Jump to content

Yamaha EMX512SC or EMX5014C ?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

I'm trying to decide between these two powered mixers

 

EMX5014C

 

EMX512SC

 

I don't need the extra inputs but I think I could maybe use the extra flexibility of the EMX5014 once I learn how to use it. One perceived downside is that there is only one graphic EQ. Does that mean that you can't EQ the monitors differently from the main speakers?

 

What are the pros and cons of going with the 5014 over the 512? Is it worth the extra dough and diminished portability?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I own and use the 5014 and it serves me well.It has worked without a hitch since I bought it a few years ago.Like always it depends on what you are going to use it for.

 

the 512 has two EQ's

the 5014 has two aux's

the 5014 has a third power routing option to power both aux's which is what I do and run crossover to a couple of amps for mains and subs.

If you are going to build into a larger PA these may be things to consider.Since we don't know what you already have or budget there may be better options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Thanks for the reply. Yeah I'd mostly be using it for jamming and small gigs.

 

I don't have any gear yet aside from a few mics, so I'll be buying some speakers too. I do have limited access to my bands BR15s and BR12Ms so I could always grab 'em for some gigs but not for jams at my place.

 

btw my budget is about 800 for the mixer. Is Yamaha the best bang for the buck or are there other better options?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Not sure which is more powerful but Ive used the PPM608 and it has alot of juice for small-medium gigs for what I do. (acoustic based, but loud at times)

 

I was most impressed with the sound. To me it sounds better than the previous Mackie series.

I think I have used every brand that makes a box powered head, and I am partial to Peavey and Mackie.

 

(I think spec-wise the Yamaha has a bit more wattage, but I dont think enough for a real noticable difference )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Mackie and Behringer are both using peak watts as their advertised power. If I had rated the XR's the way they do, it would be a 1,000 watt per channel powered mixer.

 

BTW, the PPM608 is 250x2 at 1% THD.

The EMX512SC is 500x2 at 0.5% THD at 1kHz.

 

The XR's are rated at 500x2 at 0.1% THD at 1kHz. The XR's basically have an IPR1600 in them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Mackie and Behringer are both using peak watts as their advertised power. If I had rated the XR's the way they do, it would be a 1,000 watt per channel powered mixer.


BTW, the PPM608 is 250x2 at 1% THD.

The EMX512SC is 500x2 at 0.5% THD at 1kHz.


The XR's are rated at 500x2 at 0.1% THD at 1kHz. The XR's basically have an IPR1600 in them.

 

 

So there's actually a huge difference then.

 

So is the Yamaha EMX512SC also more powerful than the Mackie PPM1008?

 

500x2 into 4ohms at 0.5% THD for the EMX512sc (listed as 1000watts)

400x2 into 4ohms at 1% THD for the PPM 1008 (listed as 1600watts)

 

Are those the right numbers to compare?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Not sure which is more powerful but Ive used the PPM608 and it has alot of juice for small-medium gigs for what I do. (acoustic based, but loud at times)


I was most impressed with the sound. To me it sounds better than the previous Mackie series.

I think I have used every brand that makes a box powered head, and I am partial to Peavey and Mackie.


(I think spec-wise the Yamaha has a bit more wattage, but I dont think enough for a real noticable difference )

 

 

It's not so much about the volume, people tell me that the power matters because you have to adequately power your speakers and if you're underpowered it can damage them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Here's a quote from the Mackie boards:

 

"Typically the general rule of thumb is: you indeed want to have an amp that's 1.5-2x the power of the RMS rating of a loudspeaker cab to get max output capabilities of the loudspeaker. However, you can certainly use a lesser power amp providing you do NOT clip (overdrive) the amp... as this can damage the speakers. I've had good success with my 808M internal amps (mono version of the 808S) running a pair C300z and a SWA1501 sub for FOH + a couple of 8ohm monitors as well, but technically yes, this is a little underpowered."

 

So is that correct? Clipping the amp is what can damage the speakers and on a lower powered system is easier to do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Sort of. If your amps aren't loud enough to generate the volume you're looking for, you're more likely to crank them beyond their limits in an attempt to get your volume. The bottom line is that you should have a good match between the amp and speakers capable of producing the desired volume, and don't try to run it wide open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't see any mention of aux sends on the Peavey XR, but the XR has more XLR inputs and an EQ for each side(very nice features too!). A knowledgable friend of mind warned against buying a mixer without aux sends back when I was shopping for mine. I'm glad he did, they come in handy as i am quickly finding out.

 

FWIW, I love my Yamaha MG206c, but wish I had gone for the whole shabang with the EMX5016....would have made life a lot simpler. The Yamaha gear is very solid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...