Author Topic: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation  (Read 47373 times)

gerenm63

  • Knight
  • ****
  • Location: Westminster, Maryland, USA
  • Posts: 215
    • gerenm.net
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #180 on: June 08, 2015, 08:01:35 PM »
It all sounds way to complex for me....setting up matrix's and delay mixes. The idea of the 1608 was to have great functional Features while keeping the operation as simple as possible. I like the new improvements and groupings which work great for me. If I wanted a million options and screens I would buy a full blown desk.
Granted, a few more view screens on the 1608 would be wonderful but I can deal with a little scrolling.

Just my opinion, since I only do this 3-5 times a month.

There's no matrix on the 1608, anyway...
Geren W. Mortensen, Jr.
Westminster, Maryland, USA

Topsøe

  • Knight
  • ****
  • Location: Denmark
  • Posts: 128
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #181 on: June 08, 2015, 08:23:18 PM »
@Rdmitch
It is your choise not to use all the features , but why not use what you have instaed of asking for something it allready can  :)
If in doubt ask

Rdmitch

  • Knight
  • ****
  • Location: Lorain Ohio
  • Posts: 328
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #182 on: June 08, 2015, 09:16:30 PM »
I like the new features and look forward to many more future enhancements. But....when I laid out my $899.00 for the mixer I did not expect more than originally promised. The added features to date make it that much better and while I gratefully accept these upgrades I in no means would have any gripes if they never provided more than originally promised. If I truly needed these things I would drop $ 4,000 on a mixer not $899.00
I am never going to compare this to a high priced deck, because that's not what it's meant to be. It was never designed to be a Yamaha desk or Midas, or Soundcraft, or DiGiCo. Just a simple to operate, step up from an analog mixer with remote control operability.
 Sure, we can ask for more views, RTA, inserts, user defined controls, channel merging, etc. but there is a limit to what I could expect mackie to provide as I'm sure there is a limit to what they can afford to spend on upgrades and development.

Not disagreeing with your premise, just not holding my breath waiting for these things.
Your never to old to learn something stupid

Keyboard Magic

  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: Toronto
  • Posts: 1032
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #183 on: June 08, 2015, 09:24:39 PM »
All the 806/1608/DL32 owners and users have different needs. Some use most of all the tools and some don’t. I don’t use half of what’s there on the 1608, including FX. As long the software/hardware continues to meet those needs in any capacity, that’s perfect. Of course, we would all like to see improvements to make our jobs a little bit easier in the long run. We all make the best of what we have.   ;)
"The bad news is time flies. The good news is...you're the pilot." ~ Michael Althsuler

Weogo

  • Knight
  • ****
  • Location: Western North Carolina
  • Posts: 144
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #184 on: June 08, 2015, 09:29:00 PM »
Hi Topsoe,

Your suggestion would work except that the Center- and Delay-Fills get a different mix, with more Vox, less Instruments.
I wrote Groups, but actually use post-fade Auxes for these sends, and the Subwoofer send.

RdMitch,
For me, the DL1608 / DL32R interface is quite fast for modestly complicated, fairly fast changing shows.
Definitely not the same as a mixer with faders, but in some cases better.
For instance, I do a concert series in a soft-seat theater with surprisingly bad acoustics, and the only place to put a full mixer is an alcove in the back where the low end just builds and roars. 
Mixing with an Ipad out in the hall makes it so much easier and faster to get a good mix.

I came to the DLs from over a decade with the Yamaha 01V96 and then LS9.
Before that, Allen & Heath MixWizards to Midas XL250.
At some point some of the extra complications might start to look useful.    : -)
The Behringer X32 overall has more bells and whistles than the DL32R, but I went with the Mackie because it has the features I need, and for the Ipad interface.

When intelligibility and consistent coverage throughout a venue are key requirements, Center-, Side- and Delay-fills often come in to play.
 
Thanks and good health,  Weogo

Rdmitch

  • Knight
  • ****
  • Location: Lorain Ohio
  • Posts: 328
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #185 on: June 08, 2015, 09:44:48 PM »
I'm with you on that and if I was in a situation that required side fills, delays, and other multi matrix mixes I would not opt for the DL1608 mixer. I would drop the bread on the x32, m32 or other more sophisticated miser. Like yourself I like the portability and iPad interface....that's what drove me to drop the StudioLive mixer.
I live close to 8th day sound and they are one of my customers so I get the opportunity to pry a bit and chat with their operators and programmers on occasion and am always in awe of some of the stuff they understand ( their heading to all DiGiCo).
I use many of the new features regularly and probably spend way too much time writing, rewriting and making
changes to my settings.   The fact that I now have (compliments of no cost Mackie upgrades) VCAs, Subgroups, trim adjustments, mute groups, view groups and others make me glad I bought the board. Sure, if new upgrades are introduced I'll jump in on the bandwagon.  But would never be upset if they said that's it, no more, we're done. They can and probably will come outwits something like the M-32 soon enough
Your never to old to learn something stupid

ijpengelly

  • Knight
  • ****
  • Location: Warrington, UK
  • Posts: 249
  • Weekend Warrior
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #186 on: June 21, 2015, 03:19:50 PM »
I spent yesterday mixing monitors for an outdoor music festival in Kendal, where we had about 15 acts to get through in the day, a mix of bands and solo artists. I had six monitor feeds to look after (four across the front of the stage, one drum fill and another on a small forward platform) and we were using a Yamaha LS9-32, with me using the StageMix app on an iPad. I've used this before, but they have made some changes to it, the best is the RTA overlay you can run under an input or output channel's PEQ, this was extremely helpful in dealing with feedback prevention on the day and  especially when you are having to do it on the fly as acts and monitor mixes change. So, still the two things at the top of my list for the DL series and MasterFader are:

- Improved effects
- RTA overlays

Come on Mackie... everyone else is doing them :-)

Renoman

  • Youngling
  • **
  • Location: Prince Edward Island, Canada
  • Posts: 24
  • Loud and Clear
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #187 on: June 25, 2015, 10:30:02 PM »
Make it simple! I'm sure I'm not the only one who is playing bass and doing the mix as well. The monitor faders are sooo much better in 2.1 , much more logical and faster to get to. No question 3.1 has nice features but not if you're a busy guy. My only big complaint has never changed, the reverbs are just not good. Better monitor EQ would be nice as well and please don't give up on 2.1. Version 3 is just too cumbersome for weekend bands. Remember who your fans are.
Lighter gear, fewer wires, everything on wheels!

Weogo

  • Knight
  • ****
  • Location: Western North Carolina
  • Posts: 144
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #188 on: June 26, 2015, 04:15:03 AM »
Hi Renoman,

"Better monitor EQ would be nice as well"

I'm curious, what you would like different with the monitor EQ?

Thanks and good health,  Weogo

Renoman

  • Youngling
  • **
  • Location: Prince Edward Island, Canada
  • Posts: 24
  • Loud and Clear
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #189 on: June 26, 2015, 08:46:32 AM »
In 2.1 all you get is the graph, I'd like the other one with the effects as well.
Lighter gear, fewer wires, everything on wheels!

Weogo

  • Knight
  • ****
  • Location: Western North Carolina
  • Posts: 144
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #190 on: June 26, 2015, 12:45:23 PM »
Hi Renoman,

My confusion arises from two points:

) You ask for simplicity and more features.  Seems kinda contradictory    : -|

) Aux(monitor) masters for both V2.x and V3.x have:
graphic EQ page
parametric EQ, HPF/LPF page
compression/delay page.

Please clarify as to exactly what you are asking for.

Thanks and good health,  Weogo

Keyboard Magic

  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: Toronto
  • Posts: 1032
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #191 on: July 01, 2015, 10:50:54 PM »
It would be nice to see MF 4 released around the same time iOS 9 drops this fall.  ;)
"The bad news is time flies. The good news is...you're the pilot." ~ Michael Althsuler

shufflebeat

  • Padawan
  • ***
  • Location:
  • Posts: 75
  • XXL
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #192 on: September 30, 2015, 12:12:53 PM »
Small ask: I'd like to see which preset (fx, eq) that I'm using at any one time.
Big ask: RTA

lotb60

  • Youngling
  • **
  • Location:
  • Posts: 11
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #193 on: October 01, 2015, 04:12:24 AM »
Would like a second PEQ on each channel, dedicated to monitor sends for that channel. Likely cannot do due to amount of processing power this would require.  Still, this would really help when doing both FOH and monitors. Currently we have to choose to affect both FOH and monitor with same PEQ or only FOH. I am constantly needing to eq something in monitors and do not need that changing in FOH.  I do understand that there are some workarounds for this currently, but it involves using up extra channels and  auxes. I also understand that there is a PEQ on each aux, but this alters the entire aux.  Anyone else agree or have thoughts?

Weogo

  • Knight
  • ****
  • Location: Western North Carolina
  • Posts: 144
Re: Master/My Fader V4 Wants and Speculation
« Reply #194 on: October 04, 2015, 12:08:00 AM »
Hi Lotb60,

"Would like a second PEQ on each channel,"

I believe that you are correct, this would use a significant amount of processing.

I generally do ok with the same EQ for house and monitors.
What I would like to see is the ability to have compression only on the channel sends to the house mix, not the monitor mix.

What I regularly do is split inputs to two channels.
On the DL1608, with XLR-Y cables, this eats up channels quite fast.
On the DL32R, including the four RETURN channels, you can digitally split 18 analog inputs to 18 house channels and 18 monitor channels.

Good health,  Weogo