Soundcraft Si Expression 3 Monitor Mixes

[DrMRG]

I am very pleased with my Christmas present... a Soundcraft Si Expression 3. It is my first digital board and I am quite impressed (gates, compressor, and parametric EQ on each channel!). Of course, I am still learning about the features and limitations of this board. In case you are considering this transition, I wanted to share my issues. My dilemma is that I had seven stereo monitor mixes (4 wireless and 3 wired) when I was using a Mamba Mix 16/8L IEM Mixer, but with the Si Expression 3, I now have only have 6 stereo sub mixes (and 8 mono mixes). However, I also wanted to have a stereo drum sub mix since my PA is stereo capable (I know that many folks only use a mono PA, but sometimes stereo inputs can be effective in live settings). As a consequence, I decided to use 5 of the stereo submixes for IEMs and 1 submix for the drums. I also did not create a submix for keyboards, but instead allocated them in stereo to the main mix. Thus, I have a mono submix for vocals and guitar. Regarding the monitor mixes: I allocated 2 of the wired submixes to mono.... Oh well.... I wish that Soundcraft would have made all 14 submixes stereo! What is your experience with mono vs. stereo monitor mixes? The problem I face is that the bass player and rhythm guitar player used to have a stereo IEM monitor mix but now have a mono mix (and they noticed the lack of separation).

Michael

 

[Craig Vecchione]

Michael, I removed your ad link, can't have spam in this forum.

Regarding stereo vs mono mixes, I think the guys will get over it, so to speak, but it is of course not a move in the "right" direction to take away rather than maintain or add. There's no functional necessity to having stereo monitors, but it's a good perk.

[DrMRG]

Craig,

Understood.  You are right.  The mono mix is being accepted and we are continuing to make progress towards improving our overall mix.

Michael

[MarkGifford-1]

---

Craig Vecchione wrote:

 

Regarding stereo vs mono mixes, I think the guys will get over it, so to speak, but it is of course not a move in the "right" direction to take away rather than maintain or add. There's no functional necessity to having stereo monitors, but it's a good perk.

---

 

Kind of like going fro Blu-Ray to B&W, tho - I'd be mad if I had to go back...

 

KInd of a side note - I've played and run sound for thousands of club dates w/one monitor mix and no problems, and in the space of a year or two, we've got complaints about not having 14 stereo aux mixes?

MG

[Saturn1212]

Hi Michael, anyone,

 

I am considering giving myself the Soundcraft Si Expression 3 as a Christmas present. I am almost ready to pull the trigger on the purchase due to sale going on now which ends in 2 days, but I am hesitating due to the following disadvantages::

 

- Parametric EQ - No Q knob for the HF and LR .

- No digital Scribble display compared to Soundcraft Performer.

 

Note I am a newbie to live sound and want a bang for the buck, but a good mixer. I have a choice to purchase Beranger X32, PreSonus 32 or Expression 3.

Q1) what has been your experience with the Expression 3 and if you had to purchase a mixer now, would you choose Expression 3 based on your experience?

Q2) Is the fact that there is "no Q knob on HF and LR" become a problem for you?

 

It looks like the Soundcraft Performer has everything, including the BIG PRICE TAG.

Thanks in advance for guidance.

[DrMRG]

Note I am a newbie to live sound and want a bang for the buck, but a good mixer. I have a choice to purchase Beranger X32, PreSonus 32 or Expression 3.

Q1) what has been your experience with the Expression 3 and if you had to purchase a mixer now, would you choose Expression 3 based on your experience?

Q2) Is the fact that there is "no Q knob on HF and LR" become a problem for you?

 

It looks like the Soundcraft Performer has everything, including the BIG PRICE TAG.

Thanks in advance for guidance.

 

Saturn1212,

 

I love my Si Expression 3. It is truly an awesome live board. In the fall of 2013, I narrowed my choices to the Si Expression 3 and the Behringer X32. I think you will find that the Behringer X32 has a more attractive set of features for the price, but I had several bad experiences with their products in the past. In contrast, every Soundcraft board I have had or used has been rock solid reliable. The Presonous was not even in the hunt. I am very happy with my Si Expression 3 and glad that I selected it over the X32. I now also have a Mini Stagebox 32 and a MADI USB card in the console so I can use it as a digital snake and record via USB to my laptop.

 

To answer your questions specifically:

 

Q1) By far, the Si Expression 3 is the best sound equipment purchase I have ever made. Its is easy to use and works well for our band. I would do it again in a heartbeat!

 

Q2) The equalizer not being fully parametric like the Performer has not been a great problem for me or my band. But then, I am not a seasoned sound man with the experience level that others have. The Performer used to be the only way to use a stage box and record, no longer since Soundcraft released the MADI USB board for the console. If you have the extra money and really want the digital scribble strips and fully parametric EQ, you should be able to negotiate a good price on the Performer. However, I believe that the Expression is a pretty awesome board for a great price.

 

These are my opinions, and you know what opinions are like

 

Michael

[OneEng]

Both are capable mixers.

 

The X32 is less expensive, and has more features in general. The Expression Si 3 can not record multi-track without the MADI USB board and does not have scribble strips. If you need to mix more than 38 inputs (the X32 limit), the Expression Si can handle up to 66 .... which is unheard of in this price range of a mixer.

 

The recording may or may not be a big deal to you. The scribble strips are a big deal to most people. The channel count may or may not be a big deal either.

 

The X32 software infrastructure is much better than the Expression Si supporting PC, Linux, Mac, Android, and iOS devices... and many of them at once.

 

The X32 hardware device support is also less expensive. The integrated P16 monitor interface is very nice and not very expensive. The ability to have an X32 Rack as a stage box also provides the X32 a built in backup mixer as well as a small gig rig when you don't want to lug the full console around.

 

They both sound really good. The Soundcraft is a little easier to learn IMHO.

 

There are quite a few people that simply can't stomach the idea of a Behringer mixer in their venue due to many different reasons as DrMRG stated, but it is the most prolific digital mixer out there right now.

[Saturn1212]

Michael, OneEng,

Thanks for guidance and feedback.

Since I am new to sound, I thought the Expression 3 EQ deficiency may not be a big issue form me since I don't even know how to properly use the Q on the HF & LR anyway nevertheless, I plan to learn, I've been taking an online course, getting better and don't want to limit myself in near future & regretting the purchase.

 

Michael,

I do plan to purchase the expansion card as well. I need to record and do a "Virtual Soundcheck", I believe you can do that with Expression 3 + card + computer.

 

I currently own a StudioLive16 and using it to learn & for live performance. I am doing sound for the smaller venue of the wedding band I play with. Nevertheless, the smaller gigs are turning out to be bigger gigs with 12 to 18 players (horns, percussions, guest performers etc.) in most cases I run out of channels and forced to use a small Behringer analog submixer to support the SL16. Nevertheless, this posses a big challenge (not enough AUX sends, etc.) being new to this and not knowing how to properly compensate. So I decided to invest in a 32 channel mixer and torn between Expression 3, Behringer X32 or could look at the new Allen Heath. I have around, just lack the knowledge to make decision like you gents.

 

OneEng, as you pointed out, the Behringer gives you everything for the $, nevertheless, I am also concern with the Behringer brand, based on past experience with the smaller mixer. But it would really give me everything I want.

I've watched the following video, which compares these boards many times as guidance to make my decision:

 

 

In the comparison, I really liked the sound of the Expression compared to the Behringer.

 

I also have the choice to wait a few months (deal with my issues) and see what comes out new from Soundcraft which has the price point of an Expression 3 and features of the Performer. Or the Performer drops to about $3500, which looks to be impossible since the cheapest price I was offered was $6K+, that is way too much investment for a beginner!

 

Thanks again gents.

 

[agedhorse]

There is no way anybody can make any determination of the "sound" of any console on you tube. Even side by side, if blindfolded I doubt most folks could tell, Don't think you know more than reality suggests, that's what marketing people hope for!

[Pro Sound Guy]

A friend who owns an install company in town showed me that Soundcraft. Its not layers deep and kind of a hybrid

so to speak. Well thought out by Soundcraft.

[Saturn1212]

Point taken agedhorse.

 

[OneEng]

There is no way anybody can make any determination of the "sound" of any console on you tube. Even side by side' date=' if blindfolded I doubt most folks could tell, Don't think you know more than reality suggests, that's what marketing people hope for![/quote']

Having heard them both in the same room (admittedly at GC), my thoughts were that they both sounded very good. Good enough that any difference in sound was limited to the efx engines on vocals. I thought they were both very good. Slightly different, but both very good.

 

Make your buying decision based off of features and workflow. There are significant differences in this department between these two boards.

 

I thought the channel eq on the Soundcraft was just fine even though it wasn't as flexible as the one on the X32. If you can't get a good mix on the Expression Si, it isn't because of the board

[agedhorse]

Agreed, the tools are better than the skills of most users, but most users blame the tools.

[OneEng]

Agreed' date=' the tools are better than the skills of most users, but most users blame the tools.[/quote']

 

... and sometimes more things to fiddle with just gets people in more trouble

 

[agedhorse]

Yup, see it all the time.

[DrMRG]

Michael, OneEng,

Michael,

I do plan to purchase the expansion card as well. I need to record and do a "Virtual Soundcheck", I believe you can do that with Expression 3 + card + computer.

 

I have used my Si Expression 3 for recording and virtual soundcheck and have a few comments I wanted to share:

 

- There is only one expansion slot in the Expression as you mentioned previously.

 

- If you are planning on using a Mini Stagebox or Compact Stagebox (i.e., the digital snake) and you want to record to a PC, the least expensive route is to get the CAT5 Mini Stagebox 32 (~$1900 USD) which comes with a Dual CAT5 MADI console card included, and then buy the MADI USB card (~$300 USD) which allows you to use both the Mini Stagebox and recording at the same time.

 

- Switching between normal live recording mode and virtual soundcheck mode requires a few steps if you want to retain your mixes. Basically, I have a live record cue called LIVEREC that has the channel inputs coming from the stagebox and the direct outputs of each channel being sent to the PC via USB. After using this cue for awhile, each of the IEM and sub groups mixes are tweeked to our liking.... To do the virtual sound check and retain this information, you need to save the LIVEREC cue as a new name (for example, VSC) and then change the channel inputs to come from the USB instead of the stagebox and save it. Its not a huge deal, but is a bit awkward.

 

- If you are going to buy a stagebox in the future, I would get the MADI USB card which allows you to record now (via USB) and later add a CAT5 stagebox. The Multi Digital card is also available which has Firewire, USB, and ADAT interfaces, but costs more (~$400 USD)

 

Michael

[Saturn1212]

Thx Michael & others for support.

 

I made some investment in 2 analog snake 3 months ago, not knowing digital snakes were available and a better options. Lack of guidance and planning and I needed the snakes ASAP and made a blind purchase. No more of that for me .

 

so I was planning to leverage my current investment with the regular snakes. Therefore I was planning to get the Multi Digital card & firewire in my MacBookPro.

 

Q) In this scenario using the Multi-digital card only with analog snake, will I still be able to do my virtual sound check & after recording or I need the setup you suggested using MADI only?

 

Today is the day I need to decide & purchase in order to get the discount my GC Pro friend offered & help his yearly quota I am sure. I plan to buy the Expression 3, card & case (Gator). So last minute guidance on card would help.

 

On a side note, since GC no longer sells Behringer, I could not get any major discount on the X32 at other retailers as I am getting for the Expression 3, another factor in decision. Lessoned Learned here is that based on comments and guidance from everyone on the thread, they are both great boards & I would not go wrong either way.

 

[agedhorse]

The digital snake may NOT be a better option. Ask anybody who has experienced issues with their digital snake.

[DrMRG]

Thx Michael & others for support.

Q) In this scenario using the Multi-digital card only with analog snake, will I still be able to do my virtual sound check & after recording or I need the setup you suggested using MADI only?

Both the Multi-Digital card and the MADI USB will allow you to do virtual soundcheck. Basically, you have a 32 in / 32 out via the Firewire or USB. If you are interested (and in the USA), I would consider selling you my Multi Digital card.

 

I have the Gator case and it rocks....

 

As others have said, digital snakes can have issues if you do not have the proper cables.

 

Another good information resource is the Si Expression Facebook page.

 

Michael

[agedhorse]

Digital snakes can have issues from a variety of causes, including the wrong type of cable, and when it does (unlike an analog snake) it's catastrophic.

 

I had infrastructure set up for both a digital snake and analog snake and by far I prefer the analog solution because I don't have to worry about surprises. Now if I diidn't have 250' of 40 pair installed and had to buy new, I would have to weigh the cost of a new analog snake with the cost of the digital snake and see if that was a tradeoff that I could live with. The gigs I did were high profile, and snake failure was not an option. The 40 pair was installed in steel conduit for added shielding and protection from hazards like the possible rat. In 28 years I never had a single problem with a single line ever. That's the advantage of an inherently robust solution executed well. That represented probably 5000 shows.

[DrMRG]

Digital snakes can have issues from a variety of causes' date=' including the wrong type of cable, and when it does (unlike an analog snake) it's catastrophic.[/quote']

 

I don't have near the experience as you, but I have never seen problems using the digital snake with Soundcraft. I have seen Behringer X32 and S16 lose sync.... That being said, good old analog snakes are uber reliable, but heavy. A Cat5 tactical snake is much more road friendly (at least in my application space). BTW Happy New Year !

[OneEng]

Andy,

 

My back says a digital snake is more robust ..... for my back

 

DrMRG, there were quite a few issues with the X32 early on that ended up being related to how finicky the X32 was to the type of cable being used. It seems like they have a handle on it now. That being said, the MIDAS boxes and mixers using the same cables work just fine .... must be a more robust solution than the one implemented on the X32 .... at least more forgiving.

[DrMRG]

Andy,

 

My back says a digital snake is more robust ..... for my back

 

DrMRG, there were quite a few issues with the X32 early on that ended up being related to how finicky the X32 was to the type of cable being used. It seems like they have a handle on it now. That being said, the MIDAS boxes and mixers using the same cables work just fine .... must be a more robust solution than the one implemented on the X32 .... at least more forgiving.

 

Andy,

 

Understood. There is are some great videos on YouTube about the importance of having Ethercon connectors when using the X32 in terms of rejecting static electricity causing sync loss. For full disclosure, I have read of someone who was using a Soundcraft Mini Stagebox with a Cat 5 tactical cable without problems, but then switched to the MADI USB card and started having problems. I have not witnessed this, but I think its worth mentioning that Agedhorse's comments are spot on correct: When reliability is the most important requirement you cannot beat an analog snake.

[OneEng]

 

Andy,

 

Understood. There is are some great videos on YouTube about the importance of having Ethercon connectors when using the X32 in terms of rejecting static electricity causing sync loss. For full disclosure, I have read of someone who was using a Soundcraft Mini Stagebox with a Cat 5 tactical cable without problems, but then switched to the MADI USB card and started having problems. I have not witnessed this, but I think its worth mentioning that Agedhorse's comments are spot on correct: When reliability is the most important requirement you cannot beat an analog snake.

Oh, I agree. It is hard to argue that a multiple analog drop is not much more reliable than the single point of failure that is represented by most digital snake connections (I understand that some higher end solutions do in fact have redundancy though).

 

Truth be known, my favorite connection is much less reliable than even a digital stage box (wireless). It is the lightest solution of all, takes less time to setup, and less floor space.

 

In my use case (not nearly as serious as you guys), light, small, and easy to setup outweigh reliabilty.

 

In smaller setups, it is getting hard to give away an analog snake .... not so much because of digital snakes, but rather tablet mixing which is really taking off in the small to medium bar venue.

 

Of course for big acts where robustness is the most important factor, you can't argue with an analog snake.

 

Stage boxes and digital mixers are the mainstay for theater work where different audio setups are routinely changed through scenes. As I understand it, this allows more inputs than the mixer can mix, but they are there for different scenes .... where a single scene will include less than or equal to the digital mixers input mix capacity (ie a 32 channel mixer may have 60 inputs hooked up, but only be mixing 32 in any given scene). This use case can not be accomplished with an analog snake to the best of my understanding.

[agedhorse]

Reliability is a much bigger issue when you share the liability for a show happening through completion. If I have a snake failure (or any failure for that matter) and there's $50k in ticket sales looking for refunds, the MOST reliable solution might become much more desireable in a hurry.

 

This past year, I probably saw 70% analog snakes even though digital was probably an option in most of these. The system engineers for the most part decided that even though analog was heavier and more work, it was worth it when reliability is factored in. I have seen digital snake failures from all platforms, not just Behringer. Not pretty, things get stressed in a hurry.