Digital Mixer Shopping?

[yeshua]

any idea what the price your looking at for that setup? I still haven't seem an official MSRP price on this stuff....

[bbrunskill]

yeshua, i've been told around 11K New Zealand dollars for the console and 32x16 dSnake.

[yeshua]

does that include the dante card and the aviom devices, or just the console and 32X16? Seems quite high relative to close guesses from the UK users if it is just the A&H stuff....wish A&H would just announce the official MSRP on their site and I'd be happy lol

But at least that helps a little with my MSRP itch......

[bbrunskill]

Nope, thats just the A&H. Here in NZ prices are high because it's a small market and all pro sound gear has to be imported from half way across the world.
I would expect the Aviom units and Danta card to run another 3k ish.

To put it in perspective, a Yamaha LS-9 costs $14,000 NZ, and that's if you negotiate. Retail price is more like $19,000.
A Si Compact is 12K.

[yeshua]

who came up with the idea of import fees and such lol.....ok so your pricing is a bit better now lol....here an LS9 tends to run I think $8-9k....so it still sounds like its about the right price....

Thanks for the info/comparison Let us know how the demo goes (maybe make a video of it yourself??)

[pdc]

Originally Posted by Frank DeWitt

The support for personal mixers (for use with IEMs) and a second mixer for recording, were a big part of why I chose Software Audio Console. It's great to have choices.

Frank

There is one problem with The SAC and SAW. Bob has his stubborn ways of doing things and he is a take it or leave it kind of guy.

[cw4u]

I agree somewhat with pdc. I really like SAC. I've been testing it out during rehearsals with direct splits but what I don't like about the software is that it is a bit lagging behind. My main issue is the lack of multi core/processor support. But other than that, it seems to be pretty reliable. Haven't had it crash on me once. But if anyone were to go into the SAC route, you'd definitely need someone capable of knowing how all the various sub-systems work together make a stable product. Probably not recommended for the average church.

[Frank DeWitt]

Originally Posted by cw4u

I agree somewhat with pdc. I really like SAC. I've been testing it out during rehearsals with direct splits but what I don't like about the software is that it is a bit lagging behind. My main issue is the lack of multi core/processor support. But other than that, it seems to be pretty reliable. Haven't had it crash on me once. But if anyone were to go into the SAC route, you'd definitely need someone capable of knowing how all the various sub-systems work together make a stable product. Probably not recommended for the average church.

I agree that it would be nice if the software would allow for multi core CPUs so we would have more choices in computers, although I doubt they would help it handle more audio. The audio must be handled without interruption so switching or even splitting between cores may not be practical. Of course, the GUI could be handled in a second core.

The other side is that I am running 48 in and 20 out with 6 mixers and I run at 28% on a duel core computer that was $500 new.

Frank

[Frank DeWitt]

Originally Posted by pdc

There is one problem with The SAC and SAW. Bob has his stubborn ways of doing things and he is a take it or leave it kind of guy.

From theSAC list

I am currently working hard on documenting and releasing the entire ethernet TCP/IP API that SAC remote uses to gain complete control over the SAC host... when that is ready, I am planning on creating a SAC Remote Developers forum where those that know how to program can discuss and design their own SAC Remote GUI from the ground up... at that point, anyone who has different ideas about how SAC should be controlled can hook the host engine and have at it... they can program in Windows, in MAC OS, in Linux, on an ipad, or iphone, or android pad or smartphone... they can hook dozens of Mackie extenders or any other physical control surface they want... I am not interested in pursuing all those options directly.

It should be interesting to see how that all develops.

Bob L

[yeshua]

FYI, the Allen & Heath GLD was the original topic. Please keep it relevant or create your own topic. Thanks

[Brad Weber]

Originally Posted by yeshua

FYI, the Allen & Heath GLD was the original topic. Please keep it relevant or create your own topic. Thanks

The thread is titled "Digital Mixer Shopping" and the OP was about an at the time unknown upcoming mixer from A&H, which later turned out to be the GLD, so discussing any new digital mixers such as not only the A&H GLD, but also the Mackie DL1608, the Behringer X32 and XENYX iX and the Line 6 StageScape M20d certainly seems to fit the thread topic.

The Mackie DL1608, the Behringer XENYX iX and the Line 6 StageScape M20d are particularly interesting as they offer some radically different approaches to the mixer hardware and operation. I can see the idea of a simple to operate mixer with presets that can be operated wirelessly from an iPad and that can be obtained for a reasonable cost being very popular for situations such as smaller churches with more limited technical resources moving into blended or contemporary worship services. It will be interested to see and hear the actual units as most of these are not yet production products and much of what is available on them now is purely marketing, and not necessarily the most complete or accurate information in all cases.

The Mackie DL1608 and Behringer Xenyx iX mixers are slightly more traditional in setup and operation but move to an iPad and related app being an integral component of the mixer. The Behringer units are apparently essentially a more traditional digital mixer with the iPad in place of a screen and with the ability to undock it and use it to mix remotely. However, the Mackie literally uses a docked or wireless iPad as the mixer control surface, the only physical controls on the 'mixer' itself are the power switch, the phantom power switch, the headphone level control and the sixteen channel gain/trim controls. Mackie also says the DL1608 will work with up to 10 iPad controllers, creating the possibility of using multiple iPads and the related app for personal monitor mixing on stage as well as FOH mixing.

The Line6 StageScape M20d is an even bigger departure in terms of operation. Having spoken with a Line 6 rep about the M20d, I have to say that I am impressed with the thought that seems to have gone into it and their approach to trying to make it as simple as possible for anyone with limited knowledge and experience to get a decent mix while also allowing greater control for those who want it. The basic concept seems to be that you plug in an XLR and it senses that and assumes it is probably a microphone (or line level of a 1/4"). You then tell it that channel is a vocal microphone (or an acoustic guitar or a kick drum or any of a number of different options) and it sets predefined generic channel settings for the gain, EQ, fader level, compression, etc. When you define the type of input the mixer also creates a related icon on the 'stage' on the touchscreen, touch that icon and you get the related channel controls. You talk/sing/play and it automatically adjusts the channel trim/gain, it can even continue to monitor that level and make adjustments if it clips or is routinely low. And all of the automation can be bypassed if you want to set things manually. The processing parameters can be adjusted traditionally, but based on the type of input defined there is also the option for adjusting them using more subjectively descriptive terms such as "light/dark", "bright/dull", "crisp/muted", "open/closed" on slider or X-Y controls that then adjust multiple processing parameters. And of course preset scene recall.

So lots of new 'entry level' digital mixer options being introduced over the next 6 months or so including some significant variations in the form factor and user interface.

[pdc]

Line6 makes products that have their niche. I think that this mixer is cool, because of the fact it is somewhat "aware", and it networks with speakers, etc.