LS9/16 - not the desk for me
in [Live Sound]
|
From: Phildo on 18 Dec 2008 10:18 "Denny Strauser" <dsdennysound(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:gic59s$t65$2(a)news.motzarella.org... > Phildo wrote: >> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:492C4516.AC5D7DFA(a)hotmail.com... >>>> On the LS9, in addition to the 4 band full parametric eq, there is a >>>> sweepable high pass filter. >>>> >>>> Seems like a no-brainer. >>> But what does it SOUND like ? >> >> Bloody good and way more flexible than a traditional analogue EQ. Come >> on, how else would you get such flexible EQ on a desk with the price >> point of the LS9 if you went analogue. >> >> Phildo > > I mean no disrespect, but weren't you the one who began this thread hating > the LS9? I had a bad experience with it. I've used on again since and have a bit more respect for it now although I still think it has been shrunk down to too small a footprint and needs more knobs. It still pisses over any analogue desk for the price. Phildo
From: Eeyore on 18 Dec 2008 12:24 Arny Krueger wrote: > "Denny Strauser" <dsdennysound(a)gmail.com> wrote > > > What I'd like to know is: Why can computer manufacturers > > make computers that can be plugged into any voltage & > > work, but audio manufacturers not do likewise. Most Pro > > audio gear have switches that choose 120-or-240V. How > > hard can it be to have circuitry to do this > > automatically? > > The so-called automatic switching feature is typically based on switchmode > power supplies. The audio industry seems to be going relatively slow on > adopting switchmode power supplies, probably because of the EMI sensitivity > of their own equipment. I did actually design a 'universal input' SMPS for one project but EMI was certainly a problem on the mic channels nearest to the supply. Further screening would probably have fixed it, but the subcontractor was so inconsistent on quality aspects and failing to communicate that we had to cancel the project. Certain Behringers have this feature. When we had a look at one we found they'd used the same integrated FET+controller chip as we had and a similar topology. But then, these things don't change much and Power Integrations' data and application notes were excellent. Graham
From: George's Pro Sound Company on 18 Dec 2008 12:28 "Phildo" <Phil(a)phildo.net> wrote in message news:CRt2l.9377$AL7.629(a)newsfe14.ams2... > > "Denny Strauser" <dsdennysound(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:gic59s$t65$2(a)news.motzarella.org... >> Phildo wrote: >>> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:492C4516.AC5D7DFA(a)hotmail.com... >>>>> On the LS9, in addition to the 4 band full parametric eq, there is a >>>>> sweepable high pass filter. >>>>> >>>>> Seems like a no-brainer. >>>> But what does it SOUND like ? >>> >>> Bloody good and way more flexible than a traditional analogue EQ. Come >>> on, how else would you get such flexible EQ on a desk with the price >>> point of the LS9 if you went analogue. >>> >>> Phildo >> >> I mean no disrespect, but weren't you the one who began this thread >> hating the LS9? > > I had a bad experience with it. I've used on again since and have a bit > more respect for it now although I still think it has been shrunk down to > too small a footprint and needs more knobs. > > It still pisses over any analogue desk for the price. > > Phildo I also don't think Phildo faulted the sound of it but rather the non intutive interface for what he wanted to do with it > >
From: Arny Krueger on 18 Dec 2008 15:05 "Phildo" <Phil(a)phildo.net> wrote in message news:CRt2l.9377$AL7.629(a)newsfe14.ams2 > "Denny Strauser" <dsdennysound(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:gic59s$t65$2(a)news.motzarella.org... >> I mean no disrespect, but weren't you the one who began >> this thread hating the LS9? > I had a bad experience with it. Phildo's problem could have been solved with scenes, but I guess Phildo had yet to learn about those. > I've used on again since > and have a bit more respect for it now although I still > think it has been shrunk down to too small a footprint > and needs more knobs. Layers and virtual controls are apparently still over Phildo's head. If there isn't a knob dedicated to a function,he can't figure out how to operate it. > It still pisses over any analogue desk for the price. Well Phildo gets *that* right.
From: Denny Strauser on 18 Dec 2008 15:43
Arny Krueger wrote: > "Phildo" <Phil(a)phildo.net> wrote in message > news:CRt2l.9377$AL7.629(a)newsfe14.ams2 >> "Denny Strauser" <dsdennysound(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:gic59s$t65$2(a)news.motzarella.org... > >>> I mean no disrespect, but weren't you the one who began >>> this thread hating the LS9? > >> I had a bad experience with it. > > Phildo's problem could have been solved with scenes, but I guess Phildo had > yet to learn about those. > >> I've used on again since >> and have a bit more respect for it now although I still >> think it has been shrunk down to too small a footprint >> and needs more knobs. > > Layers and virtual controls are apparently still over Phildo's head. If > there isn't a knob dedicated to a function,he can't figure out how to > operate it. > >> It still pisses over any analogue desk for the price. > > Well Phildo gets *that* right. Actually, I understood what Phildo was saying. I was just making light of the conversation. I know how to set up custom fader layers, but might not have time to do much walking into a gig as Phildo did. I run 6-8 monitor mixes from FOH & 4 FX for some theater shows. So' I can have 14 layers of faders, before taking into account the graphic EQ layers . More than once have I thought I was turning up one thing, when in fact I was on the wrong page. For someone not used to an LS9, it would be confusing & clumsy. He's right about it being better than an analog 'for the price.' Not only does a 32 chan LS9 price compare to most mid-level analog boards, it can eliminate the cost of a drive rack & an EQ rack. So, yes it's much better. Then consider the footprint, which is extremely important for the theater shows I do; it allow me to locate to a reasonable mixing position. If you, then, consider the fact that I can change all the monitor mixes & FX with the push of one button, it's why I ask for an LS9. But ... when I have to use an analog board (a decent one), the sound is much warmer & accurate. There's a trade-off, but it's a price I'm willing to pay. -Denny |