Members joms Posted August 25, 2013 Members Share Posted August 25, 2013 I was looking for a compact mixer (below 16x16 inches) and someone pointed me to try looking into Digital mixers specifically the Presonus 16.0.2. That thing looks amazing on paper! It has almost everything that I want (EQ/compressor/Effects/Gate/Limiter/etc).I only wish it had a)inserts b)subgroups c)USB d) SD Card to record songs and e)Feedback eliminator (for a last resort thing). Anyway, my questions are:1) How would you rank Presonus as a mixer? Is it within the same league as Allen& Heath? Soundcraft? or with Behringer, Mackie, etc? If possible can you rank them for me from 1 as being the best.2) Has anyone here used the Presonus 16.0.2? Can you comment on the quality of its pre-amp and effects? Is it better than the Zed-10fx (currently using this)?3) What other digital mixers are out there that are within 16x16 inches that can compete with the Presonus 16.0.2? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 25, 2013 Members Share Posted August 25, 2013 Ok, let's put this in perspective...1. Preamps - all of the units you mention have plenty good preamps and in fact are all very, very similar. I doubt you could tell the difference between any of these and preamps in any sub-$10k console as they all tend to share very similar topoliogies regardless of their marketing.2. Inserts??? Why would you need inserts when you have gates and comps on board for EVERY channel? If compact is one of your goals, the presumption is that you will not be carrying around a processing rack bigger than the console you are worrying about being 16" x 16" right?3. Recording... so you need to use a laptop to record, yeah this is one of the tradeoffs in a compact lower cost product.4. It's a heck of a nice console if it meets your needs and you are willing to work through the learning curve. This is the same for the other consoles as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dbMontana Posted August 25, 2013 Members Share Posted August 25, 2013 I own one and have been very happy with it for my needs -- 4-10 channels of vocals and DI'd acoustic instruments. As AH says you do need a laptop to record and also to support wireless mixing from an iPad both of which work well once set up. Sound and effects quality are fine to my ear. If I had to list the few deficiencies for me it would be having only one sweepable semi-parametric mid EQ and no GEQ on the four AUXes (only GEQ on the mains) but even the latter has proven to be a nonissue. To my knowledge the other boards you mention are fine as well but I only have first hand experience with the 16.0.2. Mine has been perfectly reliable but remember, it is in essence primarily a computer ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members twostone Posted August 25, 2013 Members Share Posted August 25, 2013 agedhorse wrote: Ok, let's put this in perspective... 1. Preamps - all of the units you mention have plenty good preamps and in fact are all very, very similar. I doubt you could tell the difference between any of these and preamps in any sub-$10k console as they all tend to share very similar topoliogies regardless of their marketing. 2. Inserts??? Why would you need inserts when you have gates and comps on board for EVERY channel? If compact is one of your goals, the presumption is that you will not be carrying around a processing rack bigger than the console you are worrying about being 16" x 16" right? 3. Recording... so you need to use a laptop to record, yeah this is one of the tradeoffs in a compact lower cost product. 4. It's a heck of a nice console if it meets your needs and you are willing to work through the learning curve. This is the same for the other consoles as well. Could be the inserts are needed for recording application to insert a outboard gear to a particular track such as tube compressor along with the inserted plugin app that comps for latency for real time monitoring to spice up the in the box mix with real analog outboard. Then could be the subgroup to be used for mutilple studio monitors for A/B referencing or external recording device ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OneEng Posted August 25, 2013 Members Share Posted August 25, 2013 joms wrote: I was looking for a compact mixer (below 16x16 inches) and someone pointed me to try looking into Digital mixers specifically the Presonus 16.0.2. That thing looks amazing on paper! It has almost everything that I want (EQ/compressor/Effects/Gate/Limiter/etc). I only wish it had a)inserts b)subgroups c)USB d) SD Card to record songs and e)Feedback eliminator (for a last resort thing). Anyway, my questions are: 1) How would you rank Presonus as a mixer? Is it within the same league as Allen& Heath? Soundcraft? or with Behringer, Mackie, etc? If possible can you rank them for me from 1 as being the best. 2) Has anyone here used the Presonus 16.0.2? Can you comment on the quality of its pre-amp and effects? Is it better than the Zed-10fx (currently using this)? 3) What other digital mixers are out there that are within 16x16 inches that can compete with the Presonus 16.0.2? Thanks I think that for what it DOES do, there is nothing like it on the market.The Mackie DL1608 has more inputs, and can record stereo without a computer (I think). It can not record multi-track as the 16.0.2 can with a computer.The 16.0.2 also has physical knobs and faders where the DL1608 does not.Something else to consider is the Behringer X32 Rack. The Rack (as the name implies) is a 3 space rack mount mixer. It has all the features of the full sized X32 with a much reduced physical interface. The iPad app and PC app are free (which help greatly to set it up and operate it. These run $1500.00 plus the cost of an iPad or PC laptop if you don't already have one.The X32 has the abililty to do inserts (although i agree with Agedhorse. Why?), it not only has subgroups, but also DCA's and matrix mixes.... and tons of features above these as well.As an example, the 16.0.2 has a 3 band channel eq with a single sweepable mid frequency. The X32 (and DL1608) has a full 4 band parametric eq. The X32 also has a low pass filter in addition to the 4 PEQ frequencies. Each frequency band can have its frequency set, as well as the width of the filter.An easy arguement can be made that the SL16.0.2 is a MUCH better mixer for someone new to digital mixing. The X32 simply has such a wealth of stuff it can do that you can easily mess up the sound more than you fix it.The DL1608 lands somewhere in complexity between the SL16.0.2 and the X32.If you up your budget to $2000.00 you can get the X32 Producer which is a 16 XLR input rack mount version of the X32 (The rack also has only 16 XLR inputs, but all X32 products can have more channels added with a digital snake and a S16 stage box).If you up your budget to $2500.00 you can also consider the Allen & Heath Qu-16 and Soundcraft Expression Si 3. The Qu-16 can record multi-track directly to an external USB hard drive (a unique feature so far in this market). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sibyrnes Posted August 25, 2013 Members Share Posted August 25, 2013 OneEng wrote: joms wrote: I was looking for a compact mixer (below 16x16 inches) and someone pointed me to try looking into Digital mixers specifically the Presonus 16.0.2. That thing looks amazing on paper! It has almost everything that I want (EQ/compressor/Effects/Gate/Limiter/etc). I only wish it had a)inserts b)subgroups c)USB d) SD Card to record songs and e)Feedback eliminator (for a last resort thing). Anyway, my questions are: 1) How would you rank Presonus as a mixer? Is it within the same league as Allen& Heath? Soundcraft? or with Behringer, Mackie, etc? If possible can you rank them for me from 1 as being the best. 2) Has anyone here used the Presonus 16.0.2? Can you comment on the quality of its pre-amp and effects? Is it better than the Zed-10fx (currently using this)? 3) What other digital mixers are out there that are within 16x16 inches that can compete with the Presonus 16.0.2? Thanks I think that for what it DOES do, there is nothing like it on the market. The Mackie DL1608 has more inputs, and can record stereo without a computer (I think). It can not record multi-track as the 16.0.2 can with a computer. The 16.0.2 also has physical knobs and faders where the DL1608 does not. Something else to consider is the Behringer X32 Rack. The Rack (as the name implies) is a 3 space rack mount mixer. It has all the features of the full sized X32 with a much reduced physical interface. The iPad app and PC app are free (which help greatly to set it up and operate it. These run $1500.00 plus the cost of an iPad or PC laptop if you don't already have one. The X32 has the abililty to do inserts (although i agree with Agedhorse. Why?), it not only has subgroups, but also DCA's and matrix mixes.... and tons of features above these as well. As an example, the 16.0.2 has a 3 band channel eq with a single sweepable mid frequency. The X32 (and DL1608) has a full 4 band parametric eq. The X32 also has a low pass filter in addition to the 4 PEQ frequencies. Each frequency band can have its frequency set, as well as the width of the filter. An easy arguement can be made that the SL16.0.2 is a MUCH better mixer for someone new to digital mixing. The X32 simply has such a wealth of stuff it can do that you can easily mess up the sound more than you fix it. The DL1608 lands somewhere in complexity between the SL16.0.2 and the X32. If you up your budget to $2000.00 you can get the X32 Producer which is a 16 XLR input rack mount version of the X32 (The rack also has only 16 XLR inputs, but all X32 products can have more channels added with a digital snake and a S16 stage box). If you up your budget to $2500.00 you can also consider the Allen & Heath Qu-16 and Soundcraft Expression Si 3. The Qu-16 can record multi-track directly to an external USB hard drive (a unique feature so far in this market).Remember this? " I was looking for a compact mixer (below 16x16 inches)". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted August 26, 2013 Members Share Posted August 26, 2013 OneEng wrote: The X32 (and DL1608) has a full 4 band parametric eq. The X32 also has a low pass filter in addition to the 4 PEQ frequencies. The DL1608 also has HPFs in addition to the 4 PEQ frequencies . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 27, 2013 Members Share Posted August 27, 2013 Cynicism is usually constructive if you are willing to read it and understand why these comments are being made (generally by the more experienced live audio folks here by the way) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 27, 2013 Members Share Posted August 27, 2013 You only need to worry about feedback on a closed loop system. Playback only systems are open loop so feedback stability issues do not apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members joms Posted August 27, 2013 Author Members Share Posted August 27, 2013 Yeah, that's what i thought. It's just that sometimes when only our mics are turned on, feedback doesnt occur. When we start playing music, feedback starts. I guess the music entering the mic gets enhanced a lot when music is turned up. Correct me if im wrong but In this case, would the results be the same if i GEQ the home theater speakers to control feedback or if i GEQ the QSC K10? (Mixer aux out --> music to home theater speakers / mixer main out --> vocals to qsc k10) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 28, 2013 Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 Not you specifically, but there is a trend I'm seeing where new people ask question and then argue that those giving the answers just don't understand. While you have been more respectful than many, it still gets old. Maybe a karaoke website might be more your style? That way, folks who you ask can give answers that seem right to you even if they are bad advice, because they don't know it's bad advice and everyone can feel happy together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Unalaska Posted August 28, 2013 Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 Lemme offer a little advice in a different context. Karaoke traditionally uses substandard gear that has a high noise floor, poor electronics, and speakers that are typically poor quality. Dynamic range isn't a big deal usually, sound quality isn't either. Most karaoke systems I see at bad Chinese bars have crap components all they the signal chain, every piece is a choke point where good audio is throttled back in favor of only spending a little money on gear. That said, nowhere in your signal chain is anything throttled back. Qsc K10s are way way more than adequate for what you're doing. Same with the mixer and the rest of the gear, I'd suggest because the room is so small using more of a studio monitor, or jbl control series speakers with a lower wattage amp (50w per is fine). Acoustical compression would go further than squashing it with a standard rack mount comp. it'll also dirty things up a bit, give a little edge to what's going on. Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 28, 2013 Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 Twostone and joms, it's beginning to look like the blind leading the blind. Twostones comments are a combination of misleading and inaccurate. Maybe that's going to be ok since joms is not listening to what's being said anyway. This is a simple problem looking too hard for a complicated, poor solution IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members joms Posted August 28, 2013 Author Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 I think I have to clarify something. The sound from my karaoke system is actually good from where i stand. The sound isn't bad at all. My system is by far the best karaoke system within our group of friends and actually it is much better than the commercial karaoke places here in our country.(all my friends attest to this).I just want to make my system sound better since I have some spare change in my pocket. If possible, I am trying to go after the sound of a jazz bar which ive heard way back in college with a performer singing in front. Guests can sing in front too and I did and man, the sound was amazing. Unfortunately, they are closed already so I can't talk to the sound engineer or owner on asking for tips on how to make my system sound better. Yes there is feedback but it isn't as bad as you think. It only happens rarely during our karaoke nights. It seems that the way some people here read this is that my system sucks like hell and I'm trying desperately to make it sound superb. It's not that at all. My system sounds above average and feedback is not all too often. Right now I have some spare money so I wan't to buy things to make it sound better. Along with this new toys im getting, i'm also reading up on how to use it. That's the gist of it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members twostone Posted August 28, 2013 Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 agedhorse wrote: Twostone and joms, it's beginning to look like the blind leading the blind. Twostones comments are a combination of misleading and inaccurate. Maybe that's going to be ok since joms is not listening to what's being said anyway. This is a simple problem looking too hard for a complicated, poor solution IMO. yea a clipped signals sounds so great through speakers is so misleading info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 28, 2013 Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 Nobody said it sucked like hell. The sound of the jazz club was a combination of the room itself. The system that was installed, how it was installed and the skill of the operator. Did they use a home theatre or stereo system? Unlikely. In fact, it's a totally different application, which the k-10's and zed-10 are much closer to than your home theatre attempt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OneEng Posted August 28, 2013 Members Share Posted August 28, 2013 agedhorse wrote: Twostone and joms, it's beginning to look like the blind leading the blind. Twostones comments are a combination of misleading and inaccurate. Maybe that's going to be ok since joms is not listening to what's being said anyway. This is a simple problem looking too hard for a complicated, poor solution IMO. +1.Hey joms,What you really need is a digital cross-over and an RTA program like Smaart. By putting the digital cross-over between your mixer and your speakers, you will be able to use advanced concepts like delay and phase alignment between your two speaker systems to make your sound much better. Also, it is very likely that Smaart program will allow you to actually SEE the problems which you are encountering with your setup and use the many tools you will have in your 16.0.2 to fix them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 30, 2013 Members Share Posted August 30, 2013 It appears that there are some pretty serious misunderstanding about what a DI does and why they are used. DI's provide an impedance transformation from high impedance to low impedance. A passive DI transforms from roughly 50k to 600 ohm and an active DI transforms from about 1M to 600 ohm. A typical unbalanced input on a mixer is around 10k. Ideally it should be driven by a source less then about 2k, hence the use of a DI which drives a typical mic input. A DI also balances the signal for improved noise. Also, a DI provides galvanic isolation and the ability to break signal ground loops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members joms Posted August 30, 2013 Author Members Share Posted August 30, 2013 agedhorse - so a DI is always needed between a guitar and a mixer so that it can reduce the ohms to 600? What will happen if the mixer gets an input from a guitar with a value of 50k to 1M ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 31, 2013 Members Share Posted August 31, 2013 Sir, it appear that you are hopelessly in over your head and the light at the end of the tunnel is a fast approaching train. I can't begin to correct your misunderstandings. All my information seems to do is fuel new and more outrageous misunderstandings. I am clearly frustrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OneEng Posted August 31, 2013 Members Share Posted August 31, 2013 ...now would be a good time for the OP to look into SMAART Andy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 31, 2013 Members Share Posted August 31, 2013 Agreed! Smaart will quickly and efficiently confirm that the light is indeed a train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted August 31, 2013 Members Share Posted August 31, 2013 This should all sound great over the home theatre speakers with lots of compression too. There seems to be either a stubbornness or a serious disconnect in comprehension becsuse things that are being said here are getting twisted around into non-truths. By any chance are you using a translation program to read and write? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted September 1, 2013 Members Share Posted September 1, 2013 Again, you misunderstand completely my comments. I hope you don't plan on putting the guitars and the kids through your home speakers. Will end poorly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OneEng Posted September 1, 2013 Members Share Posted September 1, 2013 agedhorse wrote: This should all sound great over the home theatre speakers with lots of compression too. There seems to be either a stubbornness or a serious disconnect in comprehension becsuse things that are being said here are getting twisted around into non-truths. By any chance are you using a translation program to read and write? Yep. Lots of talking, very little listening.joms,IME you can indeed get the best results by using a mic on an acoustic guitar .... but not just any mic. The microphones which get this kind of good result cost as much as your mixer (and sometimes even more). Neuman is known for this kind of pristine and accurate recording .... but check out the price: http://www.zzounds.com/item--NEUU87AISETZSo again you are in a position where someone has given you some advice, and you are ignoring it.If you are confused as to why what you are doing aggrivates some of us, consider this. I have likely forgotten more about recording and playing guitar than you or your kids will ever know, yet you dismiss my advice because you watched a youtube video and decided that the sound quality from that video was better from some unknown microphone than from a direct feed.As I stated earlier, you aren't here for advice joms. You are here for validation of what you intend to do. This is what is getting people irritated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.