Re: Mixer for live purposes?

Nah, I never mix stereo, perhaps a ping-pong delay but that's it. I guess it kinda depends on what you want to do; I reckon mixing stereo can be a real addition when you want to go deep and atmospheric but for dance music it's not really necessary. There's hardly anybody that can really enjoy the stereo sound anyway, not in a club where there's 500 people walking around, blocking the sound and not at all times standing in the right position between the speakers to fully enjoy it.

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

Thats what I thought.. I guess the ultimate would be like a 8 mono in mixer with some aux fx shit and good eqs and a nice layout. I almost put a order on a m4 but im gonna hold my horses. Too bad there isnt a m6

CRACKED BY MR. Z...

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

yeah Soundcraft makes decent mixers.
Why don't you get one of those cheap ass Spirit Folio 12:2 ?
http://www.speurders.nl/overzicht/muzie … 84354.html

nice and cheap.
Have one of those for ages.
Really nice quality.
And they are flat, so easy to pack .

And you won't be sick when somebody empties his beer in it at a gig wink

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

BMX wrote:

Thats what I thought.. I guess the ultimate would be like a 8 mono in mixer with some aux fx shit and good eqs and a nice layout. I almost put a order on a m4 but im gonna hold my horses. Too bad there isnt a m6

Well, you could look for a 2nd hand F1, they are more suitable because they have 8 mono channels and 2 stereo channels, or another Spirit Folio like Mr. Pauli suggests. In my experience they are well build so I personally wouldn't be afraid of getting one that's used.

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

Behringer mixers are so cheap.

An other option is having a couple of good models in your technical rider. So that the club need to get it for you.

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

rude66 wrote:

... but behringer? sorry guys, never.. that thing just makes everything sound worse..

Damn, now I have to put a ad in the papers that my first recordings are crap and have to be returned...

wink

TB or not TB

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

freek: they probably got mastered tho, i dont think anybody is gonna master the live big_smile

PS. I lent a behringer mixer to Eargoggle last time he played in sthlm.. After the gig we threw it in the river big_smile
Poor fishies

CRACKED BY MR. Z...

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

BMX is silly

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

what about that new allen heath ZED series?

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

Nothing wrong with behringer for live purposes. If it get stolen(by someone who don't know it is cheap wink ) or gets broken after some years, you just buy a new one for cheap.

Last edited by Sander (2008-11-29 19:53:13)

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

just use what ever crap mixer you can find. no one will notice the difference (except maybe if rude66 is in the audience) and you will probably have bigger problems than your mixer when you are up there playing.

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

Ruud's ears can't be that good anymore after all those years of abuse : )

Last edited by Sander (2008-12-01 00:20:25)

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

Ohnoo! lets not start this one again.......

+++ Dont be scared honey, thats just the resonance knob +++

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

anyone have any biased opinions on tapco mixers?

Monkey see, monkey do.

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

i bought a cheap Tapco (the model up from the cheapest) to test out and it's comparable to the behringer line imo. i also think that the construction and parts used are cheaper than the behringer line.

worship the potentiometer.

41

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

hm i got impression that it's at least some bit better then behringer. was checking out tapco 12 channel 260FX model. what about the sound quality? i would primarily use it at home, but perhaps live as well.

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

tapco is mackie's budget brand.. so i guess they would be roughly comparable.

@sander: you'd be surprised, my friend.. big_smile

and a last thing about behringers (and a lot of cheap junk gear in general): of course its possible to make decent tracks with this stuff. but it would sound a lot better if you'd used better equipment.. i'm not talking about synths (some budget synths or drum machines can have really interesting features and flaws) but there is a reason that better equipment than behringers exists..

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

Soundcraft has this Compact 10 mixer I've been looking at. Only 200 bucks new. http://www.soundcraft.com/download.asp? … ochure.pdf

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

we just got a compact 10 to replace our mackie and other small mixers and it's amazing. they put every last idea they could put into that mixer for routing things. haven't used it to record yet, but it worked perfect at our gig last weekend.

yeah tapco is mackie's budget brand. ours has buttons and the buttons do not stay depressed so i had to tape them down, that was right out of the box. i feel like in terms of cheap mixers, you might as well buy the behringer over the tapco.

i agree with rude, if you can only afford cheap or used etc, do whatever to make music happen. but if you can afford to or even go in the hole a bit, it's always better to do so and have a piece of gear that is going to last and also get you the best sound delivery.

worship the potentiometer.

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

I notice phonic is moving in on the Behringer territory. They even do a cheap firewire mixer.
Anyone know much of this brand?

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

I don't know Phonic really well, but in an edit suite we had an early '90s Phonic M2442 mixer, it looks a bit like a Tascam M2524 rip off. I hardly used it but the few times I did use it I thought it was quite okay, quite flexible with a lot of aux sends and inserts (although it also lacked some key features, like channel mutes big_smile). It sounded good, hardly any noise, quite transparant and with a decent EQ. Only thing that made me not like it was the feel, the buttons and faders always felt too loose... Anyway, for the budget in those days I think it was really a good buy. When my studio mixer burned down some time ago I thought a moment about dismounting the Phonic and take it to my studio but eventually I decided I'd rather stick to D&R.

Last edited by Brian Chinetti (2008-12-18 23:10:42)

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

screenvinylimage wrote:

we just got a compact 10 to replace our mackie and other small mixers and it's amazing. they put every last idea they could put into that mixer for routing things. haven't used it to record yet, but it worked perfect at our gig last weekend.

yeah tapco is mackie's budget brand. ours has buttons and the buttons do not stay depressed so i had to tape them down, that was right out of the box. i feel like in terms of cheap mixers, you might as well buy the behringer over the tapco.

i agree with rude, if you can only afford cheap or used etc, do whatever to make music happen. but if you can afford to or even go in the hole a bit, it's always better to do so and have a piece of gear that is going to last and also get you the best sound delivery.

I was hoping someone here had one. Can you mute channels?

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

the channels don't have mutes on them, but the mixer has a routing system so you can route only what you want to record to a set of outputs or only what you want to monitor to a set of outputs. it also gives you a bunch of possible configuration diagrams in the manual.

worship the potentiometer.

Re: Mixer for live purposes?

All my songs are recorded on a behringer. Everyting ever released went thru the behringer mixer. I also used the same one for most of my livsets. I was thinking about buying a behringer again for live. At home I use big old D&R now.
I bought my behringer second hand and it worked fine for years. Now some knobs need to be cleaned or replaced but better by a new one again this time. I like how the mid freq sounds.

I see that a lot modern mixers have effects build in, that's nice since you can leave an effectbox at home and that is good. Less cables to connect wrong.

I need 12 channels. I prefer 10 mono and 2 stereo.  In/outputs On the frontpanel would be nice. On the back is more diffult to see.

Which one should I take?

Last edited by Sander (2008-12-24 00:47:25)