Anybody use a Peavey FX series mixer?

[dedmeet]

Hi everyone! I am doing some research and planning for a possible re-do of my whole PA. My main goal is to shrink the amount of stuff I haul around.

 

I have taken an interest in the Peavey FX series mixer as a means to get analog convenience with the ability to have digital signal processing (and, as a result, a smaller and lighter effects rack). The basic plan is to shed the power mixer, four passive cabs, extra power amp, and heavy effects rack and go with a mixer, small effects rack, and powered cabs/subs.

 

Does anyone here have any experience with these mixers? I have quite a number of older Peavey analog boards with pretty good success.

 

Thanks for any info!

[Bugzie]

I have the 24 FX . I'm very happy with it but I will warn you that the learning curve is pretty steep. The manual absolutely sucks. The normal board functions are as would be expected. Its the effects and outboard processing that can be confusing. I've probably got 20 gigs under my belt and still haven't figured everything out. The thing has the capability to do so much its amazing.

[dedmeet]

Thanks for the info. I downloaded the manual, and, yes, it did seem rather lacking. The local shop has one and I may need to pop over and check it out in detail.

 

Do you run any external processing, or do you do all processing inside the mixer using its goodies?

[SoundMan]

The original manual was written before all of the digital section was even finished. If you go to our website, there is an update that Don wrote.

 

thanks,

SoundMan

[dboomer]

Here's some video training ...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIwo2HTeN0Y

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSVVlyIb3CA

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3q8bzGvUIU

[dedmeet]

Thanks, folks, just did a little reading and video watching and that answered quite a few questions. It would be nice, though, if some sample system setups were included in the manuals.

[wiresix]

good job on those training vids boomer. I wanna buy a 24FX now! if I did I would probably use a real graphic EQ just out of ease of use, but I was wondering is it completely impossible to run the graphic eq at the same time as the feedback killer?

 

also, there are two processors right? and each one can handle a max of 3 FX at a time? now can someone split up those 3 fx and assign them to different channels? or is the processor only routable as a whole?

[Bugzie]

Boomer is there a new manual available? If so I'll call and order it. Will have to check out the video's at a friends . I'm up in the hills and have to rely on good old dialup.

[xbassman]

now can someone split up those 3 fx and assign them to different channels? or is the processor only routable as a whole?

 

I don't mean to derail this thread, but I am wondering the same thing about the effects section on the PV10/PV14 series mixers.

 

Google isn't finding anything and the Peavey forum is down.

[dboomer]

is there a new manual available?

 

I don't know. I left there a year ago.

 

can someone split up those 3 fx and assign them to different channels?

 

No ... that would make them three discreet effects. It is one effect composed of up to three processes.

[SoundMan]

No new manual, just an addendum.

 

As far as the PV mixers go, there is only one effect. You assign channels to the effect by the knob in the channel, then return the result to the L/R main.

 

SoundMan

[AdamCh311]

 

is there a new manual available? I don't know. I left there a year ago. can someone split up those 3 fx and assign them to different channels? No ... that would make them three discreet effects. It is one effect composed of up to three processes.

 

 

From my understanding (have yet to use my fx mixer at a gig), you assign the effects to either aux 5 or 6. But that's just my understand from watching the videos i've seen.

[dedmeet]

Well, after looking at the videos and reading the manuals, I am pretty impressed by the FX series mixers! If I had my druthers, it would be nice to have the same output processing (especially the feedback ferret) available for the aux sends, but it seems to be a very cost-effective compromise. I especially like the mono/sub setup which is what I would run about 95% of the time. Do those of you who run this mixer feed the aux/monitor sends through external EQs and/or compressors?

 

My plan, like I said before is to re-do my system to do more with less stuff to lug. One small rack with EQs for the aux sends is ok, but if I spend some more on a used digi console (like the 01V96), I can get effects and EQ on every send, but then I have to learn how to run a digi console.

 

Decisions, decisions......

 

Thanks for all the input so far.

[cmgunn]

Well, after looking at the videos and reading the manuals, I am pretty impressed by the FX series mixers! If I had my druthers, it would be nice to have the same output processing (especially the feedback ferret) available for the aux sends, but it seems to be a very cost-effective compromise. I especially like the mono/sub setup which is what I would run about 95% of the time. Do those of you who run this mixer feed the aux/monitor sends through external EQs and/or compressors? My plan, like I said before is to re-do my system to do more with less stuff to lug. One small rack with EQs for the aux sends is ok, but if I spend some more on a used digi console (like the 01V96), I can get effects and EQ on every send, but then I have to learn how to run a digi console. Decisions, decisions...... Thanks for all the input so far.

 

A 01v96 isn't really hard to run, it's just different. I went from a Mackie SR24.4 VLZ to the 01V96v2, and it only took about 10 mins for me to figure it out and get it up and running.

[ThudMaker]

Do those of you who run this mixer feed the aux/monitor sends through external EQs and/or compressors?

I would always have an eq on a monitor channel. I have the 16FX. Nice mixer. Easy to use if you have experience with a full rack of stuff. I'm not sure why it takes so long for some to understand how it works. The menus are fairly intuitive, IMHO.

[Bugzie]

Thud, What I was refering to was massaging the effects. To get the effect you want can be cumbersome. Granted the ability to massagge them was equal to or better than some of the stand alone effects units that I had encountered at that point. Then when you start stasking the effects the ability goes up exponentionally. As far as the normal operation of the board, I found it to be very straight forward and functional.

 

On the issue of extra pieces for monitors, I use a seperate channel of EQ on each of the 4 aux sends. Works well and I've only had one situation where a feedback ferret on the aux send might have helped. That was due to a terrible "cube" of a stage and a rediculous stage volume. I'm not sure what the monitors would have sounded like with the cuts the thing would have had to make to eliminate feedback. God I'm beginingto hate Marshall stacks that are played at 11.

[dedmeet]

Thanks again for all the awesome info and help!!! The good news is that I have a small rack with 4 channels of EQ available (including one 31-band EQ) to help with monitor mixes. I will give the FX series a pretty serious look when the time comes to upgrade. I really like the idea of analog ease of use paired with digital flexibility.

 

Now, to decide on powered speakers.......but that will be another thread.

 

You guys are awesome!

 

[ThudMaker]

Thud, What I was refering to was massaging the effects. To get the effect you want can be cumbersome. Granted the ability to massagge them was equal to or better than some of the stand alone effects units that I had encountered at that point. Then when you start stasking the effects the ability goes up exponentionally. As far as the normal operation of the board, I found it to be very straight forward and functional. On the issue of extra pieces for monitors, I use a seperate channel of EQ on each of the 4 aux sends. Works well and I've only had one situation where a feedback ferret on the aux send might have helped. That was due to a terrible "cube" of a stage and a rediculous stage volume. I'm not sure what the monitors would have sounded like with the cuts the thing would have had to make to eliminate feedback. God I'm beginingto hate Marshall stacks that are played at 11.

I made that statement more because it happens to come up quite a bit, not necessarily because of your post. A lot of folks just don't understand the digital section at all. There are some things I need to tweak on the output limiters, but that's more something I need to do research on for ratios, etc. than it has to do with the interface.

 

And yeah. I don't know how you guys deal with stacks on 11. Our new drummer prefers his digitals (easier to set up) and the lead guitarist uses a Princeton, but now with the digital drums is thinking about using a 5 watter like the Black Heart!

[ledbythnose]

I recently bought a used  Peavey 16 FX Board. The previous owner had removed the Feedback Ferret option from the Processor . How do I restore the option.? I restored the factory settings and it did restore the dyn block but not the fbf.