Carvin's now more than ever confusing new mixer!

[Unalaska]

http://www.carvinguitars.com/products/group.php?cid=13

 

First off, here is what they did right. This is easy:

8 aux sends

4 band EQ with LM and HM swept EQ

USB I/O

 

things that were in the right direction but still missed the mark...

Aux 1-6 now are on balanced XLR outputs

Compressors on subgroups (??, ?? ??)

 

things that really really should have been fixed all around:

Aux 1-8 NOT SWITCHABLE PRE/POST anywhere

aux 7-8 still using crappy internal effects

aux 7-8 (1-6 on older version) on UNbalanced 1/4 outputs

All pots don't follow a straight line. Zig-zag pattern supposedly makes more room?

9 band EQ?? really, on a 32channel frame??

OPTIONAL 4 channels of wireless mic recievers mounted inside the board and them being routed to ch 1-4????? WTF!

5 identical little buttons next to each fader that I can't read even with super hero vision.

Really bad metering section, 32 channels and only a peak/sig lite and the mute/solo light is the same. Good luck...

60mm faders (ok, it's 1100 for the 24ch frame)

 

OK, that covers my rant.

 

I may forgive them if the X-drive is cool. And the 4ch amp that is 10lbs with 300w @ 8. that's cool.

[SoundMan]

You forgot to mention the opamp preamps. You'd think in a board that size they would put a little effort into the preamps.

 

We've done the compressors in the sub-groups before, I did this in the RQ4300 series back in about 2000. If memory serves me right, some of the Crest mixers had this feature before that.

[RoadRanger]

I have yet to see a MI mixer that doesn't have a few "WTF?" on them. Is there some sort of rule that mixer design engineers aren't allowed to talk to live sound engineers ?

[Craig Vecchione]

Yep, I had one of the Crest versions of the Peavey RQ4300 and found compression on the groups to be.....ehhhh, okay. If you really use groups, you probably won't want to use the comps, as you typically want them on a single instrument, not on several.

 

Getting it right on this (price) level of mixer seems to be nearly impossible.

[agedhorse]

There are some op-amp preamps that are worth considering... Crest used the SSM products, there's the THAT, NS and TI platforms too. Don't know it by chance they used one of the good options though gien their market. Another consideration is that the 5524 when properly configured, makes a pretty decent preamp and the noise figures are respectable when driven by low impedance sources. There's also the 3 op-amp topology.

 

It's the stupid features and lack of common sense towards useability that shows that the concept is driven by marketing folks that do not spend hours behind a console in a typical user environment.

 

Kind of like teachers that teach because they can't do rather than because they are great teachers.

[SoundMan]

Our compressors were patch-able out to individual channels, if I remember right. All it took was a stereo patch cable, just plug the Comp I/O to the channel insert, and there you go. They just happen to be in the sub-group area and in the sub-groups by default.

 

Those were actually pretty nice comps, same THAT/DBX chip-set as in most of the higher end rack units.

 

The only real weakness was the lack of a ratio control, everything else was there.

 

 

"Is there some sort of rule that mixer design engineers aren't allowed to talk to live sound engineers ?"

 

I'm here, and listening.

[SoundMan]

"There are some op-amp preamps that are worth considering... Crest used the SSM products, there's the THAT, NS and TI platforms too. Don't know it by chance they used one of the good options though gien their market."

 

I was going by the EIN spec of -117dBm, that's a dead give away it's a simple op-amp pre.

[agedhorse]

Gottcha

[1960LesPaul]

When you say MI mixer what does hte MI stand for.

[monkeyland]

 

When you say MI mixer what does hte MI stand for.

 

 

musical instrument grade. as opposed to professional grade.

 

generally the type of things that would be sold in a store that would also sell guitars and such

[RoadRanger]

"Is there some sort of rule that mixer design engineers aren't allowed to talk to live sound engineers ?" I'm here, and listening.

Name a mixer and I'll tell you what I don't like about it .

[Gregidon]

I think the most important thing to remember here is that Carvin's intended market is not pro audio guys but rather the hobbyist who gets their catalog and reads it in the john. While a pro-audio guy sees a 9-band and thinks WTF? the hobbyist sees it and thinks, sweet! While a pro-audio guy sees staggered aux sends and it looks bizarre, the hobbyist sees these and thinks it's a cool design choice. Built in wireless mics? Pro - limitations, Hobbyist - cool, less stuff to carry.

 

You get my point. The hobbyist probably doesn't even think to ask about things like switchable pre/post auxes or balanced outputs. The bottom line is that this board makes perfect sense when you realize that it is marketed toward the beginner, someone more impressed by number of features than features that make sense.

 

-Greg

[abzurd]

What he said - it usually seems to be case in powered mixers to implement 6 cheap "features" versus 4 more practical, but also more expensive, features.

 

The design directive often seems to be to put as much "stuff" as you can in the box, but keep it at $XXX.

[RoadRanger]

IMNSHO it's all been downhill in powered mixers since the old Peavey 600 series box mixer. Used to use one on monitors. Great for FOH in a really small room or for backup when something in the main rig took a dump .

[Craig Vecchione]

 

Our compressors were patch-able out to individual channels, if I remember right. All it took was a stereo patch cable, just plug the Comp I/O to the channel insert, and there you go. They just happen to be in the sub-group area and in the sub-groups by default. Those were actually pretty nice comps, same THAT/DBX chip-set as in most of the higher end rack units. The only real weakness was the lack of a ratio control, everything else was there. "Is there some sort of rule that mixer design engineers aren't allowed to talk to live sound engineers ?" I'm here, and listening.

 

 

You're correct, Jim, and my post wasn't clear that they had this fucntionality; I was referring to group only comps being less than useful.

[SoundMan]

"Name a mixer and I'll tell you what I don't like about it ."

 

Thing is, I could design you a custom mixer, but you might be the only one that likes it.

 

I have to design mixers that a large number of people like, our dealers like, we can make money on (that is why we are in business) and has to be reliable. I'm sure I'm forgetting some others, but you get the idea.

 

 

Ok, XR1212. What don't you like about it? If you don't like it, it's Don's fault.

[dboomer]

I'm here, and listening.

 

Don't you mean stalking

[RoadRanger]

Ok, XR1212. What don't you like about it? If you don't like it, it's Don's fault.

First off it's powered - but aside from that:

 

9-band GEQ + Auto RTA = kiddy treats.

 

I'd prefer individual over global phantom. I'd prefer these buttons to be recessed.

 

Rather have a pad button than a line input.

 

I'd prefer monitor sends pre-EQ post-insert. Would be awesome if it was recessed-button selectable per channel .

 

The usual lack of monitor send inserts and XLR outs. Don't think I saw main inserts either? Not show stoppers though...

 

No talkback channel. Being a powered mixer guess it doesn't need one as it's meant to be run on-stage or side-stage?

 

I'd prefer the lo-cut to be pre-insert.

 

Really like to see my usable mic input count match up with a standard snake (12, 16, 24, 32). Have mixer designers actually ever seen a snake ?

 

I do like many things you did:

I prefer an FX send mute over the return mute you have. Otherwise the FX section controls are a notch above most .

RCA / 1/8" iPod input on a full stereo strip - loose the mono XLR though .

I like the concept of the EQ for a board this small but I'd have to try it to like it I think .

[RoadRanger]

Really like to see my usable mic input count match up with a standard snake (12, 16, 24, 32). Have mixer designers actually ever seen a snake ?

 

This is the one that really makes me feel that "live sound" is disrespected by the designers .

[SoundMan]

You do realize, almost everything you asked for adds to the price, right? So, if it had all of these things, would it be worth $1299 instead of $899? How many people are going to pay that for a powered mixer?

 

 

First off it's powered - but aside from that: The amps are practically free, consider them a bonus.

 

9-band GEQ + Auto RTA = kiddy treats. I'm not sure what you are saying...I couldn't fit 31 sliders in the given area.

 

I'd prefer individual over global phantom. I'd prefer these buttons to be recessed. Adds cost, and is it really necessary?

 

Rather have a pad button than a line input.

 

I'd prefer monitor sends pre-EQ post-insert. Would be awesome if it was recessed-button selectable per channel . They are switchable with an internal solder connection, an easy mod.

 

The usual lack of monitor send inserts and XLR outs. Don't think I saw main inserts either? Not show stoppers though...

 

No talkback channel. Being a powered mixer guess it doesn't need one as it's meant to be run on-stage or side-stage?

 

I'd prefer the lo-cut to be pre-insert. Ok, but that would add cost, due to the construction constraints. Something that's not obvious from the outside.

 

Really like to see my usable mic input count match up with a standard snake (12, 16, 24, 32). Do mixer designers actually ever use a snake ? Ugh, the XR1212 has 12 XLR connectors. What's wrong with that?

 

I prefer an FX send mute over the return mute you have. Otherwise the FX section controls are a notch above most . Why? If you mute it post effects, you remove the added noise from the main mix. Not that the effects are noisy, but almost any digital board at this level will be noisier than the analog board it's plugged into.

 

There's a reason for almost every feature, you wouldn't believe the amount of thought that goes into almost every switch or knob on the board. I've seen us argue for days over the labeling of a simple switch.

 

Once again, this mixer was intended to be a one box solution at a reasonable price. I think we did a pretty good job at hitting the intended target.

[Unalaska]

I really like the Peavey powered mixers, the whole point of having one is simplicity. The minute you have to add an EQ to insert or an effects processor the whole simplicity and ease thing doesn't work. Keep on keepin' on peavey.

[RoadRanger]

You do realize, almost everything you asked for adds to the price, right?

Maybe, maybe not - let's see :

First off it's powered - but aside from that: The amps are practically free, consider them a bonus.

I just have no need or desire for them and running active speakers is much simpler (and safe) for the newbee I think? I'm sure it adds a little cost at least .

9-band GEQ + Auto RTA = kiddy treats. I'm not sure what you are saying...I couldn't fit 31 sliders in the given area.

I have no desire for ANY GEQ in the mixer itself - I'll always have an external 31 band. This also adds a little cost at least .

I'd prefer individual over global phantom. I'd prefer these buttons to be recessed. Adds cost, and is it really necessary?

If you replace the line-in jacks with pads you do need individual phantom or need to use DI's on all non-mic sources - not a showstopper. Swapping the line out jacks for pad switches would probably be a wash costwise?

I'd prefer monitor sends pre-EQ post-insert. Would be awesome if it was recessed-button selectable per channel . They are switchable with an internal solder connection, an easy mod.

Not shown on the block diagram? Other mixers that have jumper pads internal show this on the block diagram.

I'd prefer the lo-cut to be pre-insert. Ok, but that would add cost, due to the construction constraints. Something that's not obvious from the outside.

Not something most mixers do anyways.

Really like to see my usable mic input count match up with a standard snake (12, 16, 24, 32). Do mixer designers actually ever use a snake ? Ugh, the XR1212 has 12 XLR connectors. What's wrong with that?

You loose one if you use the iPod input. Channel 11 is also stereo but usable I suppose but would be used for a talkback mic when using a snake. So, only 10 channels down the 12 channel snake . For a stage mixer (its intended use) it's fine .

I prefer an FX send mute over the return mute you have. Why? If you mute it post effects, you remove the added noise from the main mix. Not that the effects are noisy, but almost any digital board at this level will be noisier than the analog board it's plugged into.

It cuts the reverb "tail" off. Just sounds a bit more pro to do it the other way 'round. No biggie .

[monkeyland]

pre EQ aux sends is huge for me. without it you are ruining the monitor mix everytime you eq a vocal.

 

mixwiz is the only small frame mixer that i know of that has this

[SoundMan]

"Not shown on the block diagram? Other mixers that have jumper pads internal show this on the block diagram."

 

Yeah, that's my fault. It's there, just not on the block diagram.

 

"I have no desire for ANY GEQ in the mixer itself - I'll always have an external 31 band. This also adds a little cost at least ."

 

If you're bringing external EQ, this mixer is probably not for you anyway. Like I said, it's intended to be a one box PA. I think most people could get good results with it the way it is. If you use the auto-EQ and feedback ferrets to reduce the feedback, then use the 9 band graphic for tone shaping, I'm not sure you could gain much with a 31 band. That's not a challenge, I'm just pointing out the mixer has a fairly strong feedback/tone management set the way it is.

 

All that aside, I think this is something the market demands. I don't think we could sell a powered mixer of this size without a graphic EQ.

[Unalaska]

Roadranger: it sounds like any powered mixer wouldn't suit your needs, but for many it works quite well.

 

98% of users wouldn't know what pre/post eq auxes mean anyway. As I see it there really isn't any botique full service powered mixer out there on the market. EV has a EMX2000 or something like it 10years ago, 12 XLR, 3 aux, 500w @4 per channel but it came in around $1600 or so. Yamaha quickly came out with similar powered mixers for about 1/2. By the time you add these features up you really don't need a powered mixer but a rack with everything in it.