Aviom or MyMix

[bradneal]

We are looking onto purchasing an IEM system. We usually have up to 9 musicians and are using an LS9-32 FOH desk.

We are especially interested in the individual mix capabilities of these 2 models but I am open to other suggestions.

Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Brad

[Brad Weber]

I'm sure you'll get strong opinions one way or the other as well as probably suggestions for some other options, but if you have an open slot in your LS-9 then being able to get a module for that slot that directly outputs to Aviom rather than requiring multiple audio outputs from the console and an interface may be a factor.

[bradneal]

Yea, that's one of the reasons we're considering the Aviom. Both slots on the LS9 are still open.

[Paris MkVI]

The Aviom will integrate quite well into your LS9. I have no experience with the MyMix gear, so cannot speak about their stuff.

Don't go cheap on earbuds. Even if you use something like Shure SE215's for many of your musicians, 215's or their equivalent may not be adequate for bassists and drummers. Allow for decent buds in the budget. Otherwise you will just spend the money anyway replacing the blown-out ones with more cheap ones.

[Mustangnaz]

I've been looking at the new Behringer personal monitor mixers. Looks pretty similar to the Aviom for less than half the price. They've been working on some compelling stuff since they acquired Midas.

[cmchamp]

After my eyes are finished being dilated from my eye-doctor appointment late this afternoon, I'll address this with a comparison of the Aviom, MyMix, HearBack and Behringer options. These are one's I'm familiar with, though I'm sure there are others.

C.

[bradneal]

Thanks, Cory. Looking forward to your comparison.

-Brad

[cmchamp]

Attached is a matrix of the mix surface features. I'm not going to get into the details of the interface/surface at the FOH mixer level. All interconnect between distribution and mix surfaces with Cat5 or Cat5e.

Aviom uses the ANet network standard and Yamaha has has a card for the LS9 in interface. Non digital mixer users can interface via the AN16i via inserts or direct outs from their mixer.

MyMix, I believe, can be fed by the 16LA expander and MY16-AT card on the LS9. The MyMix can also be fed from the IEX16L expander, OR by the 2 analog inputs on the mixer surfaces. One "bonus" the MyMix allows the others don't is the option to be fed all global sources from the Mix position AND a local ambient mic (or stereo pair of ambient microphones, OR stereo "more me"). Power over Ethernet switches for wall-wart free operation. Pre-configured Cisco switches available from MyMix.

HearBack is fed from inserts only. I've heard it and the Aviom side by side and the audio quality of the HearBack was superior, but features are limited. Fed from either an analog or ADAT lightpipe source. Channel count is deceiving. It's really 1&2 as a stereo pair, 3-8 mono + local input.

Behringer is fed from the PM16I analog & ADAT input or the S16 digital snake, or the X32, so it should interface with the LS9 and the MY16-AT cards. Local MIDI input so that if desired the BCR2000 rotary controller or other rotary controllers. The Music Group has been requested to provide a pre-set for the BCR2000 for plug and play operation. Uses UltraNet over Cat5 for distribution

I've been promised by the MyMix rep their demo units to try out.

The above and attached information are meant for reference and education only, and may not be complete because my eyes are still dilated a bit and since I'll be getting progressive lenses... well...

Sorry if you were wanting a usability review of the work surfaces, sorry.

Also not mentioned would be ProCo's Momentum, or any mixer that might allow for remote mixing via tablet or iPad, etc.

C.

[Brad Weber]

Roland would probably be another one to consider, the biggest drawback is that it works on their proprietary REAC network and can be relatively expensive to integrate with mixers and systems other then their own since no one else has, or has been allowd to, integrate REAC into their products.

Just about all of the personal monitor systems currently available utilize proprietary networks that require dedicated audio interfaces and in some cases dedicated distribution devices rather than being based on more widely adopted network audio formats such as Cobranet or EtherSound or probably now more likely Dante or AVB. I realize there have been reasons for that but I think that a reasonably priced personal monitor system that uses a more widely adopted 'standard' network audio scheme could do quite well.

[Frank DeWitt]

We had a "real" IEM system and it failed suddenly. We were using SAC for FOH so I quick set up SAC mixers for the worship Team. (SAC comes with 20 mixers) I borrowed some laptops for control surfaces and got them going. At the next practice I assured them that I would get the other one repaired and back in place. They all wanted to keep the SAC. When I asked why, they said it was intuitive to see all the faders in a row with names above them. They also liked the individual meters. They said often during practice they would not here someone, look at the screen and think, Oh, I can't here him because he isn't playing.

We switched out the borrowed laptops for a bunch of 10 inch Dell minis and they are very pleased. Another benefit is that we save there settings for them at the end of practice.

You could run SAC as a slave of your boards Line outs, and for 16 ch in and out it would be quite inexpensive.

Frank

[cmchamp]

Frank
I knew that SAC had the ability to function with remote virtual mixers that can be purposed for personal mixers. I just didn't know enough about it to mention it.
At that point, an SAC remote virtual mixer could access as many as 72 channels, correct?
Also, if more than 20 virtual mixers were required, what's the possibility of using 2 SAC engines with the same audio sources?

Probably thoughts for another thread.

I am investigating replacement of a venue system with an SAC, so I may be contacting you for some assistance in pieces needs.

[Frank DeWitt]

I always thought it was 20. It turns out it is 24 plus FOH or 25 mixers.
http://www.softwareaudioconsole.com/Products_SAC.htm

Yes, Each mixer can access all 72 ch I would not recommend using a 10 in laptop for that. It could be done but you would do some scrolling. BTW if each user needs to set there mix, and just tweak it once in a while one PC such as a laptop can be used for a number of mixers. That is, when I switch mixer desplays from Bob to John, Bob still has his mix, just not a display (Control surface) for his mix. The remote mixers do not pass any audio, just GUI control.

I am sure two engines could be run from the same inputs. The question would be where and how to split the inputs. A lot will depend on what your inputs are, Mic requiring preamps, or line. Between all the outputs that come with the hardware inputs I am sure it can be done.

From the web

"All 25 consoles are 72 inputs, with built-in attenuator, phase reverse, swap LR, mono, high quality mastering 5 band para-graphic Eqs with Hi and Lo cut filters, keying gates and compressors with a bandpass filter, 6 stereo aux sends with pan, pre and post FX patches, full 8 point surround XY panners plus a separate center and sub send, 24 stereo out assigns, mute, solo and long throw faders with -60db high resolution meters on each input channel."

Frank