Soundcraft Signature 22 MTK

[Sam Spoons]

Internet abbreviation for "if I remember correctly" I've checked and I did

[OneWorld]

The Presonus websites says the StudioLive 16 III.......

"With 128 channels (64x64) of USB I/O, the StudioLive 16 is not just the best digital mixer for live sound recording; it’s the best digital mixer for the studio as well. Each channel can independently access its analog input or its dedicated digital return from your computer. And recording is simple and easy. Studio One and the StudioLive 16 digital mixer are the perfect pair to elevate your studio recordings. "

128 channels, on a 16 channel mixer, really? OK 64 in and 64 out. But can USB2 handle 64 channels? Not that I would ever use that many, and it claims it records 32 tracks to an SD card?

Any Presonus users out there?

[OneWorld]

Internet abbreviation for "if I remember correctly" I've checked and I did

Thanks. So if I understand you correctly. The x32s come with a 32x32 interface card, but if I wanted to record, I would swap that card out for one that works as 32x32 interface and 32 track recorder? Although some suppliers, might sell it with the interface+recording interface?

[OneWorld]

Internet abbreviation for "if I remember correctly" I've checked and I did

Thanks. So if I understand you correctly. The x32s come with a 32x32 interface card, but if I wanted to record, I would swap that card out for one that works as 32x32 interface and 32 track recorder? Although some suppliers, might sell it with the interface+recording interface?

But I am sure I have read somewhere, there are no templates for Cubase, only templates/emulation for ProTools or of course Studio One?

[Sam Spoons]

If you want to record to a computer it will do that out of the box, if you need stand alone recording (no computer) then you'll need the X-Live card which does both.

[OneWorld]

If you want to record to a computer it will do that out of the box, if you need stand alone recording (no computer) then you'll need the X-Live card which does both.

Got it, thanks

[OneWorld]

Oh dear, I have been looking for user reviews of the StudioLive 16 III and the first one that came up......

"I'M DONE WITH PRESONUS!
I have never made a bad review before, but it's time. This review is about Presonus. Simply stated, if you're a professional, Presonus is not the way to go. I'm sure there are exceptions but IMO, If you want solid gear that lasts, look elsewhere."

Behringer is nosing in front of the rest of the pack and one of the appealing factors is reliability, how things change

[Sam Spoons]

The X32 and what followed has been a game changer for Berry in more ways than one. Back when they had sold 300,000 of them Thomann reported a lower than industry average return rate (around 2% IIRC) and I've seen no reports of significant problems over the years, seems like the new factory has achieved it's aims.

[FrankF]

Don't forget the X32 has significant DAW control-surface abilities as well, if you install X32Reaper.

https://sites.google.com/site/patrickma ... z7OP4Wmg0-

[Mike Stranks]

Oh dear, I have been looking for user reviews of the StudioLive 16 III and the first one that came up......

"I'M DONE WITH PRESONUS!
I have never made a bad review before, but it's time. This review is about Presonus. Simply stated, if you're a professional, Presonus is not the way to go. I'm sure there are exceptions but IMO, If you want solid gear that lasts, look elsewhere."

Behringer is nosing in front of the rest of the pack and one of the appealing factors is reliability, how things change

I may not be looking at the right place or product, but I'm getting a message from the Presonus website that the StudioLive 16 III is discontinued.

I can only comment about my 16.0.2 - max 12 mics. It was quite a few years ago now and I only used it live, but it was faultless.

But if I was buying now and wanting recording capabilities I'd probably be considering one of the smaller x32s or the Qu16.

[OneWorld]

Oh dear, I have been looking for user reviews of the StudioLive 16 III and the first one that came up......

"I'M DONE WITH PRESONUS!
I have never made a bad review before, but it's time. This review is about Presonus. Simply stated, if you're a professional, Presonus is not the way to go. I'm sure there are exceptions but IMO, If you want solid gear that lasts, look elsewhere."

Behringer is nosing in front of the rest of the pack and one of the appealing factors is reliability, how things change

I may not be looking at the right place or product, but I'm getting a message from the Presonus website that the StudioLive 16 III is discontinued.

I can only comment about my 16.0.2 - max 12 mics. It was quite a few years ago now and I only used it live, but it was faultless.

But if I was buying now and wanting recording capabilities I'd probably be considering one of the smaller x32s or the Qu16.

Yes the Studiolive 16 III does seem to have been discontinued, seemingly replaced by the 32SC and yes the x32 or QU16 are looking good

[Sam Spoons]

It's a long time ago when I was buying but I seriously considered and compared the X32 Compact and the Qu16. I was, and still am, a bit of an Allen & Heath fanboi but I ended up buying the X32.

The factors to consider are mostly to do with the flexibility and processing power of the X32 and the analogue like workflow of the Qu. At the time, the Qu could only process 22 inputs whatever the source while the X32C had the capability of handling the same 40/22 I/O as the full sized X32 using it's onboard I/O in addition to up to 96 AES50 sources.

In my case it was not a particularly difficult choice as I knew I would, ultimately, need a stagebox (I bought an X32 Rack for that job).

[OneWorld]

It's a long time ago when I was buying but I seriously considered and compared the X32 Compact and the Qu16. I was, and still am, a bit of an Allen & Heath fanboi but I ended up buying the X32.

The factors to consider are mostly to do with the flexibility and processing power of the X32 and the analogue like workflow of the Qu. At the time, the Qu could only process 22 inputs whatever the source while the X32C had the capability of handling the same 40/22 I/O as the full sized X32 using it's onboard I/O in addition to up to 96 AES50 sources.

In my case it was not a particularly difficult choice as I knew I would, ultimately, need a stagebox (I bought an X32 Rack for that job).

Thanks. I too am sort of undecided between the X32C and the QU16/24. And I too am a fan of A&H, that said, the reputation for unreliability regarding Behringer kit is long gone, and equipment such as the X32 range has now become highly regarded because of the reliability.

The number of inputs isn't so much of an issue with me, but would like at least 16 + 1 faders, and be able to stream from the DAW to a recording facility within the mixer and the 32 x 32 capability of the x32 range is quite a persuasive factor.

Currently I record to Korg d3200, or import the wavs from my DAW (Cubase) means I can even have separate tracks for the parts of the drumkit, and it is so convenient to have the faders at my fingertips. To be able to do that on a mixer - perfect

[Sam Spoons]

Both the Qu16 and the X32C have the same onboard I/O, the differences are mostly that the Qu is not expandable beyond it's 22 inputs and 14 outputs (though some or all can be sourced from a remote stagebox). The trade off is that the Qu works much more like an analogue mixer with much less menu surfing than the X32. The X32 OTOH is hugely flexible an can control 40 channels of audio from up to 96 external AES50 sources plus 24 built in inputs. Output routing is similarly flexible.