Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

Powered mixer or seperate power amp?


FuNkShUi
 Share

Recommended Posts

How urgent is the need for it? Can you save up a little more? As others say, £2.5k is pushing it for a rig to cover the size of band you refer to, assuming you want to buy new. Agree with advice to keep it all separate - passive mixer, speakers, power amps, etc. The other advantage of doing it that way is that, rather than the band owning the PA jointly, individual members own individual items. So if someone leaves, you don't have all the bother of agreeing a price to buy out their share, etc (bad idea to sell a rig and split the proceeds - you lose too much money doing that). They just take their item with them and the new member(s) replace it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well im sorry to say i've been outvoted on this :rolleyes:
We had a band meeting on this subject last night.
I took forward the views expressed here, of seperates, with an active speakers and passive mixer etc, but i may aswel not have.
As far as anyone else in the band were concerened the decision should go to a sound engineer who is a friend of the band.
I'm well aware he has more knowledge of all this than i do, but i do worry that the setup he has recommended is not ideally suited for us.
The main issue being no one else in the band really has any idea of how a P.A works, so they are taking his word on it, and not listening to any of the points i am concerned about, also it will be left to me to set up when we do get it.
He has recommended a Behringer digital mixer. I've no idea how to use one of these to their full potential and i can see problems on the horizon here.
There are other issues, but i dont think theres much point in going into them.
As a 6 piece band, i was out voted 5-1 . Democracy rules <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disclaimer: I'm not wholly sold on the supremacy of democracy. The X32 range are, however, very good desks; I've a PA-business chum with 2 of 'em (amongst others...), and he has endless fun running 'em through wi-fi from his i-phone 'thingy'. There's a bit of a learning curve, but it's well overkill for your needs, really, and swallows just about all of the budget at a stroke. Never mind; at least that part of your kit will be good stuff. Imperative: get a decent flight case bundled in; it will be indispensable. :mellow:
Let us know how all of this develops, please..?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeh i agree with you Douglas.
I have made my point known, but what can i do?
The desk they are opting for is the X18.
Flight cases have been agreed on so at least that is one thing.
Wont be getting it until next month, but yes ill let you know how it all goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='FuNkShUi' timestamp='1437549814' post='2826875']
The main issue being no one else in the band really has any idea of how a P.A works, so they are taking his word on it, and not listening to any of the points i am concerned about, also it will be left to me to set up when we do get it.
[/quote]

Respectfully, that doesn't sound like a particularly long-lasting band dynamic. Take note of the individual folks owning items advice IMHO - I've been in the situation of a band split with a jointly owned PA and it's a massive hassle. If you're expected to drive the mixer, I'd say you should buy whatever you're comfortable using, and have other folks buy say an active speaker each, which they own, store, and bring to each gig.

Edited by 6v6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Behringer is thoroughly overkill for your needs, imho. No question of its quality (Behringer has bought Midas and their newer products are derived from the Midas tech expertise they acquired). However, engineers love their high tech toys (fair enough - we musicians love ours), so their advice may not be the best when it comes to deciding what is most appropriate for you. Simpler and modular is best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='FuNkShUi' timestamp='1437549814' post='2826875']
Well im sorry to say i've been outvoted on this :rolleyes:
We had a band meeting on this subject last night.
I took forward the views expressed here, of seperates, with an active speakers and passive mixer etc, but i may aswel not have.
As far as anyone else in the band were concerened the decision should go to a sound engineer who is a friend of the band.
I'm well aware he has more knowledge of all this than i do, but i do worry that the setup he has recommended is not ideally suited for us.
The main issue being no one else in the band really has any idea of how a P.A works, so they are taking his word on it, and not listening to any of the points i am concerned about, [b]also it will be left to me to set up when we do get it.[/b]
He has recommended a Behringer digital mixer. I've no idea how to use one of these to their full potential and i can see problems on the horizon here.
There are other issues, but i dont think theres much point in going into them.
As a 6 piece band, i was out voted 5-1 . Democracy rules <_<
[/quote]

What is the full list of gear reccomended by the sound guy?

You shouldn't have to set up the gear by yourself. Have the rest of the band study the manual and do their part of the work, it's their obligation as a "democratic band".
In my band everybody works setting up the stage, each of us may not know everything about the gear operation and EQing the band sound but we all know how to carry and setup the gear and hooking up all the cables and even doing the most basic/common operations in the mixer. We never know when somebody needs to get to a gig late so we can't rely on a single person to do a specific job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ghost_Bass' timestamp='1437564895' post='2827054']
What is the full list of gear reccomended by the sound guy?

You shouldn't have to set up the gear by yourself. Have the rest of the band study the manual and do their part of the work, it's their obligation as a "democratic band".
In my band everybody works setting up the stage, each of us may not know everything about the gear operation and EQing the band sound but we all know how to carry and setup the gear and hooking up all the cables and even doing the most basic/common operations in the mixer. We never know when somebody needs to get to a gig late so we can't rely on a single person to do a specific job.
[/quote]

+1, definitely, on this. The setting up/tearing down is a band task. Running the desk is best left to the 'expert', but all should know at least a minimum (how to open a mic for a guest speaker, how to adjust CD interval music level, how to mute the o/p when a mic takes of with larsen...). Cable runs, monitor placing, stacking in the truck etc; all manual tasks for the whole band, no debate.

Edited by Dad3353
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='6v6' timestamp='1437560569' post='2826995']
Respectfully, that doesn't sound like a particularly long-lasting band dynamic. [/quote]

Must disagree with this.
We aren't strangers who have formed a band.
We are all friends, some who studied music together, who thought we would form a band because we have jammed together for years, whilst playing in seperate bands.
We found ourselves all to be free to form our own band, so went ahead with it.
Surely the fact its a "democracy" rather than a "dictatorship" is a good thing.
I might not agree with them, but i respect their decision. Im not necessarily right, and can't assume to be.

May not have been completely clear, and thats my fault.
Everyone helps with the setup. As in bringing things in, running cables, stacking cabs etc.
But i will be left to set the mix.
The singers have a working knowledge of the basics (of the mixer we have now) so will probably look to gleen the same level of competancy.
Dan Dare, i agree, and that was my point to the other members. It might be a brilliant mixer, but that might only stand true to someone who has a better knowledge of it than i do.
In all fairness though, our sound engineer friend has offered to give me tuition on the mixer.
He said i can go to some gigs where he works and watch how he sets up, and hes offered to come and set up for us until i think i have the hang of it. For no money.
Cant say fairer than that, i just worry it may take me a while. On the whole, im a relatively quick learner, so i hope it wont.

Edited by FuNkShUi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='FuNkShUi' timestamp='1437569183' post='2827118']
Must disagree with this.
...
[/quote]

Fair enough, I meant no offence, you pitched it very differently in your previous post, e.g "not listening to any of the points i am concerned about", "it will be left to me to set up when we do get it" etc - that didn't sound like your opinion (as the one who would be left to set it up e.g the actual user of the kit) was being respected at all, hence my suggestion that you just get whatever you're comfortable with and use that.

Good luck :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO/IME and in answer to the OP... Good efficient pro gear is separates unless you are in the Meyer league for actives.
Cheaper actives are ok for quieter P.A's i,e pub to function bands.as a general rule.

Budget actives is Yamaha, and then QSC and if you need more, then there are a few boutiquey namkes but you are into NEXO D&B
and Martin which are all separates/passive.

This is where the discerning money is..

As for mixers. Behringer, IME..used to be pretty poor and one to avoid like the plague, depending how discerning you were.
If they have upped their game, then fair enouigh. PV, Mackie and Behringer all came from the same core parts at one point.
Bang for buck, maybe, for a starter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='6v6' timestamp='1437580623' post='2827272']
Fair enough, I meant no offence, you pitched it very differently in your previous post, e.g "not listening to any of the points i am concerned about", "it will be left to me to set up when we do get it" etc - that didn't sound like your opinion (as the one who would be left to set it up e.g the actual user of the kit) was being respected at all, hence my suggestion that you just get whatever you're comfortable with and use that.

Good luck :)
[/quote]

No offence taken at all. Sorry if it sounded like that.
I explained it poorly previously. My fault.

JTUK- i agree. I think in going the route we are, we are making sacrifices.
But again, they're all putting their trust in the engineer. Which is fair enough really.
He has 10 years experience of it being his only job. I cant really blame them.
Hopefully it'll all work out and i'll be able to get to grips with it relatively quick.
A good sound is obviously important, but how important it is to "Joe Public"
Do they notice the intricacies, or do they just enjoy the songs aslong as they can hear the singing?
I do wonder.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='FuNkShUi' timestamp='1437636231' post='2827667']
A good sound is obviously important, but how important it is to "Joe Public"
Do they notice the intricacies, or do they just enjoy the songs aslong as they can hear the singing?
I do wonder.....
[/quote]

Yup - thought the same for a LOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time. We usually have a few people we know at most of our gigs who are muso's and they might offer a bit more when it comes to FOH sound, but IME the average punter is only concerned if they can't hear the singer properly..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='FuNkShUi' timestamp='1437636231' post='2827667']
No offence taken at all. Sorry if it sounded like that.
I explained it poorly previously. My fault.

JTUK- i agree. I think in going the route we are, we are making sacrifices.
But again, they're all putting their trust in the engineer. Which is fair enough really.
He has 10 years experience of it being his only job. I cant really blame them.
Hopefully it'll all work out and i'll be able to get to grips with it relatively quick.
[b]A good sound is obviously important, but how important it is to "Joe Public"
Do they notice the intricacies, or do they just enjoy the songs aslong as they can hear the singing?
I do wonder.....[/b]
[/quote]

I think they'll notice when it hits them in the face....and is something simple like
the tops distort in the high end which is a VERY common problem with band P.A's around here.

The vox seem an afterthought to a lot of bands and the first thing I'd not really want to see
is old active narrow horn boxes and SM58's all round. This means PV's. Mackies;s
and any units that have had a hard life...pretty much.
Now, the SM58 is a decent mic but you should know why you are using it and what it will give you.

Most very good vocalists ( IMO) that I know, wont use them and they wont do a gig with certain PA boxes..
or rather they'll get caught once and then wont be 'available' again..

In that sense QSC is a decent benchmark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='FuNkShUi' timestamp='1437729794' post='2828520']
We do try to make the vocals a priority.
Might i ask, what is the issue with the SM58?
Im not a singer, so have never had one, but i assumed they were highly thought of?
[/quote]

There's no 'issue' with the SM58; they're the 'P' bass of mic's. There are better mic's, there are worse. They are, however, used world-wide, and sound engis know exactly where they stand with 'em. Their 'sound' is a reference, as is their robustness and reliability. Some singers prefer, even deserve, a different 'sound'; some singers can use the difference that another mic can bring, but the reference is still the SM58, more so still in bands at amateur or semi-pro level. It is perfectly possible to 'fine tune' with a different mic, or get a perfectly good result from a mic at half the price, but the Shure is a sure bet for a starting point, at least. I say all this; we use AKG D5 and C5 mics; I have no Shures left in our mic box, but have used them for decades with success. If you're looking for a different mic, it's because you're experienced enough to know what you want. There are those that view them with disdain, often because of their very ubiquity. That's not a reflection on their qualities, though; rather the opposite.

Edited by Dad3353
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem withy the 58 is that it is indeed a work horse but it is basically 30 years old and things have moved on.
The other issue is the chinese fakes that abound and the fact that 58's pick up a lot of noise, so that is one reason
why good singers don't like them. They don't want the backline thru their mics....:lol:

If you want to pick up the drums..just give the Drummer a 58 to sing thru..and you'll also get his kit :lol:

So a 58 thru a mixer with bad channel separation which the cheap mixers can be notorious for, and you
have a bit of a mess of a sound before you even start.

If your vox likes his voice, get him to demo a few alternative mics and see which one suits his voice.
I'd expect every vocalist to have done this and know their mic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='FuNkShUi' timestamp='1437729794' post='2828520']
We do try to make the vocals a priority.
Might i ask, what is the issue with the SM58?
Im not a singer, so have never had one, but i assumed they were highly thought of?
[/quote]the SM58 dates back to 1962, so a bit more than 30 years old. It has quite a heavy diaphragm and a relatively weak magnet system. The beta58 sounds a whole lot better and there are a whole range of cheaper competitors from European manufacturers like AKG and Sennheiser. The VW Beatle was a great car in 1937 but you wouldn't run one as reliable transport now.

One big advantage of the 58 though, apart from reliability, is that it is a cardioid mic and relatively undemanding of good technique, singers who grew up on 58's find it hard to use modern miss with tighter directional patterns. However there are still a few undemanding cardio ds out there like the Sennheiser 935 which also sound much better than the rather muddy 58. There's no issue really they are just superseded, as you would expect 50 years on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1437783128' post='2829108']
Still a tried and trusted workhorse, though, as is the 'P' bass. :mellow:
[/quote]
Don't get me wrong. They were great mics back in the day and even back in the late eighties, thirty years after their first outing they were still competitive. Great reliability even now but with fifty years of advances in materials technology, plus the doubling of knowledge every ten years we can do better now, and it shows when you do an A/B test. The 58 sounds less life like and rather dull compared to almost any other mic in its price range. P basses are made mainly of wood and wire so advances in technology have brought the costs of production down but until we have a better tree we aren't likely to improve much on the instrument.

The only reasons to hang on to your 58 is if you have had a lifetime learning how to get the best out of it. Change your mic and to an extent you'll have to re learn your mic technique. Why change if you are happy with what you have? But, I woulnt advise anyone to buy a mic when there are better sounding, less feedback prone and cheaper alternatives around. Even Shure offer a 58beater in the Beta58 if you want to hang on to the Shure brand.

I'll stick by my car analogy, if you like me are a man of a certain age and are happy to drive round in a much loved split screen beetle then no one is knocking that. If you are telling an eighteen year old it's technically the best car ever designed......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...