting is used. If someone quotes -132db,
without weighting and a non zero source resistance, they are lying, well not
unless they are at the north pole. "Captain, I cannie change the laws of
physics"

Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
www.kevinaylward.co.uk
"Live Long And Prosper \V/"

[Cyberserf[_2_]]

On Jan 2, 4:31*pm, Mike Rivers > wrote:
> On 1/2/2011 2:16 PM, Kevin Aylward wrote:
>
> > My brother has one of their 24 channel live mixers.
> > Behringer don't understand that in normal use, one would
> > like the main output led metering to actually display the
> > output signals. They don't. You can only get the meters to
> > read things like soloing of a channel etc.
>
> How strange. Maybe it's always been broken. I have a little
> Behringer tabletop sized mixer, a Xenix 1204FX, I think. I
> got it for a review and they told me that if I could use it,
> to keep it, that it wasn't worth the cost of shipping back.
>
> I suspect that your brother's mixer works the same way as
> the one I have. The meters read what you've selected for
> monitoring (headphones/Control Room outputs) except when you
> press a SOLO button, in which case they show the channel
> level. Since normally you'd be monitoring the main mix, when
> you press that button, the meters are reading the main mix
> level.
>
> What may seem a little kooky is that the meters are ahead of
> the main L/R output faders, so what you're seeing is the
> level coming out of the summing bus. This is what you really
> want to watch to be sure you aren't clipping the bus. You
> can hear how loud the PA system is, and presumably you've
> calibrated what comes after the mixer so that when the
> meters hit the pin with the faders all the way up, you're
> still below clipping. With the main faders at their "unity
> gain" position, the meters actually do represent the output
> level. I'm pretty sure that 0 dB on the meters is +4 dBu, or
> at least it's a constant. It's true, you don't see the
> meters go downscale when you fade out the mains, but then if
> you do that, you want to do it by ear, not by eye.
>
> *> I was absolute
>
> > stunned on discovering this. How can anyone get that wrong.
>
> It's just one way of doing it. It's a good way of forcing
> you to set up the system for maximum headroom rather than
> having to keep the meters down in the bottom quarter of the
> scale where they don't tell you anything useful since you
> have too much gain on the power amplifiers.
>
> > I have a berihnger guitar foot pedal, the knob snapped off.
>
> The phantom power LED on my Behringer mixer failed (there's
> still phantom power) but it's a surface mounted LED on the
> main circuit board. I'm not likely to replace it. Stuff breaks.
>
> --
> "Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
> operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
> it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
> of audio." - John Watkinson
>
> http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com- useful and
> interesting audio stuff

My UB1832fx works as you described with a SOLO selection (without a
channel selected) providing Main Bus output metering....the mixer is
sometimes noisy and getting a bit long in the tooth, but it still
works. As for my other Behringer gear...my Autocomp (mdx 1600) is
nowhere as nice as my RNC, but it works as advertised and is quite
versatile (having dual expander, gate, compressor, limiter and
"dynamic enhancer" all on one strip). I also use a BFC-2000 controller
(way cheaper than a Mackie Hui), an AB200 footswitch and a Behringer
active DI20 box...all have suffered my abuse for at least 5 years
now...yet they still work. I know it isn't top of the line gear, but I
do think they have an image problem they do not deserve. Besides, for
my little demo projects (with no hope of recouping a dime), the price
is very right. Looking forward to seeing an X32 live.

Regards, CS

[Arny Krueger]

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in
message
> "Arny Krueger" wrote in message
> ...
>
> "Kevin Aylward" > wrote in
> message
>
>>> Not to me it isn't. Studiomaster have always had that
>>> sort of noise performance, ever since I was their chief
>>> design engineer in 1982:-)

>> Do you know or know of Graham Stevenson? I believe he
>> has said that he had some connection with Studiomaster.

> Yes I know Graham. I joined after he left, then I left,
> and he rejoined. However, he did visit the factory whilst
> I was there. I popped over to see him not too long ago as
> he lives only about 20 miles from me. Graham designed a
> fair amount of the Studiomaster gear over the years.
> Graham also worked at Neve.

FYI Graham has contributed to several of the Usenet Pro audio forums in the
past few years. He is fairly opinionated (not a problem for me, he can be
fun!)) and thus has attracted some favorable and unfavorable opinions. Our
correspondent George might be in the second group. Just so you aren't
surprised by some reactions you might see.

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/3/2011 8:04 AM, Arny Krueger wrote:

> I don't see a lot of difference or if there is a difference any loss between
> that and how things work on my digital console. The "knobs" may be on a
> menu that has to be displayed but I usually can select that menu by simply
> touching the relevant fader.

That usually gives you the indicators and knobs for a single
channel. You have to do something active in order to go from
looking or adjusting one channel and another.

> One key to a happy life on a digital console is
> knowing how to bring up menus

And one problem is that you can't do very much without
bringing up a menu or a display screen. And then it's not
big enough. <g>

Look, you don't have to try to sell me on digital consoles.
I like the idea, I just don't like the implementation of
most of them. At least big ones like the DigiCo and Harrison
have several screens.

> Some people seem to hate layers, but to me layers mean that I never have to
> look at more than 24 faders at a time.

To me, it means that there may be some faders that you won't
see until you go fishing for them. I'm sorry, but I just
can't think from both sides of my brain at once. When I'm
mixing, I'm playing a musicial instrument, not operating a
machine. There are others who work exactly the other way.
They figure the band is doing something wrong if they don't
sound good when all the meters are moving the way they think
they should be and all the EQ knobs are in position
according to the preset.

> Rather than having to thread my way through 448 knobs for aux sends, I only
> have to look at the virtual knobs for one aux channel at a time. Or, I have
> the option at looking at all of the virtual knobs for the aux sends for one
> input channel at a time.

One good case for a digital console is in making monitor
mixes, most (but unfortunately not all) have the ability to
copy settings from one bus to another. That way you can
start off everyone with a workable mix, then modify it to
suit their individual needs. I find that's often quicker
than starting everyone's mix from scratch.

> My digital console has meters on every input and output. Where there is an
> option for what they show, they are usually set to PFL. And that is what I
> get with no pysical meter bridge at all. Why would I want a meter bridge
> interferring with sight lines to the performers?

So I can see them at a glance. To me, not seeing a meter
move when I think it's supposed to be moving is more
important than losing the visibility of a performer's feet.
Wedge monitors cut off more view than a meter bridge.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/3/2011 8:42 AM, Arny Krueger wrote:

> Normal spec for a Behringer console mic preamp is 120 dB EIN, but I don't
> know how that translates into dBV.

Equivalent Input Noise for most everyone else is in the the
range of -127 dBu. EIN is also not a very good way to
express how much noise you hear because it's a derived
number, one that's good to tell a designer how well he's doing.

People who make up spec sheets like to include it, though,
since it's a very small number with "dB" and "noise"
associated with it. It's the rabbit carefully put into the
hat before pulling it out.

EIN is the noise level measured at some chosen gain, with
the gain subtracted. For example, if you measured -65 dBu of
noise coming out of a preamp with 55 dB of gain, EIN would
be -120 dBu. If they tell you the gain at which the EIN is
measured, you can calculate the noise output.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/3/2011 9:36 AM, Kevin Aylward wrote:

> Its not very difficult to get -127db, getting -132db
> unweighted @ 200 ohms is a tad difficult:-)

If you're talking about EIN, it's darn near impossible
unless the temperature is close to absolute zero. Me, I
don't mix if it's any colder than 60 degrees F. I find it
hard to mix with gloves on.



--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/3/2011 8:23 AM, Arny Krueger wrote:

> I've been pretty vocal with my questions about the PreSonus. Frankly, I
> don't see it as being a very powerful tool. I don't see it as exploiting
> many of the worthwhile benefits of being digital.

Aside from a few dumb things about it, I think that they
have a good place in the market. It works more like an
analog console most of the time than many other small
digital consoles. That's a plus for someone who is
graduating from a small analog mixer. While you can still
get a whole picture only one channel at a time, the knobs
and indicators for every parameter are on the work surface.
It's like looking at a channel strip sideways rather than
looking at a too-small LCD screen. Also, you can (if the
planets and stars are in correct alignment) connect it to a
computer with a single Firewire cable and bring home what
went into every mic so you can do a recording mix at home.
And if you don't want ot mix in the box, you can feed it
back through the console and mix on the console.

One problem with it is that there seem to be an awful lot of
people for whom this is their first mixer at all, and it's a
little difficult ot grasp the concepts of gain structure and
signal flow when you haven't had the analog experience.




--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Richard Kuschel]

On Jan 3, 7:36*am, "Kevin Aylward" >
wrote:
> "George's Pro Sound Co." *wrote in messagenews:FIWdnTYmUfiIU7zQnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@poste d.fingerlakestechnologygroup...
>
>
>
> >>>> I now use a Studiomaster powered wedge mixer as its mic
> >>>> input noise *is -127db verses the huge -112dbv of the behringer. The
> >>>> noise of the Behringer is very noticeable at pub gigs,
> >>>> let along recording.
>
> >> Given the acoustic noise levels that one sees in real world studios and
> >> stages, I will fearlessly suggest that if you can't get a subjectively
> >> noise free recording with equipment with -112 dB noise, perhaps you need
> >> to rethink your gain staging and/or mic choice and positioning.
>
> >I agree, I would also suggest you measure that studiomaster as that figure
> >seems awful suspect to me
> >George
>
> Not to me it isn't. Studiomaster have always had that sort of noise
> performance, ever since I was their chief design engineer in 1982:-)
>
> Its not very difficult to get -127db, getting -132db unweighted @ 200 ohms
> is a tad difficult:-)
>
> Kevin Aylward B.Sc.www.kevinaylward.co.uk
> "Live Long And Prosper \V/"

I'm still using an antique Studiomaster 8 into 4 mixer which I like a
lot. The sound is good and the eq is exceptional. I carry it to
recording gigs that don't require more than 8 channels

It has always had one problem. when a set of headphones is plugged
into it, there is bleed across all of the channels. Any idea what
might be causing this?

I used other permutations of this mixer which did not work so well.
There was a version that had two 80 watt amplifiers built into it and
it was really noisy, and one with a 4 track cassette recorder built
into it and it did not work well either. I can't remember the exact
problem on that.

[Dec [Cluskey]]

> Bu I would guess, unserviceable if its like a lot of their other kit. It
> goes wrong, and you have to throw it away.
>
> Regards
>
> Kevin Aylward B.Sc.


Kevin

A little naughty to say that ....

I have been a long time advocate of "buy with your ears, not your
eyes" ... in other words, don't suffer from 'branditis' ... a disease
which a lot of novice sound engineers and home studio people suffer
from.

Behringer offer a complete 'return if not happy' service ... which has
worked brilliantly for me.

I feel it is worth remembering that their 'Composer' series is
accepted as studio and 'live' Industry standard. I have used, and
currently use, many of their products and have been thoroughy
happy ... always bought through BEM [Brixton Music Exchange]. Frank
looks after me rather well.

Dec [Cluskey]

[Kevin Aylward[_4_]]

"Richard Kuschel" wrote in message
...

On Jan 3, 7:36 am, "Kevin Aylward" >>
wrote:
>> "George's Pro Sound Co." wrote in
>> messagenews:FIWdnTYmUfiIU7zQnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@poste d.fingerlakestechnologygroup...
>>
>>
>>
>> >>>>>>>> I now use a Studiomaster powered wedge mixer as its mic
>> >>>>>>>> input noise is -127db verses the huge -112dbv of the behringer.
>> >>>>>>>> The
>> >>>>>>>> noise of the Behringer is very noticeable at pub gigs,
>> >>>>>>>> let along recording.
>>
>> >>>> Given the acoustic noise levels that one sees in real world studios
>> >>>> and
>> >>>> stages, I will fearlessly suggest that if you can't get a
>> >>>> subjectively
>> >>>> noise free recording with equipment with -112 dB noise, perhaps you
>> >>>> need
>> >>>> to rethink your gain staging and/or mic choice and positioning.
>>
>> >>I agree, I would also suggest you measure that studiomaster as that
>> >>figure
>> >>seems awful suspect to me
>> >>George
>>
>> Not to me it isn't. Studiomaster have always had that sort of noise
>> performance, ever since I was their chief design engineer in 1982:-)
>>
>> Its not very difficult to get -127db, getting -132db unweighted @ 200
>> ohms
>> is a tad difficult:-)
>>
>> Kevin Aylward B.Sc.www.kevinaylward.co.uk
>> "Live Long And Prosper \V/"

>I'm still using an antique Studiomaster 8 into 4 mixer which I like a
>lot. The sound is good and the eq is exceptional.

Take any mixer with a bass turnover set to 100Hz. Play some music through
and twiddle the knob.
Take a mixer with a bass turnover set to 50Hz. Play some music through and
twiddle the knob.

For me its a no contest. For me, 100Hz bass boost just sounds bad. At 50 Hz,
for me, its good and meaty

Studiomaster usually had tuneable bass, or fixed bass at 50-60Hz.

>I carry it to
>recording gigs that don't require more than 8 channels

>It has always had one problem. when a set of headphones is plugged
>into it, there is bleed across all of the channels. Any idea what
>might be causing this?

Those mixers were done just before I arrived. I could check with Graham if
there is anything known.

Has it always behaved that way?

One fundamental problem on a lot of the Studiomaster kit is the use of IDC
connecters. i.e. wire pushed onto connecter metal that breaks the wire when
inserted. i.e bad contacts over time.

In principle, if a highish resistance got developed in an earth/ground lead,
it could get a drop on it due to current from the headphone amp ground. This
might well cause crosstalk like this.

>I used other permutations of this mixer which did not work so well.
>There was a version that had two 80 watt amplifiers built into it and
>it was really noisy, and one with a 4 track cassette recorder built
>into it and it did not work well either. I can't remember the exact
>problem on that.

Again, just before my time. I personally thought the the studio 4 recorder
was quite good for its day. Noisy is also a complaint not often made for the
studiomasters mixers though. It may be you got a bad one:

To get low noise on the mic input stage, 2n4003 transisters were used. These
are switching transistors, with no spec on their 1/f (low frequency noise).
However, they had very low 12 ohms base spreading resistance. This made them
very low noise in general, e.g. compared to something like a bc109 with 400
ohms base resistance. So, every individual transistor was tested in a rig
and all the noisy ones put aside to be used where noise did not matter. Its
possible that someone was sloppy, or the transistors went bad in use.

Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
www.kevinaylward.co.uk
"Live Long And Prosper \V/"

[axolotl]

On 1/3/2011 9:44 AM, George's Pro Sound Co. wrote:

> did not see much studiomaster here in the states and what I did come across
> sure was not "up to snuff'
> I think the last unit I saw was over 12 years ago and even then it was a
> rarity, so a default to your experiance as mine was limited but none too
> fondly remembered.

George,

I have a Studiomaster 8 into 4 made in 1985. For its equipment class its
a pretty good little box, IMO better than the B* and M* products. The
front end is a differential pair (2N4403?) feeding a TL072- a fairly
common topology in consoles at that time. Well thought out system,
excepting that the channels are labeled backward. Mechanically OK; the
pots tend to freeze due to the gook used to damp the action hardening
due to old age.
I still keep my eye open for the 32 input version on Ebay. These
consoles generally command "haul it away" prices.

If audio performance is the evaluation metric, this era of console (IMO)
still holds its own. Certainly a good bang for the buck. With cheap
digitals hitting the market, sure to get better.

Kevin Gallimore

[Richard Webb[_3_]]

Mike Rivers writes:
> Look, you don't have to try to sell me on digital consoles. I like
> the idea, I just don't like the implementation of
> most of them. At least big ones like the DigiCo and Harrison have
> several screens.

Indeed, snapshot automation is quite handy I've found from
the 01v generation which I've used a few times. I just
don't like the implementation.

> To me, it means that there may be some faders that you won't see
> until you go fishing for them. I'm sorry, but I just
> can't think from both sides of my brain at once. When I'm
> mixing, I'm playing a musicial instrument, not operating a
> machine. There are others who work exactly the other way.
> They figure the band is doing something wrong if they don't sound
> good when all the meters are moving the way they think they should
> be and all the EQ knobs are in position
> according to the preset.

INdeed, I'm much the same way. WEre I doing two different
acts, and each needs, for example 16 channels, I could
handle the first act on 1-16, second on 17-32. SEt 'em,
forget 'em, when we change to act 2 I switch to the bank
that's 17-32.
I use some radio equipment that acts in that way, but I find my preferred radio equipment that uses menus with limited
controls are those which don't make me crawl around in menus and submenus to get to things i want right now on the fly
while operating the unit. I know part of this is the
blindness, I have to always remember where I'm at, how many
button presses of the select button get me to where I want
to be, how to exit and get back to a known state so that I
can access those menus later with the appliances. WHen you
can glance at the screen and see what menu you're in it's
easier to get used to I'm sure. There are times I wish my
old analog iron in the truck had snapshot automation and
recall, but other than that I'm quite happy with it.


<snip again>

> So I can see them at a glance. To me, not seeing a meter
> move when I think it's supposed to be moving is more
> important than losing the visibility of a performer's feet. Wedge
> monitors cut off more view than a meter bridge.

Indeed, even the old blind man has enough site to see that
the meter is moving when it's supposed to and I can isolate
that movement to that meter with my eyes, harder for me to
do with led and lcd displays.

Regards,
Richard
.... Remote audio in the southland: See www.gatasound.com
--
| Remove .my.foot for email
| via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet<->Internet Gateway Site
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

[Dec [Cluskey]]

On Jan 2, 8:32*pm, "George's Pro Sound Co." > wrote:

> but if emotion and ego are what drives ones buying decisions then don't fret
> over selling a desk that cost 100,000$ selling for 4K in perfect condition
> some get their satisfation with name badges, I get mine with bank deposits
> george

George....

Well said ....

I know lots of them ... even guys I employ in our crews ....

I call it suffering from 'branditis'.

My concert rig changed over to the rack mounted 24 channel Behringer
Xenyx x2442usb FXPro some 6 years ago ... the monster Soundcraft we
were using just got too many complaints from Festival FOH managers and
Hotel Maitre Di's .... Prima Donnas in every sense ... do not like
their pretty function set-up disturbed ... although our crew were in
early and set up properly at rear of venue.

Now with the small footprint Behringer, with all the Compressors, FX
etc. rack mounted underneath, we have the perfect FOH position.
However, we have to put up with other sound engineers and artists
smirking ....

The No Quibble exchange is excellent ... we always have two in stock
and the change over, should one fail, is so easy as all the inserts
and outputs are exactly the same and the change over takes 15 minutes.

Strange that the units all fail with the same fault .... channel
failure which starts from the gain and can be any part of the channel
right through to the fader ... but we never repair, just replace. the
problem always shows up after get in and on first firing up. So, our
guy just lives without that channel and replaces next day.

It is always fun when we play a huge Festival or venue [National
Concert Hall in Dublin a few weeks ago] and our sound jockey wheels
the Behringer into the sound position and asks for a left right feed
[organised and requested well in advance] .... the look on the faces
of the in-house sound guys is a picture ... we just sling in our
custon set up monitors .... and when they hear the resulting
sound????? They cannot understand why we won't use the provided
Midas etc. desks .... and who has the best sound? Always?

Only complaint we have is that the channel mutes still leave the
monitors on ... a design fault I wish they would fix.

I recommend them to everyone who has a 24 channel requirement.

At the proposed $2500 I doubt if many will treat their X32 FOH desk in
the 'replace when bust' category.

Dec [Cluskey]

[Trevor]

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in message
...
> Its a Eurodesk SL2442FX-Pro.

In that case it definitely does output metering, at least mine does.
Now the channel mutes that don't mute their conection to the aux busses are
another matter :-(

Trevor.

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/4/2011 3:23 PM, Trevor wrote:

> Now the channel mutes that don't mute their conection to the aux busses are
> another matter :-(

Behringer isn't likely to make that change for you, but you
could probably modify it if you cared enough. But it's tough
for a manufacturer. For live work, it's clearly the way to
go, but there are some other applications where you want to
keep the auxiliary sends live when muting the channel to the
main outputs. The only way to please everyone is to put
internal jumpers or switches in there to select one mode or
the other. But then someone who doesn't care or doesn't know
to care would complain that the mixer is more expensive than
its nearest competitor.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 12/31/2010 11:54 AM, Sean Conolly wrote:
>
>> Don't see it on their site yet, do you have a link?
>
> You need to know the secret URL:
> http://www.behringer.com/EN/Products/X32.aspx
>
> The official release is at the NAMM show in a couple of weeks. Not much
> more info than what Arny posted. Interesting part is that it's not yet
> approved for sale in the US and Canada pending FCC certification.
>
and as such do not be surprised should the unit on display simply be a mock
up, not a functioning unit
George

[Trevor]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/4/2011 3:23 PM, Trevor wrote:
>> Now the channel mutes that don't mute their conection to the aux busses
>> are
>> another matter :-(
>
> Behringer isn't likely to make that change for you, but you could probably
> modify it if you cared enough.

One look at how it's built is enough to disuade me of attempting that
unfortunately.

>But it's tough for a manufacturer. For live work, it's clearly the way to
>go, but there are some other applications where you want to keep the
>auxiliary sends live when muting the channel to the main outputs. The only
>way to please everyone is to put internal jumpers or switches in there to
>select one mode or the other.

Obviously a switch is what's required, but a jumper would be better than
nothing.

>But then someone who doesn't care or doesn't know to care would complain
>that the mixer is more expensive than its nearest competitor.

And that is EXACTLY the problem with all cheap mixers (and many not so cheap
ones), they have to compromise somewhere to meet the price point. I have no
problem with Behringer, and have used Soundcraft, Midas, Allen & Heath,
Yamaha, Mackie etc. Each had their pro's and cons AFAIC.

Trevor.

[Scott Dorsey]

Mike Rivers > wrote:
>On 1/4/2011 3:23 PM, Trevor wrote:
>
>> Now the channel mutes that don't mute their conection to the aux busses are
>> another matter :-(
>
>Behringer isn't likely to make that change for you, but you
>could probably modify it if you cared enough. But it's tough
>for a manufacturer. For live work, it's clearly the way to
>go, but there are some other applications where you want to
>keep the auxiliary sends live when muting the channel to the
>main outputs. The only way to please everyone is to put
>internal jumpers or switches in there to select one mode or
>the other. But then someone who doesn't care or doesn't know
>to care would complain that the mixer is more expensive than
>its nearest competitor.

The thing about the digital world is that making changes like this
require relatively simple software alterations. Instead of actually
adjusting internal jumpers or switches, you download a configuration
file off a host computer.

It adds some programming expense but no per-unit cost. So I'd actually
send Behringer an SPR on this one and see if they might be willing to
make it available as an option.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Rivers > wrote:
>>On 1/4/2011 3:23 PM, Trevor wrote:
>>
>>> Now the channel mutes that don't mute their conection to the aux busses
>>> are
>>> another matter :-(
>>
>>Behringer isn't likely to make that change for you, but you
>>could probably modify it if you cared enough. But it's tough
>>for a manufacturer. For live work, it's clearly the way to
>>go, but there are some other applications where you want to
>>keep the auxiliary sends live when muting the channel to the
>>main outputs. The only way to please everyone is to put
>>internal jumpers or switches in there to select one mode or
>>the other. But then someone who doesn't care or doesn't know
>>to care would complain that the mixer is more expensive than
>>its nearest competitor.
>
> The thing about the digital world is that making changes like this
> require relatively simple software alterations. Instead of actually
> adjusting internal jumpers or switches, you download a configuration
> file off a host computer.
>
> It adds some programming expense but no per-unit cost. So I'd actually
> send Behringer an SPR on this one and see if they might be willing to
> make it available as an option.
> --scott
> --
Scott it will be part of the digitalmixer that the thread tiltle is about,
but this poster was speakeing of one of the existing xenex analog desks
that have been out a few years , signal flow of not muting monitors is
pretty typical on these budget desks
George

[Mike Rivers]

On 1/4/2011 5:55 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> The thing about the digital world is that making changes like this
> require relatively simple software alterations. Instead of actually
> adjusting internal jumpers or switches, you download a configuration
> file off a host computer.

The trouble is that they don't do it. I've been tapping my
foot, waiting for PreSonus to make the Solo function
interrupt what you're monitoring instead of adding to it
ever since the StudioLive mixer was released. They changed
that on the 24-channel version, but in a dozen or so
firmware updates to the original 16 channel version, that
change hasn't been there.

I complained about my 1993 Lexus ES300 that that he climate
control system wouldn't stick in "outside air" mode but
would come on in "recirculate" mode when it thought it was
too hot outside. My 2003 is the same way.

> It adds some programming expense but no per-unit cost. So I'd actually
> send Behringer an SPR on this one and see if they might be willing to
> make it available as an option.

The console in question is analog.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Bill Graham]

Mike Rivers wrote:
> On 1/4/2011 5:55 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
>> The thing about the digital world is that making changes like this
>> require relatively simple software alterations. Instead of actually
>> adjusting internal jumpers or switches, you download a configuration
>> file off a host computer.
>
> The trouble is that they don't do it. I've been tapping my
> foot, waiting for PreSonus to make the Solo function
> interrupt what you're monitoring instead of adding to it
> ever since the StudioLive mixer was released. They changed
> that on the 24-channel version, but in a dozen or so
> firmware updates to the original 16 channel version, that
> change hasn't been there.
>
> I complained about my 1993 Lexus ES300 that that he climate
> control system wouldn't stick in "outside air" mode but
> would come on in "recirculate" mode when it thought it was
> too hot outside. My 2003 is the same way.
>
>> It adds some programming expense but no per-unit cost. So I'd
>> actually send Behringer an SPR on this one and see if they might be
>> willing to make it available as an option.
>
> The console in question is analog.

I have made many such suggestions to manufacturers during my life. None of
them were taken. I have come to the conclusion that to adopt a user's
suggestion would be putting oneself in jepordy of being sued for some
percentage of the profits, so the manufacturers legal department advises
them to not adapt the suggestion. IOW, by simply sending them the
suggestion, you are guaranteeing that they will not change the design of
their equipment.

[Dec [Cluskey]]

On Jan 4, 9:19*pm, "Trevor" > wrote:
> And that is EXACTLY the problem with all cheap mixers (and many not so cheap
> ones), they have to compromise somewhere to meet the price point. I have no
> problem with Behringer, and have used Soundcraft, Midas, Allen & Heath,
> Yamaha, Mackie etc. Each had their pro's and cons AFAIC.
>
> Trevor.

Trevor

When we first started using a Behringer Xen 24 channel our sound
jockey really had a hissy fit and proclaimed that in our position we
should be using the Allen and Heath comparable unit .... far better
built.

We were almost convinced until shortly after a support band was using
the Allen and Heath version ...

I got my brother to join me in a chat with that sound guy.... "how do
you find the Allen and Heath?" .... "Don't go anywhere near them ....
bin' back to the shop six times, still not right".

Case proven?

In my opinion it is the compactness that creates the lack of complete
reliability, not the price. Something the X32 should not suffer from.

Dec [Cluskey]

[Scott Dorsey]

Bill Graham > wrote:
>
>I have made many such suggestions to manufacturers during my life. None of
>them were taken. I have come to the conclusion that to adopt a user's
>suggestion would be putting oneself in jepordy of being sued for some
>percentage of the profits, so the manufacturers legal department advises
>them to not adapt the suggestion. IOW, by simply sending them the
>suggestion, you are guaranteeing that they will not change the design of
>their equipment.

And that, in short, is the difference between Behringer and the pro audio
world.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Bill Graham > wrote:
>>
>>I have made many such suggestions to manufacturers during my life. None of
>>them were taken. I have come to the conclusion that to adopt a user's
>>suggestion would be putting oneself in jepordy of being sued for some
>>percentage of the profits, so the manufacturers legal department advises
>>them to not adapt the suggestion. IOW, by simply sending them the
>>suggestion, you are guaranteeing that they will not change the design of
>>their equipment.
>
> And that, in short, is the difference between Behringer and the pro audio
> world.

or establish a friendly relationship with the manufacturers key personel and
then they will solicit your input. this has happened with me
george

[Scott Dorsey]

In article stechnologygroup>,
George's Pro Sound Co. > wrote:
>
>"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
>> Bill Graham > wrote:
>>>
>>>I have made many such suggestions to manufacturers during my life. None of
>>>them were taken. I have come to the conclusion that to adopt a user's
>>>suggestion would be putting oneself in jepordy of being sued for some
>>>percentage of the profits, so the manufacturers legal department advises
>>>them to not adapt the suggestion. IOW, by simply sending them the
>>>suggestion, you are guaranteeing that they will not change the design of
>>>their equipment.
>>
>> And that, in short, is the difference between Behringer and the pro audio
>> world.
>
>or establish a friendly relationship with the manufacturers key personel and
>then they will solicit your input. this has happened with me

Sadly, a lot of the MI-grade companies (and Behringer is actually an exception)
just buy whatever the factories in China want to make and they resell them in
the US... because the factory makes millions of things and the US importer only
buys thousands or tens of thousands, it's not even possible for the vendor to
really have much say in the products they are themselves selling.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Gareth Magennis]

"Kevin Aylward" > wrote in message
...
> "George's Pro Sound Co." wrote in message
> rlakestechnologygroup...
>
>>afaik bent knob shafts signal serious abuse and if you can't figure out
>>how to open a powered mixer, then you have no business inside of it
>
> Why would that be?
>
> I am professional analogue design engineer, and have been so for 30 years.
> I am not a mechanical tech, nor am I in the general business of repairing
> audio equipment for employment. Sure, whilst at university I did have a
> fair bit of on the side repair work for a music shop, a £20 repair was a
> good percentage increase on my £45 weekly student grant money, but I no
> even longer build what I design. Its a "would you expect an architect to
> lay bricks"? Despite this, I have opened and repaired more bits of kit
> that probably most in this NG.
>
> So, non expertise in opening boxes, stuffed in china, that are not
> designed for servicing, is hardly a good reason to avoid throwing money
> away by not trying. If you have some suitable instructions for opening up
> the PMP1280S I would welcome your obviously superior knowledge on this
> matter.
>
> Kevin Aylward B.Sc.
> www.kevinaylward.co.uk
> "Live Long And Prosper \V/"



Kevin,
hope you don't mind me saying, but your posting style is uncannily similar
to that of Graham Stevenson. Blimey.



Gareth.

[Arny Krueger]

"Gareth Magennis" > wrote in
message

> hope you don't mind me saying, but your posting style is
> uncannily similar to that of Graham Stevenson. Blimey.

Asked and answered last week. They were both senior engineers for the same
company in a similar time frame.

[Gareth Magennis]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Gareth Magennis" > wrote in
> message
>
>> hope you don't mind me saying, but your posting style is
>> uncannily similar to that of Graham Stevenson. Blimey.
>
> Asked and answered last week. They were both senior engineers for the same
> company in a similar time frame.
>

Yes, I know. So how come they both sound the same?

[Arny Krueger]

"Gareth Magennis" > wrote in
message
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Gareth Magennis" > wrote in
>> message
>>
>>> hope you don't mind me saying, but your posting style is
>>> uncannily similar to that of Graham Stevenson. Blimey.
>>
>> Asked and answered last week. They were both senior
>> engineers for the same company in a similar time frame.
>>
>
> Yes, I know. So how come they both sound the same?

I've been interacting with them for a number of years. I agree that they
sound very similar at times, but I can separate them pretty easily. Kevin is
more theoretical, and Graham is more practical. Graham doesn't exactly
suffer fools, but Kevin has a shorter fuse.

[Gareth Magennis]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Gareth Magennis" > wrote in
> message
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Gareth Magennis" > wrote in
>>> message
>>>
>>>> hope you don't mind me saying, but your posting style is
>>>> uncannily similar to that of Graham Stevenson. Blimey.
>>>
>>> Asked and answered last week. They were both senior
>>> engineers for the same company in a similar time frame.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I know. So how come they both sound the same?
>
> I've been interacting with them for a number of years. I agree that they
> sound very similar at times, but I can separate them pretty easily. Kevin
> is more theoretical, and Graham is more practical. Graham doesn't exactly
> suffer fools, but Kevin has a shorter fuse.
>


Hmm, this is starting to look like some kind of Oliver Sack's precis. I
wish you luck.

Gareth.

[Trevor]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Bill Graham > wrote:
>>
>>I have made many such suggestions to manufacturers during my life. None of
>>them were taken. I have come to the conclusion that to adopt a user's
>>suggestion would be putting oneself in jepordy of being sued for some
>>percentage of the profits, so the manufacturers legal department advises
>>them to not adapt the suggestion. IOW, by simply sending them the
>>suggestion, you are guaranteeing that they will not change the design of
>>their equipment.
>
> And that, in short, is the difference between Behringer and the pro audio
> world.

Nope, Behrenger aren't the only ones who do it. And many of the smaller
companies have even less inclination to change anything that isn't high
priority on their list since they have less staff and money to devote to it.

Trevor.

[Trevor]

"George's Pro Sound Co." > wrote in message
rlakestechnologygroup...
> or establish a friendly relationship with the manufacturers key personel
> and then they will solicit your input. this has happened with me

Yep, that is usually the only way to get listened to. I do think if enough
people bombard them with the same complaint or suggestion, most companies
might at least take a look. Unfortunately most of us think "how stupid",
"bad design" etc. but don't actually complain to the manufacturer. And when
we do I wonder how much gets passed to the right people.

Trevor.

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Trevor" > wrote in message
u...
>
> "Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Bill Graham > wrote:
>>>
>>>I have made many such suggestions to manufacturers during my life. None
>>>of
>>>them were taken. I have come to the conclusion that to adopt a user's
>>>suggestion would be putting oneself in jepordy of being sued for some
>>>percentage of the profits, so the manufacturers legal department advises
>>>them to not adapt the suggestion. IOW, by simply sending them the
>>>suggestion, you are guaranteeing that they will not change the design of
>>>their equipment.
>>
>> And that, in short, is the difference between Behringer and the pro audio
>> world.
>
> Nope, Behrenger aren't the only ones who do it. And many of the smaller
> companies have even less inclination to change anything that isn't high
> priority on their list since they have less staff and money to devote to
> it.
>
> Trevor.
>
Behringer activly solicits end user input before final production units are
put in the pipe line

[Scott Dorsey]

Trevor > wrote:
>"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
>> Bill Graham > wrote:
>>>
>>>I have made many such suggestions to manufacturers during my life. None of
>>>them were taken. I have come to the conclusion that to adopt a user's
>>>suggestion would be putting oneself in jepordy of being sued for some
>>>percentage of the profits, so the manufacturers legal department advises
>>>them to not adapt the suggestion. IOW, by simply sending them the
>>>suggestion, you are guaranteeing that they will not change the design of
>>>their equipment.
>>
>> And that, in short, is the difference between Behringer and the pro audio
>> world.
>
>Nope, Behrenger aren't the only ones who do it. And many of the smaller
>companies have even less inclination to change anything that isn't high
>priority on their list since they have less staff and money to devote to it.

No, they certainly aren't the only ones who do it, but it's typical of the
MI store folks.

Call up Great River or Manley, tell them you want their electronics with
some changes or in a funny form factor box, they'll quote you. They might
quote you a lot more than you want to pay, but they'll do it because that is
where much of their market is.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[George's Pro Sound Co.]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Trevor > wrote:
>>"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
>>> Bill Graham > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>I have made many such suggestions to manufacturers during my life. None
>>>>of
>>>>them were taken. I have come to the conclusion that to adopt a user's
>>>>suggestion would be putting oneself in jepordy of being sued for some
>>>>percentage of the profits, so the manufacturers legal department advises
>>>>them to not adapt the suggestion. IOW, by simply sending them the
>>>>suggestion, you are guaranteeing that they will not change the design of
>>>>their equipment.
>>>
>>> And that, in short, is the difference between Behringer and the pro
>>> audio
>>> world.
>>
>>Nope, Behrenger aren't the only ones who do it. And many of the smaller
>>companies have even less inclination to change anything that isn't high
>>priority on their list since they have less staff and money to devote to
>>it.
>
> No, they certainly aren't the only ones who do it, but it's typical of the
> MI store folks.
>
> Call up Great River or Manley, tell them you want their electronics with
> some changes or in a funny form factor box, they'll quote you. They might
> quote you a lot more than you want to pay, but they'll do it because that
> is
> where much of their market is.
> --scott
>
long before Omnidrives and Driveracks a friend had ashley custom build his
design of a parametric crossover
stereo fully adjustable band pass filters
5 filters per channel
george

[Trevor]

"Dec [Cluskey]" > wrote in message
...
>When we first started using a Behringer Xen 24 channel our sound
jockey really had a hissy fit and proclaimed that in our position we
should be using the Allen and Heath comparable unit .... far better
built.
>We were almost convinced until shortly after a support band was using
the Allen and Heath version ...
I got my brother to join me in a chat with that sound guy.... "how do
you find the Allen and Heath?" .... "Don't go anywhere near them ....
bin' back to the shop six times, still not right".
>Case proven?

Pretty bad service department anyway it seems.


>In my opinion it is the compactness that creates the lack of complete
>reliability, not the price. Something the X32 should not suffer from.

Well there's no such thing as "complete reliability" at any price! I do not
find the Behrengers to be any less reliable than others in their class
(usually the reverse) However they are certainly not as rugged as some
higher priced equipment, and things like the faders will certainly not last
as long in a less than pristine environment. And repairs are usually
uneconomic, but if buying a new cheap mixer is cheaper than what it costs to
repair a more expensively built one, I'd say that's not a big issue for me
either. How the X32 will stack up I have no idea though. I bet it will
probably provide some real bang for your buck regardless.

Trevor.

[Bill Graham]

Trevor wrote:
> "George's Pro Sound Co." > wrote in message
> rlakestechnologygroup...
>> or establish a friendly relationship with the manufacturers key
>> personel and then they will solicit your input. this has happened
>> with me
>
> Yep, that is usually the only way to get listened to. I do think if
> enough people bombard them with the same complaint or suggestion,
> most companies might at least take a look. Unfortunately most of us
> think "how stupid", "bad design" etc. but don't actually complain to
> the manufacturer. And when we do I wonder how much gets passed to the
> right people.
> Trevor.

Yes, but you'd think that when you change a design to make it better, and
then send the schematic to the manufacturer together with the information as
to why it is better, that they would at least acknowledge your letter. I
have won cases in court where the design of the equipment causes it to catch
on fire and destroy a building, so its not like I don't know something about
poorly designed equipment....Especially power supplies. - I was a specialist
in those.

[PStamler]

On Jan 7, 8:50*pm, "Bill Graham" > wrote:
> Trevor wrote:
> > "George's Pro Sound Co." > wrote in message
> rlakestechnologygroup....
> >> or establish a friendly relationship with the manufacturers key
> >> personel and then they will solicit your input. this has happened
> >> with me
>
> > Yep, that is usually the only way to get listened to. I do think if
> > enough people bombard them with the same complaint or suggestion,
> > most companies might at least take a look. Unfortunately most of us
> > think "how stupid", "bad design" etc. but don't actually complain to
> > the manufacturer. And when we do I wonder how much gets passed to the
> > right people.
> > Trevor.
>
> Yes, but you'd think that when you change a design to make it better, and
> then send the schematic to the manufacturer together with the information as
> to why it is better, that they would at least acknowledge your letter. I
> have won cases in court where the design of the equipment causes it to catch
> on fire and destroy a building, so its not like I don't know something about
> poorly designed equipment....Especially power supplies. - I was a specialist
> in those.

Really? I thought you worked on broken effects pedals.

Peace,
Paul

[Bill Graham]

PStamler wrote:
> On Jan 7, 8:50 pm, "Bill Graham" > wrote:
>> Trevor wrote:
>>> "George's Pro Sound Co." > wrote in message
>>> rlakestechnologygroup...
>>>> or establish a friendly relationship with the manufacturers key
>>>> personel and then they will solicit your input. this has happened
>>>> with me
>>
>>> Yep, that is usually the only way to get listened to. I do think if
>>> enough people bombard them with the same complaint or suggestion,
>>> most companies might at least take a look. Unfortunately most of us
>>> think "how stupid", "bad design" etc. but don't actually complain to
>>> the manufacturer. And when we do I wonder how much gets passed to
>>> the right people.
>>> Trevor.
>>
>> Yes, but you'd think that when you change a design to make it
>> better, and then send the schematic to the manufacturer together
>> with the information as to why it is better, that they would at
>> least acknowledge your letter. I have won cases in court where the
>> design of the equipment causes it to catch on fire and destroy a
>> building, so its not like I don't know something about poorly
>> designed equipment....Especially power supplies. - I was a
>> specialist in those.
>
> Really? I thought you worked on broken effects pedals.
>
> Peace,
> Paul

Yeah, that too. I have had a long and varied life, sonny. One of these days,
after your ear wetness drys out a bit, you may be able to say the same
thing. Of course, since you are unable to learn from my mistakes, you will
have to make your own.

[hank alrich]

PStamler > wrote:

> On Jan 7, 8:50 pm, "Bill Graham" > wrote:
> > Trevor wrote:
> > > "George's Pro Sound Co." > wrote in message
> > rlakestechnologygroup...
> > >> or establish a friendly relationship with the manufacturers key
> > >> personel and then they will solicit your input. this has happened
> > >> with me
> >
> > > Yep, that is usually the only way to get listened to. I do think if
> > > enough people bombard them with the same complaint or suggestion,
> > > most companies might at least take a look. Unfortunately most of us
> > > think "how stupid", "bad design" etc. but don't actually complain to
> > > the manufacturer. And when we do I wonder how much gets passed to the
> > > right people.
> > > Trevor.
> >
> > Yes, but you'd think that when you change a design to make it better, and
> > then send the schematic to the manufacturer together with the information as
> > to why it is better, that they would at least acknowledge your letter. I
> > have won cases in court where the design of the equipment causes it to catch
> > on fire and destroy a building, so its not like I don't know something about
> > poorly designed equipment....Especially power supplies. - I was a specialist
> > in those.
>
> Really? I thought you worked on broken effects pedals.
>
> Peace,
> Paul

I've seen some of those with accelerator pedals that I guess make the
sound particles go faster.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[Trevor]

"Bill Graham" > wrote in message
...
> Trevor wrote:
>> Yep, that is usually the only way to get listened to. I do think if
>> enough people bombard them with the same complaint or suggestion,
>> most companies might at least take a look. Unfortunately most of us
>> think "how stupid", "bad design" etc. but don't actually complain to
>> the manufacturer. And when we do I wonder how much gets passed to the
>> right people.

> Yes, but you'd think that when you change a design to make it better, and
> then send the schematic to the manufacturer together with the information
> as to why it is better, that they would at least acknowledge your letter.

You'd hope, but unfortunately as you found, in vain with some manufacturers
:-(

> I have won cases in court where the design of the equipment causes it to
> catch on fire and destroy a building,

I'm willing to bet they take more notice of you in those cases! :-)

Trevor.

[Sean Conolly]

"George's Pro Sound Co." > wrote in message
rlakestechnologygroup...
>
> "Trevor" > wrote in message
> u...
>>
>> "Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Bill Graham > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>I have made many such suggestions to manufacturers during my life. None
>>>>of
>>>>them were taken. I have come to the conclusion that to adopt a user's
>>>>suggestion would be putting oneself in jepordy of being sued for some
>>>>percentage of the profits, so the manufacturers legal department advises
>>>>them to not adapt the suggestion. IOW, by simply sending them the
>>>>suggestion, you are guaranteeing that they will not change the design of
>>>>their equipment.
>>>
>>> And that, in short, is the difference between Behringer and the pro
>>> audio
>>> world.
>>
>> Nope, Behrenger aren't the only ones who do it. And many of the smaller
>> companies have even less inclination to change anything that isn't high
>> priority on their list since they have less staff and money to devote to
>> it.
>>
>> Trevor.
>>
> Behringer activly solicits end user input before final production units
> are put in the pipe line

The important part is that it's *before* the product is in production. It's
surprising how expensive the smallest change can be after production starts.

Sean

[Bill Graham]

Trevor wrote:
> "Bill Graham" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Trevor wrote:
>>> Yep, that is usually the only way to get listened to. I do think if
>>> enough people bombard them with the same complaint or suggestion,
>>> most companies might at least take a look. Unfortunately most of us
>>> think "how stupid", "bad design" etc. but don't actually complain to
>>> the manufacturer. And when we do I wonder how much gets passed to
>>> the right people.
>
>> Yes, but you'd think that when you change a design to make it
>> better, and then send the schematic to the manufacturer together
>> with the information as to why it is better, that they would at
>> least acknowledge your letter.
>
> You'd hope, but unfortunately as you found, in vain with some
> manufacturers :-(
>
>> I have won cases in court where the design of the equipment causes
>> it to catch on fire and destroy a building,
>
> I'm willing to bet they take more notice of you in those cases! :-)
>
> Trevor.

Yes. Unfortunately, they were few and far between. I worked for an Engineer
in the Bay area for a while who specialized in investigating fires and other
industrial accidents... That was a fun job. There were some real weird
cases. I remember one where the transformer that knocks the 12.7 KV on the
telephone pole shorted out primary to secondary, and put 12 KV on this
lady's house circuits while she was ironing in her kitchem. The iron got so
hot she couldn't hold it. Then smoke started pouring out of the walls in her
house. She ran for the door, and just after she cleared it, her whole house
burst into flames and burned to the ground before the fire department could
even get there. Folrtunately, there was no one else in the house, so no one
was hurt.