IEM questions and thoughts on upgrading to digital.

[roadweiry]

 

Alright the current rig (as it has been for a while) We do country/jamband original music

FOH PRX600

Monitors- EV1202 /Qsc Gx3

GL-2400-32

Outboard - DBX 1231's (3units) DBX 266 (4units) a few fx units

 

So I will start with the fact that our current rig sounds amazing , bulky and heavy for sure! We have also started talking about going with IEM's. As a 4pc we could pull this off in mono with the GL but from what i have read alot of ppl say stereo is the way to go.

In regards to the IEM rig, I plan on racking up some galaxy 1100's and getting custom molds/buds. Now most of the antenna "combiners" I have seen are quite pricey.  What's the "good but cheap one" ?

 

We also record most everything we do and are considering looking at selling "souvenir recordings" on USB stick after the show.  Seems recording live is easier digital ?

So far as the upgrading to digital goes. The IEM factor makes the most sense digital as the ease of live recording, weight/size is another thing the digi has going for it.

So being I would like to keep the mixer under 3k that pretty much points me towards the SL24 or X32. I like everything about the X32 except that it is a digital Behringer product. eek  The digital snake option would cut down on gear and ease our set ups big itme. I have read SL vs x32 threads for a week now.

Truth be told the SL24 would fit our needs as we dont need any real crazy fx all at once. 10aux sends leaves a few left over for back up wedges.  So its a toss up in that dept.

 

[agedhorse]

IMO, stereo in ears is not all that beneficial UNLESS you interact with the audience and use ambience mics to help with localization of sound from the audience... BUT I have also seen problems where being rigerous about checking and testing... like the ambient mics being reversed makes you look like a fool on stage looking away from where the sound is coming from. Also, making stereo mixes that are meaningful on stage can be more trouble than they are worth and do take more time to set up.

That said, done well by an experienced monitor engineer, it can be an improvement in spacial imaging. The key is doing it well.

[roadweiry]

Thanks for the input. Reading all the stereo vs mono threads here and elsewhere certainly ranged from "mono is good" to "stereo is the only way". That said I personally pictured the drummer and in our case bass/singer in the middle having the most to gain since they have other members to their left/right.  

What should I be looking for far as an external antenna and combiner ?  Good used recommendation?

 

[Koopdaddy]

 

---

roadweiry wrote:

 

 

Alright the current rig (as it has been for a while) We do country/jamband original music

 

FOH PRX600

 

Monitors- EV1202 /Qsc Gx3

 

GL-2400-32

 

Outboard - DBX 1231's (3units) DBX 266 (4units) a few fx units

 

 

 

So I will start with the fact that our current rig sounds amazing , bulky and heavy for sure! We have also started talking about going with IEM's. As a 4pc we could pull this off in mono with the GL but from what i have read alot of ppl say stereo is the way to go.

 

In regards to the IEM rig, I plan on racking up some galaxy 1100's and getting custom molds/buds. Now most of the antenna "combiners" I have seen are quite pricey.  What's the "good but cheap one" ?

 

 

 

We also record most everything we do and are considering looking at selling "souvenir recordings" on USB stick after the show.  Seems recording live is easier digital ?

 

So far as the upgrading to digital goes. The IEM factor makes the most sense digital as the ease of live recording, weight/size is another thing the digi has going for it.

 

So being I would like to keep the mixer under 3k that pretty much points me towards the SL24 or X32. I like everything about the X32 except that it is a digital Behringer product. eek  The digital snake option would cut down on gear and ease our set ups big itme. I have read SL vs x32 threads for a week now.

 

Truth be told the SL24 would fit our needs as we dont need any real crazy fx all at once. 10aux sends leaves a few left over for back up wedges.  So its a toss up in that dept.

 

 

---

 

FWIW the P16 setup with the X32 is a nice system. It works well and the sound quality is on par with the other brands that offer personal mixing systems.

 

That being said, you may not need all that and as others have mentioned, the SL probably will work well for you.

[mshifflett]

I would have to agree with Andy on this.  I have been using IEM almost since it came out and have tried both stereo and mono at length.  The ambient mic option that Andy mentions is pretty cool.  There is also some value in the fact that you can create a fairly close stereo image of your stage by gently panning things around in your ears.  Of course if you move around it seems a little weird.  There is also the "open" sort of quality with the mix you get when in stereo.  Although these things seem like good reasons to go stereo, it was just not enough to sway me.  A good mono mix is nice and thick, takes half the numbers of outputs and is much easier to mix (especially on the fly).

For me and the people I play with it just wasn't worth it.

[OneEng]

 

---

roadweiry wrote:

 

 

Alright the current rig (as it has been for a while) We do country/jamband original music

 

FOH PRX600

 

Monitors- EV1202 /Qsc Gx3

 

GL-2400-32

 

Outboard - DBX 1231's (3units) DBX 266 (4units) a few fx units

 

 

 

So I will start with the fact that our current rig sounds amazing , bulky and heavy for sure! We have also started talking about going with IEM's. As a 4pc we could pull this off in mono with the GL but from what i have read alot of ppl say stereo is the way to go.

 

In regards to the IEM rig, I plan on racking up some galaxy 1100's and getting custom molds/buds. Now most of the antenna "combiners" I have seen are quite pricey.  What's the "good but cheap one" ?

 

 

 

We also record most everything we do and are considering looking at selling "souvenir recordings" on USB stick after the show.  Seems recording live is easier digital ?

 

So far as the upgrading to digital goes. The IEM factor makes the most sense digital as the ease of live recording, weight/size is another thing the digi has going for it.

 

So being I would like to keep the mixer under 3k that pretty much points me towards the SL24 or X32. I like everything about the X32 except that it is a digital Behringer product. eek  The digital snake option would cut down on gear and ease our set ups big itme. I have read SL vs x32 threads for a week now.

 

Truth be told the SL24 would fit our needs as we dont need any real crazy fx all at once. 10aux sends leaves a few left over for back up wedges.  So its a toss up in that dept.

 

 

---

 

Hi roadweiry,

I have been doing research on digital mixers for the last 6 months in preperation to move to digital myself.  In the price range and channel count you are considering, the X32, SL24, and Soundcraft Expression Si are all in the same general price range.  The Expression Si requires an external (and expensive) MADI card to do multi-track recording and playback if that part is important to you.  I think it can do stereo recording without it though.

The general consensus I have read is as follows:

Sound Quailty

Expression Si, X32 > SL24

Features

X32 > Expression Si > SL24.  It should be noted that the features of the X32 come at the cost of ease-of-use/ ease-of-understanding.  Both the SL24 and the Expression Si are very easy to comprehend while the X32 requires some thinking to get your head around it.  This may be more so for setup than it is for operation.

Remote Mixing

SL24 > X32 (haven't heard about the Expression Si), and there were some posts about the SL app not behaving well when it disconnects.  It should also be noted that the SL24 requires an external computer for remote mixing where the others do not.

Recording (multi-track)

X32, SL24 > Expression Si (due only to additional cost needed for Expression Si).  Keep in mind that all of the digital mixers allow stereo mixing directly to a USB drive AFAIK.

 

 I have toyed with all of these in the show-room, but haven't mixed a show on them.  I don't think I can make a fair comparison of them without doing something like that.  There is a thread at Prosoundweb where a group did exactly that (and a few other mixers as well).  I suspect you have already read that one.

[FormerlyBassred]

I used IEM's every night for years. I did a stereo mix with a few extra mics around the stage/front of stage area. It was nice, but meant that I had 3 or 4 more mics to set up (on top of a full PA and monitor rig (two guys on either side of the stage were still using wedges - which worked as stage fills for me at center stage if I ever pulled my IEM's out for any reason..)  and I was actually pretty satisfied with the mono mix, so I went with that (with one extra mic set upon a tall boom around the center stage mark over the drum set (so it looked like a drum overhead, but was actually picking up the 'airy' pen vibe of the stage mix)... 

So I go mono, when I use IEM's. A lot of our shows now have quick turn-arounds so no time to dial in IEM mixes (playing originals now vs covers before)... 

[Dookietwo]

I'm working with a band now that uses stereo IEM. They don't have any amps on stage just use their peddles. (Joy) They like to hear their stereo patches. Returning them mono just does "something" they don't like. Easy enough to do. Of course having stereo drums adds more space to the mix as does panning the vocals slightly.

Andy is right about making sure that the room microphones are correct as far as from the stage L/R image. For the small rooms that they do a stereo pair in a X/Y configuration works fine for this group. Pull the room microphones down when they are playing songs. Up when the are finishing the song.

I use 1 reverb lightly to keep their mix from being too dry.

Dookietwo

[roadweiry]

 

Thanks for the replies.  I suppose I will try the IEM's with the GL2400 in mono first since its already there. 

Far as the mixer upgrade goes, I figure I can sell of the GL and the outboard for it pretty much for the cost of a sl24 or x32. The Behringer name still scare me but the options are killer. It seems pretty straight forward. I like the fact that we would have more then enough to have stereo IEMS as well as floor wedges.  As would the sl24 if we didn't go full stereo IEM's

 

Some of our best paying shows are larger events where there are sometimes 2-4 other bands on the bill earlier in the day. So not having to touch our monitor mix while still handling others bands is a major plus and pretty much required. The digital snake option down the road seems cool as well.

 

lol. Anyone want to trade a x32 for a gl2400-32w/out board gear ? ..let me know .

[Dookietwo]

One more thing as far as the room microphones. Be sure they are not asssigned to the FOH, fills , or other floor wedges. I saw a show not too long ago where feedback was coming up at the end of each song then go away when the next song started. Went over to the desk and sure enough the BE had the room microphones for the IEM's assigned to the main mix as well. Of course this goes for the bands talk back as well. 

 

Dookietwo

[Gregidon]

Guido, some IEMs support this natively.

[Vito Corleone]

In what form?

[DanBAP]

---

Dookietwo wrote:

One more thing as far as the room microphones. Be sure they are not asssigned to the FOH, fills , or other floor wedges. I saw a show not too long ago where feedback was coming up at the end of each song then go away when the next song started. Went over to the desk and sure enough the BE had the room microphones for the IEM's assigned to the main mix as well. Of course this goes for the bands talk back as well. 

You could see how the routing was set up from somewhere other than directly behind the board? 

 

-Dan.