Jump to content

Anyone have direct experience with the X32 Compact?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

I really don't think we need another "What digital mixer should I get" thread but I do seem to be facing a bit of a perfect storm of sorts (I don't think it's just GAS).

 

I own a SL 16.0.2 which has worked very well for it's intended use -- running sound for my son and his buddies performances over the past few years, however, they've since all gone away to college. These days I primarily use an installed 16.4.2 at the venue I work and have grown quite comfortable with that console as well. I do, however, almost always use a laptop (my wife's) to provide a graphical display of dynamics/EQ etc -- put the VirtualRemote software in "Fat Channel" mode and whatever "select" you do on the physical surface gets automatically displayed on the laptop -- very handy. I also use the laptop for recording (when needed) and mixing via iPad at other venues. So all is well right? Well...

 

I've recently agreed to run sound for a gig by a seven-piece project of local musicians I know well using my baby SL mixer and their QSC based FOH/monitor system. It's a medium-profile 300+ event in a "boomy vintage ballroom" and we've figured a way to squeeze down into 12 channels OK. However, my friend just called back last night and said they also have a much higher profile gig in May and asked if I'd take that on too. Same group but we're not going to fit that event/venue into 12 channels so I need something bigger. Now I can probably borrow another 16.4.2 for this one event but then comes the perfect storm.

 

So my birthday is in two weeks and my wife offers that she'd split the cost of a new laptop with me (so I'd quite borrowing hers was certainly understood). A new 15" retina MacBook is right at $2k which is essentially the street price of something like the X32 Compact which doesn't need a laptop for graphical display, recording, nor remote mixing by iPad. So hmmmm says I... The only real reason I need a personal laptop is for mixing but for what I do the new mixers don't absolutely need one so...hence the question.

 

OneEng has extensively detailed his experience with the X32 rack and I know others have the full X32 but does anyone have any experience with the Compact? Yea I know, with only eight channel faders that means more layers but any other thoughts/observations/experiences? Yes, I do know there are other very promising options. I've briefly worked on a QU-16 and I really liked it but it's hard limited to 16 channels. Soundcraft Expression ranks well (except minimal graphical display) but I'm pretty intrigued by the Compact at this point. Thanks in advance for any perspective offered.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have been working with one of my customers on developing his skills on his X32 compact and it's a good option. A few things are different in terms of work flow bacuse of the reduced control surface but if you are willing to make those compromises it's plenty fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Thanks Andy. Yea I've gotten used to 16 channel faders exposed (no layers) on the 16.4.2 but the full X32 would be way overkill for almost everything I'll likely be doing. I've also worked on a LS9 so layers are not a foreign concept but even that had 16 faders. It would start to get rather interesting to try and run 32 channels with only 8.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's more than the layers, it's the access to routing and processing modules. Look closely at what is missing on the control surface (other than the faders) and you will see what I mean. The more you know about the X32, the more you will see missing on the Compact. It's still enrirely workable, but if size is not an issue and you need to be as fast as possible, it's noticeable. Since I do all one-offs these days (my own touring days are over) fast and easy rules the day. I still find the analog board faster and easier, but I don't find the need for a lot of eq, processing, routing, etc. Last night's show I handled FOH only, another company handled the monitor system. Analog was totally good for that. Band was also 100% happy and then when they asked if I had a digital console and I said no, they experessed their frustration with the guys who mixed "heads down" the entire show and missed all the subtle cues that were being given throughout the night.

 

If bands are noticing this kind of thing, either it's because it's the wrong tool for the job or the wrong tool user for the tool being used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I own and use the X32 Compact. An option released with the version 2.0 upgrade allows you to "extend" input layers to the output (left group) faders. This allows you access to all 16 channels, which I believe was your main concern for above.

 

Having only mixed on the Compact (in the X32 Family), I love it. Navigation can be easy once you get the hang of it. There are view buttons and controls for each of the major components (Preamp, EQ, Comp, Gate) as well as assignable buttons (tap delay, etc) and mute groups on the right. Don't forget about the DCA's. They add another element.

 

The part that takes me the longest time on the board is when I have to customize the channel strips from the mixer. I rarely do this at the mixer, but it can be quicker if your using the generic presets (guitar, bass, etc). Normally I will set these from either a laptop or a tablet device, which is faster. I will usually setup my workflow ahead of time on a laptop and then transfer the settings to the board. A laptop is only really necessary if you want to multitrack. You can also use the same laptop as a playback device for break music, assigned to an aux. You can still record and playback without a laptop, however. The USB stick option allows you to record two channels (left, right, for example), and you can play back wave files. I also prefer to ring out or set the 31 band EQ's from a tablet rather than the rotary knobs.

 

My current setup is the X32 Compact, with a laptop and also connected to a router. I connect wirelessly to the router with an inexpensive Android tablet running the mixing station app. The laptop is used for multitrack, playback, and also uses the kick drum channel to feed the audio for lighting software that runs on said laptop. The tablet, using Mixing Station, is typically utilized to set gains, monitor mixes, and ringing out from stage. It is also great for when the mixer cannot be placed in an ideal location, or if I want to view/access a screen or layer in addition to what I have up on the mixer. I sometimes work with help, and they are able to connect their tablets (android or IPAD).

 

For your use, I think the Compact would work out great. If you want remote options in the future, they are available. Version 2.0 firmware has added additional features, such as an RTA, and they are already feature requesting for 3.0. If you need additional channels in the future, you can always rent or add on an S16 stage box or connected it with other X32 family mixers. Let me know if you have more questions!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Dave I came from a couple years on a mackie 1604 with a few outboard pieces to the SL16.4.2 for 3 years and now to the X32 Compact. I have only done 3 actual shows on the compact and it was a significant "culture" shift for me in terms of workflow. Maybe your experience with the LS-9 will make it easy for your but it took me a couple of weeks of playing around with the X32 to really feel like I knew where everything was and that I had it set up the way I wanted. Lack of long term experience and only averaging one gig a month probably slows me down on the uptake as well. If you mix all the time it might come more naturally but there is a lot to remember.

 

From that standpoint for your "high profile" gig you might want to borrow the 16.4.2 so that you are totally comfortable.

 

I am not knocking the X32 compact. I like mine and am glad I switched (so far). There are so many additional features and I really wanted the complete scene recall capability.

 

I was very ready to switch as well because I sort of had a grudge against the Studiolive after several "failures" . Some of these were operator error but there were also actual board failures requiring factory repair, software glitches that froze up the board, and firewire connectivity problems that caused board resets and pops. Lots of people don't have any problems but I did so I have that bias.

 

Having the lap top in the mix was, especially with firewire, the Achilles heel of the presonus line for me. I think one advantage of the X32 is the ability to do more functions without requiring the laptop to be present.

 

As you mentioned the X32 can display the the "fat channel" info directly on the board. It is not a nice as the full laptop display you use with the SL16 but it provides decent enough visualization of what is going on for me. The other thing the SL with lap top will do is display the sprectograph directly over the GEQ. This is a pretty handy feature for ringing out but also works for ferreting out any feedback during the show. I suppose if you really know what you are doing the whole visualization thing is a crutch anyway. I doubt if I will ever be able to just "hear" what I am changing, though.

 

And as you also noted the X32 does not need the laptop for Ipad mixing. This is another big plus in my mind.

 

You can save your scenes to a laptop with either board. On the X32 you can also save scenes and the entire show file to a USB stick. That is much more convenient than needing a laptop. And, it does offer a more "workable" disaster recovery possibility. Lots of us carry a spare board but actually switching one out is not so easy in the middle of a performance. I had this happen exactly once and, even with the partial recall ability of the presonus, it took in excess of 30 minutes to come back on line and then there were still issues with head amp gains, etc. It really sort of killed the show. With a spare X32 and judicious saves to the thumb drive, I can envision coming back online exactly where I left off in little more time than it takes to swap the snake connections. Some will say a quality board should not fail but I think in the digital age can fail , and fail catastrophically, at any time.

 

As to recording you can only do 2 tracks on the X32 without a laptop. With a laptop you do the full multi-track. I have used the Studio One artist daw that came with the SL16.4.2 and it works well with the X32. If recording is important you are back to needing a laptop anyway. But at least you can do it through USB.

 

In terms of input limitations, you can still only get 16 "full" mic level inputs on the X32 without buying a second device to expand that. Compared to the SL16.4.2 though, it is easier to extend your usable input count because the Aux Inputs on the X32 can be, accessed, routed, EQ'd and mixed much more like a regular input channel. So if you have some line level inputs you can get up to 20 and you might even be able to use the talkback mic input. You can do some tricks like this on the SL16 to get the input count up but you have very limited mixing access to these inputs.

 

Those are just a few differences that I have noted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I was only going to add the channel expansion mentioned above which does let you mix 16 channels at a time. Also a slight correction. Including the 6 aux inputs, you have a total of 22 inputs. I think the only thing missing from the aux in channels are compressor and gate. Aside from that, the operate just like any of the XLR inputs and are assigned to faders. To my ears the X32 effects are a significant step up over the SL. I am still hoping for gains on fader and pitch correction in V3 firmware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

The part that takes me the longest time on the board is when I have to customize the channel strips from the mixer.

 

Version 2.0 firmware has added additional features, such as an RTA,

While I own both a X32 and a X32 Compact, I've mixed on the X32 "some", and haven't mixed on the Compact any more than simple EQ, Aux, and fader adjustments. However, my employee "Joel" has a fair amount of time on both boards, and Joel gave me a brief overview on what the differences are (I sort-of paid attention to what he was explaining)... I seem to recall Joel explaining there are things the X32 does that the Compact either doesn't do, or it takes more fussing around to do it on the Compact.

 

I can say, based on personal experience:

 

1) The Compact isn't all that much smaller or lighter weight than the X32... the Compact is certainly "some smaller and lighter weight", but it's not like a night and day difference.

2) Joel has his choice of the X32 or Compact to take out to any gig... along with some other choices of mixing boards, and he generally opts for the X32.

3) If I understand correctly, the X32 has 16 outputs while the Compact has 8 outputs. Our band uses 10 outputs for our stereo IEM's... and we overwhelmingly prefer the stereo IEM mixes over mono mixes, so that certainly has some influence on which board gets used with our band. Along with that (IEM thing), I'm shopping for a smartphone device as I'm the only person in the band who doesn't own a smartphone... all the other band members are using the smartphone app for mixing their IEM's, and I'm the only member of the band who fusses around bugging Joel to tweak my IEM mix... and I'm the only member of the band who is seemingly/apparently sometimes frustrated with my monitor mix.

 

Joel somewhat recently "upgraded" the boards to the version 2.0 firmware, and he mentioned that it seems to him that the firmware "upgrade" has muddied the on-board FX... and if so, he'd prefer to retain the quality of the sound over having an RTA on every channel (or some such thing that I seem to recall he mentioned).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

With all those fairly new analog boards out there, you could get a very nice one to do what you need. Personally, I'd be tempted to just add a MixWiz for the drums and keyboards as a sub mixer and then use 14 channels on your SL for the rest and monitor sends. With MixWiz's going used for around $400, it's a cheap and very functional fix. (I really do have a very big cheap streak. Gotta remember that not everyone is that stingy.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
It's more than the layers, it's the access to routing and processing modules. Look closely at what is missing on the control surface (other than the faders) and you will see what I mean. The more you know about the X32, the more you will see missing on the Compact. It's still enrirely workable, but if size is not an issue and you need to be as fast as possible, it's noticeable. Since I do all one-offs these days (my own touring days are over) fast and easy rules the day. I still find the analog board faster and easier, but I don't find the need for a lot of eq, processing, routing, etc. Last night's show I handled FOH only, another company handled the monitor system. Analog was totally good for that. Band was also 100% happy and then when they asked if I had a digital console and I said no, they experessed their frustration with the guys who mixed "heads down" the entire show and missed all the subtle cues that were being given throughout the night.

 

If bands are noticing this kind of thing, either it's because it's the wrong tool for the job or the wrong tool user for the tool being used.

 

Good points all. Yea, I've just been reviewing images of the layouts and your points ring especially true with respect to bus sends etc. I also definitely agree on the benefits of keeping one's "head up" (gee, I told kids that a lot when I coached soccer too!) as I'm personally more on the "active member of the band" end of the mixing-philosophy spectrum. I do agree with the "less is more" adage but the generally very talented but certainly not pro musicians I work with almost always benefit from some action on my part to bring solos up front (and clear) when appropriate and then settle them back into the mix. Having to dig through too many layers and menus could certainly detract from the attention needed for that role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
I own and use the X32 Compact. An option released with the version 2.0 upgrade allows you to "extend" input layers to the output (left group) faders. This allows you access to all 16 channels, which I believe was your main concern for above.

 

Having only mixed on the Compact (in the X32 Family), I love it. Navigation can be easy once you get the hang of it. There are view buttons and controls for each of the major components (Preamp, EQ, Comp, Gate) as well as assignable buttons (tap delay, etc) and mute groups on the right. Don't forget about the DCA's. They add another element.

 

The part that takes me the longest time on the board is when I have to customize the channel strips from the mixer. I rarely do this at the mixer, but it can be quicker if your using the generic presets (guitar, bass, etc). Normally I will set these from either a laptop or a tablet device, which is faster. I will usually setup my workflow ahead of time on a laptop and then transfer the settings to the board. A laptop is only really necessary if you want to multitrack. You can also use the same laptop as a playback device for break music, assigned to an aux. You can still record and playback without a laptop, however. The USB stick option allows you to record two channels (left, right, for example), and you can play back wave files. I also prefer to ring out or set the 31 band EQ's from a tablet rather than the rotary knobs.

 

(first attempt at editing the HTML "QUOTE" tags to intersperse replies -- fingers crossed)

By "customize the channel strips from the mixer" I assume you mean configure the scribble strips? I can definitely see where a keyboard would be much faster at that. Yea, I did miss/forget that direct recording to USB drive is for main LR out only -- not multitrack. So yes, a laptop will still be very helpful/essemtial for certain functions. I remember OneEng explaining how he pre-defines all his settings on the laptop and then transfers that to the console.

 

My current setup is the X32 Compact, with a laptop and also connected to a router. I connect wirelessly to the router with an inexpensive Android tablet running the mixing station app. The laptop is used for multitrack, playback, and also uses the kick drum channel to feed the audio for lighting software that runs on said laptop. The tablet, using Mixing Station, is typically utilized to set gains, monitor mixes, and ringing out from stage. It is also great for when the mixer cannot be placed in an ideal location, or if I want to view/access a screen or layer in addition to what I have up on the mixer. I sometimes work with help, and they are able to connect their tablets (android or IPAD).

 

For your use, I think the Compact would work out great. If you want remote options in the future, they are available. Version 2.0 firmware has added additional features, such as an RTA, and they are already feature requesting for 3.0. If you need additional channels in the future, you can always rent or add on an S16 stage box or connected it with other X32 family mixers. Let me know if you have more questions!

 

Thank you for this info Vort. This is precisely the hands-on perspective I'm looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Dave I came from a couple years on a mackie 1604 with a few outboard pieces to the SL16.4.2 for 3 years and now to the X32 Compact. I have only done 3 actual shows on the compact and it was a significant "culture" shift for me in terms of workflow. Maybe your experience with the LS-9 will make it easy for your but it took me a couple of weeks of playing around with the X32 to really feel like I knew where everything was and that I had it set up the way I wanted. Lack of long term experience and only averaging one gig a month probably slows me down on the uptake as well. If you mix all the time it might come more naturally but there is a lot to remember.

 

From that standpoint for your "high profile" gig you might want to borrow the 16.4.2 so that you are totally comfortable.

 

Yup, that's likely very sound advice. Still, while I fully intend to remain a "financially compensated hobbyist" at best and do only the events that interest me, it's becoming obvious that much of what interests me will be hampered by the capabilities of my 16.0.2.

 

I am not knocking the X32 compact. I like mine and am glad I switched (so far). There are so many additional features and I really wanted the complete scene recall capability.

 

I was very ready to switch as well because I sort of had a grudge against the Studiolive after several "failures" . Some of these were operator error but there were also actual board failures requiring factory repair, software glitches that froze up the board, and firewire connectivity problems that caused board resets and pops. Lots of people don't have any problems but I did so I have that bias.

 

Having the lap top in the mix was, especially with firewire, the Achilles heel of the presonus line for me. I think one advantage of the X32 is the ability to do more functions without requiring the laptop to be present.

 

Boy I certainly agree the laptop <-> firewire <-> SL is indeed it's Achilles heel. I've taken to rebooting the mixer whenever I attach as I've consistently had subtle to significant issues otherwise. Boy and don't ever accidentally bump/eject a PCI firewire card from the laptop when you're live.

 

As you mentioned the X32 can display the the "fat channel" info directly on the board. It is not a nice as the full laptop display you use with the SL16 but it provides decent enough visualization of what is going on for me. The other thing the SL with lap top will do is display the sprectograph directly over the GEQ. This is a pretty handy feature for ringing out but also works for ferreting out any feedback during the show. I suppose if you really know what you are doing the whole visualization thing is a crutch anyway. I doubt if I will ever be able to just "hear" what I am changing, though.

 

And as you also noted the X32 does not need the laptop for Ipad mixing. This is another big plus in my mind.

 

I have used the spectrograph on the SL GEQ before but since we've done the Smaart-wizard room analysis on the venue I rarely need to adjust the main LR. I do use the Studio Six spectrograph to ring out monitors though. In short, I know a laptop still has much usefulness but it would be very nice not to need it for basic visualization and/or remote mixing.

 

You can save your scenes to a laptop with either board. On the X32 you can also save scenes and the entire show file to a USB stick. That is much more convenient than needing a laptop. And, it does offer a more "workable" disaster recovery possibility. Lots of us carry a spare board but actually switching one out is not so easy in the middle of a performance. I had this happen exactly once and, even with the partial recall ability of the presonus, it took in excess of 30 minutes to come back on line and then there were still issues with head amp gains, etc. It really sort of killed the show. With a spare X32 and judicious saves to the thumb drive, I can envision coming back online exactly where I left off in little more time than it takes to swap the snake connections. Some will say a quality board should not fail but I think in the digital age can fail , and fail catastrophically, at any time.

 

Good point. While I'm a ways off (if ever) from having a full backup X32, it would be very convenient to sync all settings to the backup via USB.

 

As to recording you can only do 2 tracks on the X32 without a laptop. With a laptop you do the full multi-track. I have used the Studio One artist daw that came with the SL16.4.2 and it works well with the X32. If recording is important you are back to needing a laptop anyway. But at least you can do it through USB.

 

In terms of input limitations, you can still only get 16 "full" mic level inputs on the X32 without buying a second device to expand that. Compared to the SL16.4.2 though, it is easier to extend your usable input count because the Aux Inputs on the X32 can be, accessed, routed, EQ'd and mixed much more like a regular input channel. So if you have some line level inputs you can get up to 20 and you might even be able to use the talkback mic input. You can do some tricks like this on the SL16 to get the input count up but you have very limited mixing access to these inputs.

 

Those are just a few differences that I have noted.

 

All very good info. That is very interesting that the inputs can be expanded short of adding a S16 box (OneEng confirms that in another post) . I've lived with 16 channels OK at the venue but knowing that upping to 20 is possible is another big plus. Great info Mike -- thank you.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

While I own both a X32 and a X32 Compact, I've mixed on the X32 "some", and haven't mixed on the Compact any more than simple EQ, Aux, and fader adjustments. However, my employee "Joel" has a fair amount of time on both boards, and Joel gave me a brief overview on what the differences are (I sort-of paid attention to what he was explaining)... I seem to recall Joel explaining there are things the X32 does that the Compact either doesn't do, or it takes more fussing around to do it on the Compact.

 

I can say, based on personal experience:

 

1) The Compact isn't all that much smaller or lighter weight than the X32... the Compact is certainly "some smaller and lighter weight", but it's not like a night and day difference.

2) Joel has his choice of the X32 or Compact to take out to any gig... along with some other choices of mixing boards, and he generally opts for the X32.

3) If I understand correctly, the X32 has 16 outputs while the Compact has 8 outputs. Our band uses 10 outputs for our stereo IEM's... and we overwhelmingly prefer the stereo IEM mixes over mono mixes, so that certainly has some influence on which board gets used with our band. Along with that (IEM thing), I'm shopping for a smartphone device as I'm the only person in the band who doesn't own a smartphone... all the other band members are using the smartphone app for mixing their IEM's, and I'm the only member of the band who fusses around bugging Joel to tweak my IEM mix... and I'm the only member of the band who is seemingly/apparently sometimes frustrated with my monitor mix.

 

Joel somewhat recently "upgraded" the boards to the version 2.0 firmware, and he mentioned that it seems to him that the firmware "upgrade" has muddied the on-board FX... and if so, he'd prefer to retain the quality of the sound over having an RTA on every channel (or some such thing that I seem to recall he mentioned).

 

Whoa. I haven't upgraded my X32 Rack because of the fact that the remote apps haven't been released yet for it (due out middle of April).

 

Audiopile, could you have someone A/B the upgrade with a pair of consoles to verify if there is a lower clarity in the efx in V2.02 than in V1.15? That would be a deal killer for me as well. As I stated earlier, I think the X32 efx are particularly strong and would be reluctant to lower my .... now very high standard in the quality of the efx.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

While I own both a X32 and a X32 Compact, I've mixed on the X32 "some", and haven't mixed on the Compact any more than simple EQ, Aux, and fader adjustments. However, my employee "Joel" has a fair amount of time on both boards, and Joel gave me a brief overview on what the differences are (I sort-of paid attention to what he was explaining)... I seem to recall Joel explaining there are things the X32 does that the Compact either doesn't do, or it takes more fussing around to do it on the Compact.

 

I can say, based on personal experience:

 

1) The Compact isn't all that much smaller or lighter weight than the X32... the Compact is certainly "some smaller and lighter weight", but it's not like a night and day difference.

2) Joel has his choice of the X32 or Compact to take out to any gig... along with some other choices of mixing boards, and he generally opts for the X32.

3) If I understand correctly, the X32 has 16 outputs while the Compact has 8 outputs. Our band uses 10 outputs for our stereo IEM's... and we overwhelmingly prefer the stereo IEM mixes over mono mixes, so that certainly has some influence on which board gets used with our band. Along with that (IEM thing), I'm shopping for a smartphone device as I'm the only person in the band who doesn't own a smartphone... all the other band members are using the smartphone app for mixing their IEM's, and I'm the only member of the band who fusses around bugging Joel to tweak my IEM mix... and I'm the only member of the band who is seemingly/apparently sometimes frustrated with my monitor mix.

 

Joel somewhat recently "upgraded" the boards to the version 2.0 firmware, and he mentioned that it seems to him that the firmware "upgrade" has muddied the on-board FX... and if so, he'd prefer to retain the quality of the sound over having an RTA on every channel (or some such thing that I seem to recall he mentioned).

 

Yea I'm guessing that if I had both the full X32 and the Compact available I'd likely grab the former -- especially if I was working at your level and there was room for it at the venue. Very good point as well about the number of outputs. While the number of inputs are expandable through various means I haven't heard anybody say the outputs are as well. I certainly do understand the benefits of stereo IEM mixes as my first exposure was through a national five-piece new-grass band that swears by them. Decisions, decisions. Thanks Mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The way the Compact is designed, you have only 16 local mic inputs, and 8 local bus (or mix or omni or whatever you want to call them) outputs. To access the second page of 16 ins and 8 outs require an S16 stagebox. Once you make the decision to go with 1 stagebox, you may as well go to 2 IMO.

 

There are also differences in access to individual bus outputs with the bus master differences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
The way the Compact is designed, you have only 16 local mic inputs, and 8 local bus (or mix or omni or whatever you want to call them) outputs. To access the second page of 16 ins and 8 outs require an S16 stagebox. Once you make the decision to go with 1 stagebox, you may as well go to 2 IMO.

 

There are also differences in access to individual bus outputs with the bus master differences.

I spent longer with the Compact in accompaniment of Joel getting less comfortable with the Compact than the X32... and a lot of that time was spent by Joel explaining to me what the Compact won't do that the X32 does...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You can pretty easily extend the analog output count on the compact by using the 6 aux outs and route them through the matrix layer. I set mine up this way to drive the mains tops in stereo and an aux sub and still have 3 left over for delays or zones. This way you have all 8 regular "outs" for your monitor mixes or whatever.

 

By routing your mains drive lines through the matrixs (matrices?) you can control the individual L/R/C and zone sends but you can also configure it so that they are slaved to the master fader. It is just one of many configurations you can create and it may be advantageous in some cases.

 

If you do go through the matrices you have the option to apply filters if you want to use the board as your crossover. I tried that at one gig and it sounded pretty good. I could leave the driverack in the trailer but you don't get any limiting. I was using powered speakers for that event so did not feel the need for additional speaker protection. You could extend this concept and drive biamp tops, too. But it starts getting complicated and if you use different configurations frequently you are adding time and perhaps some risk to your setup. I plan to keep using the driverack as the crossover.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Along with that (IEM thing)' date=' I'm shopping for a smartphone device as I'm the only person in the band who doesn't own a smartphone... all the other band members are using the smartphone app for mixing their IEM's, and I'm the only member of the band who fusses around bugging Joel to tweak my IEM mix... and I'm the only member of the band who is seemingly/apparently sometimes frustrated with my monitor mix.[/quote']Get an iPad Mini - much more versatile and easy to use than an iPhone, especially for us older fellers with "experienced" eyes ;) .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
The way the Compact is designed, you have only 16 local mic inputs, and 8 local bus (or mix or omni or whatever you want to call them) outputs. To access the second page of 16 ins and 8 outs require an S16 stagebox. Once you make the decision to go with 1 stagebox, you may as well go to 2 IMO.

 

There are also differences in access to individual bus outputs with the bus master differences.

 

OK, that's good to note. The S16 not only doubles the inputs but the outputs as well. Of course, once you buy a Compact and a S16 you're right at the price of a X32 anyway plus you still only have eight faders. Yeah I just watched a video on the differences in the bus-control functions. Decisions decisions...

 

...dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

 

Whoa. I haven't upgraded my X32 Rack because of the fact that the remote apps haven't been released yet for it (due out middle of April).

 

Audiopile, could you have someone A/B the upgrade with a pair of consoles to verify if there is a lower clarity in the efx in V2.02 than in V1.15? That would be a deal killer for me as well. As I stated earlier, I think the X32 efx are particularly strong and would be reluctant to lower my .... now very high standard in the quality of the efx.

 

I'm fixin to dive into this... as soon as I have a full crew for like maybe 2 days in a row. I've been pretty short-handed for the past couple of weeks as there seems to be an outbreak of spring fever going around. The projects are starting to pile-up... possibly approaching the angle of repose on my work benches... no hope what-so-ever to find a surface of a work bench, let alone find a workbench surface large enough to set-up the X32 and Compact side-by-side for A-B-ing. I'm guessing/hoping one of the two boards can have V1.15 reinstalled?

 

BTW: I don't know what the angle of repose is for "stuff piled up on work benches", but I suspect I'm close to finding out. Initially, I theorized that the angle of repose for "stuff on benches" depends on what it is and how it's stacked... but... "what it is and how it's stacked" is starting to seem like that doesn't need to be considered (moot point). It appears that workbench pile-up has "stages" of development. Initially there is some classification of the "stuff" on the benches... some of this here, and that there, and somewhat organized and relatively neatly stacked in the initial/foundation stages of workbench pile-up. As the pile-up progresses, the piles become more random/ chaotic. Well before the angle of repose is reached, access to the workbenches proper becomes hampered due to what appears to be "Stuff Propagation"... some stuff running amuck somehow turns into lots of stuff... everywhere, including "heaped up in-front of the workbenches". But somehow the workbench pile-up continues, even though access to the workbenches is blocked. I can only conclude that additions to the workbench piles are "air born" and completely random beyond the point of blocked workbench access.

 

There also seems to be a stage of "workbench pile-up bloom"... where some threshold of a critical mass of workbench pile-up is crossed, and the pile-up just sort-of explodes, seemingly in just a day or two... generally on Thursdays and Fridays.

 

sigh...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

 

I'm fixin to dive into this... as soon as I have a full crew for like maybe 2 days in a row. I've been pretty short-handed for the past couple of weeks as there seems to be an outbreak of spring fever going around. The projects are starting to pile-up... possibly approaching the angle of repose on my work benches... no hope what-so-ever to find a surface of a work bench, let alone find a workbench surface large enough to set-up the X32 and Compact side-by-side for A-B-ing. I'm guessing/hoping one of the two boards can have V1.15 reinstalled?

 

BTW: I don't know what the angle of repose is for "stuff piled up on work benches", but I suspect I'm close to finding out. Initially, I theorized that the angle of repose for "stuff on benches" depends on what it is and how it's stacked... but... "what it is and how it's stacked" is starting to seem like that doesn't need to be considered (moot point). It appears that workbench pile-up has "stages" of development. Initially there is some classification of the "stuff" on the benches... some of this here, and that there, and somewhat organized and relatively neatly stacked in the initial/foundation stages of workbench pile-up. As the pile-up progresses, the piles become more random/ chaotic. Well before the angle of repose is reached, access to the workbenches proper becomes hampered due to what appears to be "Stuff Propagation"... some stuff running amuck somehow turns into lots of stuff... everywhere, including "heaped up in-front of the workbenches". But somehow the workbench pile-up continues, even though access to the workbenches is blocked. I can only conclude that additions to the workbench piles are "air born" and completely random beyond the point of blocked workbench access.

 

There also seems to be a stage of "workbench pile-up bloom"... where some threshold of a critical mass of workbench pile-up is crossed, and the pile-up just sort-of explodes, seemingly in just a day or two... generally on Thursdays and Fridays.

 

sigh...

 

Sounds like spring is in the air (finally)!

 

You should have no problem reverting one of your consoles to 1.15. Many people have done this (not me because I will not upgrade until the remote apps for V2 are released).

 

I don't think there should be any difference between a Compact and full X32 (or my X32 Rack for that matter) since everything is the same with respect to the processing. I am concerned that there may be something different with the efx.

 

They did add quite a bit to the desk which would take up processing time from the DSP's (like the RTA). It is not unbelievable that in doing so, they pulled some of the processing out of the reverbs. If that is the case, then I may never upgrade to V2. The clarity of the plate reverb is one of my biggest draws to this board.

 

BTW, my basement workbench suffers the same issues ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I don't think there should be any difference between a Compact and full X32 (or my X32 Rack for that matter) since everything is the same with respect to the processing. I am concerned that there may be something different with the efx.

 

They did add quite a bit to the desk which would take up processing time from the DSP's (like the RTA). It is not unbelievable that in doing so, they pulled some of the processing out of the reverbs. If that is the case, then I may never upgrade to V2. The clarity of the plate reverb is one of my biggest draws to this board.

 

 

At our last performance where we used the X32, that performance was a week or so after Joel upgraded the board's firmware. One of the songs we do is "Spooky"... and at the very ending of the song, our lead vocalist for that song finishes with the word "Spooky" (a cappella)... Joel has the delay tapped in, and punches it up for that last word, and that word is regenerated 3 - 4 times... echo type fade-out... clearly discernible FX only. During the ride home, Joel asked me: "How did the FX sound?" I replied: "Now that you mention it, the FX seemed a bit "off"... not quite as clear and kind of "strained" or something... I especially noticed at the end of "Spooky"... why?... what's up?" Joel explained that he'd upgraded the firmware a week or so earlier, and he'd kind-of forgot he'd done that... for awhile into the show. He thought something was "off" about the FX and some of the over-all sound of the system... and initially he thought he'd inadvertently goofed something up... but then remembered as he was checking settings and such, that he'd upgraded the firmware, and maybe that's what's up, or maybe his ears were a bit "off", or ??? I didn't know Joel had upgraded the firmware till he mentioned it on the trip home, after the show. Our independent impressions seem to confirm each other's impression, and something seems "different"... but we haven't looked into it further since that show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

 

At our last performance where we used the X32, that performance was a week or so after Joel upgraded the board's firmware. One of the songs we do is "Spooky"... and at the very ending of the song, our lead vocalist for that song finishes with the word "Spooky" (a cappella)... Joel has the delay tapped in, and punches it up for that last word, and that word is regenerated 3 - 4 times... echo type fade-out... clearly discernible FX only. During the ride home, Joel asked me: "How did the FX sound?" I replied: "Now that you mention it, the FX seemed a bit "off"... not quite as clear and kind of "strained" or something... I especially noticed at the end of "Spooky"... why?... what's up?" Joel explained that he'd upgraded the firmware a week or so earlier, and he'd kind-of forgot he'd done that... for awhile into the show. He thought something was "off" about the FX and some of the over-all sound of the system... and initially he thought he'd inadvertently goofed something up... but then remembered as he was checking settings and such, that he'd upgraded the firmware, and maybe that's what's up, or maybe his ears were a bit "off", or ??? I didn't know Joel had upgraded the firmware till he mentioned it on the trip home, after the show. Our independent impressions seem to confirm each other's impression, and something seems "different"... but we haven't looked into it further since that show.

I sincerely hope you are wrong on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...