Best small mixer with 8 XLR inputs?
in [Live Sound]
|
From: Arny Krueger on 19 Oct 2009 07:44 "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)removethishotmail.com> wrote in message news:0011ae5e$0$2674$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com > Arny Krueger wrote: >> "Eeyore" >> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)removethishotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:000a544b$0$2634$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com >> >>> Arny Krueger wrote: >> >>>> Adding an analog mixer adds noise and distortion. >> >>> I suggest you examine the data sheets for National's >>> LME49710/20/40 or TI's OPA211/2211 before making any >>> more daft comments like that. >> >> So Graham, you want people to believe that a typical >> analog mixer has only one op amp in its signal path? > > Where did you get that daft idea ? The question is where did you get that idea Graham, when you start spouting off about the performance of single op amps in low gain circuits. Once a signal is placed in the digital domain, its bandwidth and dynamic range need not experience any signficiant degradation. In contrast just the channel strip of a console (just one of many blocks of amplification and processing in a complete live sound system) includes many op amps and measurably degrades signal quality as compared to the performance of a single op amp in an applications note circuit. In fact the development of new high performance op amps such as the LME49710 are justified by the need for high quality analog buffers, given the superlative performance of modern converters.
From: Rupert on 19 Oct 2009 16:42 On Oct 19, 4:39 am, "Arny Krueger" <ar...(a)hotpop.com> wrote: > "Rupert" <foodste...(a)linkline.com> wrote in message > > news:43a5493b-d350-4acd-9693-f6be3183e895(a)h14g2000pri.googlegroups.com > > > > > > > On Oct 18, 3:59 am, "Arny Krueger" <ar...(a)hotpop.com> > > wrote: > >> "Rupert" <foodste...(a)linkline.com> wrote in message > > >>news:9180a776-d380-4e87-bf36-b1b7e0071cfd(a)b25g2000prb.googlegroups.com > > >>> On Oct 17, 5:17 pm, "Arny Krueger" <ar...(a)hotpop.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>> "Eeyore" > >>>> <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...(a)removethishotmail.com> > >>>> wrote in > >>>> messagenews:000a544b$0$2634$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com > > >>>>> Arny Krueger wrote: > >>>>>> Adding an analog mixer adds noise and distortion. > >>>>> I suggest you examine the data sheets for National's > >>>>> LME49710/20/40 or TI's OPA211/2211 before making any > >>>>> more daft comments like that. > > >>>> So Graham, you want people to believe that a typical > >>>> analog mixer has only one op amp in its signal path? > > >>>>> The world is analogue, > not digital. > > >>>> The world of today is hybrid. > > >>>>> Shall we now discuss the failings of A/D and D/A > >>>>> converters ? > > >>>> If modern converters are so bad Graham, why are so many > >>>> people on AAPLS buying consoles, equalizers, and > >>>> amplifier management systems that contain them? > > >>> Admittedly, there is some validity to his belief. > > >> Some validity? It's a very strong market trend. > > >>> But the convenience, cost effectiveness, and > >>> versatility of DSP/digital desks trumps any of the > >>> sonic issues with A/D & D/A. > > >> You're wrong there, because there are no sonic issues > >> with good converters. > > > Until there is a converter is capable of nearly infinite > > resolution, there will always be some errors in tracking > > and reproducing an analog waveform. -------- > So what? There is often far more errors and tracking and reproducing analog > waveforms in the analog domain. Can you site some examples? > Once audio signals are placed into the > digital domain, they can be processed almost endlessly without any loss of > resolution or bandwidth, other than that which may be intentional. That may be the case, but the biggest issue is that conversion from A to D. Not all A to D converters are created equal and the cheaper converters out there have noticeable artifacts/distortion. Even the best A to D converters out there aren't perfect. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of acceptable and usable converters used in various gear. All I'm saying is that is not as perfect as they manufactures would have you believe and there are audible artifacts. The other thing that's often overlooked is the inherent latency added to the chain with DSP and digital desks, and this can have some undesirable consequences in the real world of live sound. It's not so much problem with basic speaker processing, but with digital monitor desks and IEMs there is a noticeable delay that the artist can hear that can be dispensed with. I can connect up every piece of analog gear I own from end to end in series and not have any latency whatsoever. > > What I see Rupert is that you have bought into the mistaken belief that the > analog world has infinite resolution. Anybody who knows how real world > audio gear works, and has a University sophomore's understanding of > information theory knows better. Nice backhanded comment, untrue as it may be. Rupert
From: Arny Krueger on 20 Oct 2009 08:22 "Rupert" <foodsteaks(a)linkline.com> wrote in message news:75cb866c-516e-4b3c-8dd4-deced9e48346(a)m7g2000prd.googlegroups.com >> So what? There is often far more errors and tracking and >> reproducing analog waveforms in the analog domain. > Can you site some examples? Of course. Just measure the performance of any analog console. The measured performance is usually good enough and adequate for the purpose, but it is measurably poorer than that of a good modern converter chip. >> Once audio signals are placed into the >> digital domain, they can be processed almost endlessly >> without any loss of resolution or bandwidth, other than >> that which may be intentional. > That may be the case, but the biggest issue is that > conversion from A to D. Not all A to D converters are > created equal and the cheaper converters out there have > noticeable artifacts/distortion. Things have progressed to the point where even many of the cheaper converters lack noticable artifacts and distortion. I've been tracking the performance of converters in my shop since the middle 1990s, and there has been a dramatic improvement in price/performance. However Rupert, you are making a straw man argument. Just because egregiously cheap converters may have audible artifacts, has no bearing on the converters that would be used to build a real-world lower end digital console such as a LS-9. > Even the best A to D converters out there aren't perfect. Again Rupert you are making a straw man argument. Analog stages aren't perfect, either. Nothing is perfect. > Don't get me wrong, > there are plenty of acceptable and usable converters used > in various gear. I think you need to make a consistent presentation, Rupert. You just criticized *all* converters because they weren't perfect. Now you are talking about "good enough". What is the real standard? I think that for most of us, the standard is "good enough". > All I'm saying is that is not as perfect > as they manufactures would have you believe and there are > audible artifacts. IME, virtually all converters that are used in professional gear, even those used by low end producers like Behringer, meet manufacturer's specs. I have measured the performance of several hundred converters in the past 15 years. > The other thing that's often overlooked is the inherent > latency added to the chain with DSP and digital desks, You're right about latency often being overlooked on manufacturer's spec sheets. For example, good luck if you want to find the latency of say a Behringer DEQ 2496. OTOH, I don't recall anybody complaining about their latency. > and this can have some undesirable consequences in the > real world of live sound. It's not so much problem with > basic speaker processing, but with digital monitor desks > and IEMs there is a noticeable delay that the artist can > hear that can be dispensed with. For example the latency of Yamaha's LS9-32 is given as being less than 2.5 msec. http://www.yamahaproaudio.com/products/mixers/ls9/specifications.html That is the time it takes sound to travel less than 3 feet. A floor wedge is 6 feet or more from the artist's ears. I don't recall ever hearing anybody complain about the audible delay in their floor monitors with an analog console. If you use IEMs with a LS9-32, you actually have less than half of the latency than you would have with an analog mixer and wedges. > I can connect up every piece of analog gear I own from end to end in > series and > not have any latency whatsoever. Interesting that sound passing through air is not delayed in your working environment, Rupert. How do you do that? >> What I see Rupert is that you have bought into the >> mistaken belief that the analog world has infinite >> resolution. Anybody who knows how real world audio gear >> works, and has a University sophomore's understanding of >> information theory knows better. > Nice backhanded comment, untrue as it may be. You have the option to explain yourself, Rupert. Seeing none...
From: Phildo on 20 Oct 2009 18:08 "Arny Krueger" <arnyk(a)hotpop.com> wrote in message news:VJmdndysHpsF00HXnZ2dnUVZ_u2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >> Ron's simply letting you know some uncomfortable truths. > > Ron is living the lies that Phildo and George have programmed him with. > He's just another coward who enables AAPLS remaining the joke of the live > sound industry. Yes Arny, it's all a big conspiracy. George and myself go to every newsgroup you post to and force people to have a go at you. It has nothing to do with the fact you are a know-nothing blowhard with serious mental health issues and a complete inability to accept responsibility for your own actions who pisses people off wherever he goes. >> If you didn't go out >> on a limb saying daft things I'm sure he'd have no issue >> with you at all. > > You are obviously ignorant of his recent crazy antics. You are a fine one to talk about crazy antics. Phildo
From: Eeyore on 20 Oct 2009 23:18
Arny Krueger wrote: > "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)removethishotmail.com> > wrote in message > news:00429964$0$1807$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com >> Arny Krueger wrote: >>> I could stop posting here tomorrow, and you'd still be >>> venting at me a year from now. > >> I can't even remotely imagine that. > > That's your problem, Graham. > >> Ron's simply letting you know some uncomfortable truths. > > Ron is living the lies that Phildo and George have programmed him with. He's > just another coward who enables AAPLS remaining the joke of the live sound > industry. Ron is a genuinely decent chap. Graham |