What will the X/M32 replacement be?

[VTypeV4]

Many of us on the live scene will have used these consoles from tiny 'corner of the pub' setups all the way through to proper shows. My personal experiences are little other than positive - especially in the case of the full size M32.

My question is, what will their replacement look like? I appreciate some will say it already exists and is the Wing but I can't help but feel that is simply an experimental / concept / off-shoot design. Most clubs I've worked that have chosen to replace their X32 have done most often an A&H SQ series which are also great.

I also understand the full-sized M32 is now out of production.

Any thoughts or knowledge of any new series from the 'Music Tribe' people?

[OneWorld]

Many of us on the live scene will have used these consoles from tiny 'corner of the pub' setups all the way through to proper shows. My personal experiences are little other than positive - especially in the case of the full size M32.

My question is, what will their replacement look like? I appreciate some will say it already exists and is the Wing but I can't help but feel that is simply an experimental / concept / off-shoot design. Most clubs I've worked that have chosen to replace their X32 have done most often an A&H SQ series which are also great.

I also understand the full-sized M32 is now out of production.

Any thoughts or knowledge of any new series from the 'Music Tribe' people?

I sort of feel in my waters that Yamaha must have something cooking. Yamaha were at the vanguard when it came to mixers when they introduced the 'O' series. Yes there were some mixers that superceded those, but none that made a quantum leap in technical terms. Yamaha went back to the Moon instead of heading for Mars

I thought the Behringer Wing was the replacement for the X series but it seems it is a different box altogether and the X series continues to be manufactured and is a popular choice anyway. I suppose Behringer thinks if it works why fix it. Just like X-Factor, you'd think it's being shown the eXit and then sure enough, it's back again!

[Dave Rowles]

most often an A&H SQ series which are also great.

This is the current small format mixer of choice. so it's probably better asking what the next SQ will be. At the moment the SQ is moping up, and I see more and more of them around, with good reason as it's a great mixer.

At the moment I can't see any manufacturer great up for something that beats an SQ, but it took ages for anyone to beat an X32, so who knows what's in the pipelines. I think Yamaha is a good place to look as their small format stuff has been neglected for a while, and the TF series was not looked upon favourably. The new DM3 looks like they might be headed in that direction, but they need to add a load more channels and functionality to get there.

[DGL.]

I think if they hadn't improved the X/M32 with firmware updates then Behringer would have had to have a similar replacement by now, in theory the Wing should be seen as the follow up as it's certainly a much more powerful board and with the Pro series i/o on board it makes it an M series upgrade too.

Behringer have somehow managed to produce a well priced, reliable board which with FW upgrades still has a decent feature set even after quite a while in production, this has saved them in development costs and it's ubiquity means that it's probably still selling well. So many engineers will know how to use the board and probably have show files for it, having a "better" and more powerful board is nice but most engineers will simply want something that they know how to use and has enough features to do what they want.
It can do this, this and this better than an X32, ah yes but I can simply plug my USB stick in here and be away in seconds on an X32, your fancier board can't do that!

[VTypeV4]

Apparently the X32 is the best selling console of all time ever..

I guess they covered so many corners with it.. Out-right replacing the LS-9 and even smaller / lesser funded places that still had something like an A&H GL2200 with questionable outboard up until a few years ago.

I'm very interested to see what Yamaha bring to the table - I still have a DM2000 at the studio, a DM1000 for external jobs and I regularly use an 02R at home all of which get the job done and keep the work coming in.

A&H have done brilliantly with the SQ as it's a machine that I can't really fault as it does everything so well. I can't say as I've ever had a bad show with one.

I suppose I was wondering whether we'd see a cut down version of the Midas Heritage D. I've used a few of these and they're very good plus they're so much nicer to use than the Pro series. Appreciated, even a cut down and re-badged version would be more pricey than an X32 (and no doubt an SQ) but I'm really quite excited to see what happens next as the X/M32 has been such a game changer.

[AlecSp]

The simple answer is - maybe.

x32 has been a gamechanger, and carries on doing the job in many a small venue. Wing and SQ may be significantly better in many ways, but are both significantly more expensive, so X32 still has its own market.

There could be a replacement waiting in the wings, or it could be another decade. Can't see X32 being ditched wholesale at the lower end for some time, until there's a suitably priced replacement.

[VTypeV4]

I wonder if I should have named the topic 'I wonder if there will be another mixer so influential and widespread - what will that look like'..

I also considered whether a version of the new Yamaha DM3 but bigger with more faders might give Behringer something to worry about? Having said that, Behringer have made history so expect they don't really have anything to worry about anyways..

[Wonks]

They've obviously upset some M32 owners who wanted it for recording by never implementing the promised 96kHz upgrade. The website still describes it as '96kHz ready'.

I know a lot of people who are happy with it as is, but for those who paid out extra money over an X32 because of the promise of 96kHz recording and never got it, it must be a 'never again' moment.

[Drew Stephenson]

I also considered whether a version of the new Yamaha DM3 but bigger with more faders might give Behringer something to worry about? Having said that, Behringer have made history so expect they don't really have anything to worry about anyways..

Given the different price points I don't think Yamaha and Behringer really see each other as competition with those products.
The Midas range is a bit different though but as Wonks says, they've done themselves no favours there.

[VTypeV4]

It's funny, as I write this, there's an advert from DV247 'Ready to ship' for a brand new X32 in the top right corner of my screen..

I'm still very happy with the performance of my now 'old fashioned' Yamaha DM series mixers - they still do more (including 96K!) than everything I need for any situation I find myself in (where I need to provide a console at least) and as such, feel no need to swap them out for a replacement.

I guess the same applies to the X32 from both Behringer and the end users' perspective..

[BigRedX]

They've obviously upset some M32 owners who wanted it for recording by never implementing the promised 96kHz upgrade. The website still describes it as '96kHz ready'.

I know a lot of people who are happy with it as is, but for those who paid out extra money over an X32 because of the promise of 96kHz recording and never got it, it must be a 'never again' moment.

I got bitten by promised software/firmware upgrades for digital mixers when I purchased a TMD8000. Many of those never materialised, and IIRC there were some functions that when selected simply brought up a message saying that they would be implemented in a future upgrade.

As a result I won't buy any device that doesn't do everything I need at the time of purchase. If additional features are added later for free I won't complain, but I expect to get all the things promised out of the box.

[Dave Rowles]

[As a result I won't buy any device that doesn't do everything I need at the time of purchase. If additional features are added later for free I won't complain, but I expect to get all the things promised out of the box.

Totally with you on that front. That's part of the reason why the X32 sold so well is that it had everything you needed right away.

[ajay_m]

The dm3 is an odd beast. I bought one for home studio use for which it is utterly brilliant, giving me 18 low latency usb I/Os at 96khz and it handles miscellaneous outboard synths really well. Plus it makes a pretty serviceable daw controller as well.
It has also finally banished the low level digital noise I used to put up with as well.

But for live use where I'm figuring they're targeting small breakout conference sessions the lack of Dugan automixing is perplexing, unless they're planning that for a firmware upgrade. No multiband compressors either just simple dynamics and ducking.

You also have to grapple with one of the worst manuals I've ever encountered, but to be fair, any experienced sound tech isn't going to have a problem with it. But what market are they targeting, particularly since Dante isn't a retrofittable option, you have to choose when you purchase it. 16 ins and 8 outs is fine for me but by the time you've added a stagebox to get 32:16 the cost is getting comparable to an SQ.

Still. As I said. In a home studio this is a cracking product (non-dante version) if you can justify the cost. Beautifully built with excellent performance and there's no lag, all the screens respond instantly.

[AlecSp]

16 ins and 8 outs is fine for me but by the time you've added a stagebox to get 32:16 the cost is getting comparable to an SQ.

You say 32:16 - but I thought that both versions of DM3 were limited to 16 mono & 1 stereo in, 6 mixbuses.

Which is the bizarre thing. Pretty unusual to find a mid - higher priced mixer that can't mix beyond its fader count.

[ajay_m]

Well I only have the non-dante version (indeed, I'm not sure the Dante version is even shipping yet) but I *think* what you do is put the extra Dante channels on the two custom fader banks so at that point you *do* have four switchable banks of 8 faders to work with.

But you would surely think an sq5 would be more attractive, sure you have to then add a stagebox to augment its built-in 16 inputs but the dm3d and a stagebox will hit £3500 and the base sq5 can be had for just over £3000 now.

Another strange dm3 omission is that it can only record stereo mixes to a usb drive whereas the sq5 can do a full multitrack recording to usb. (Though I hear this can be tricky unless you're careful about the external USB storage device you use).

However in a home studio the little dm3s standard does hit a sweet spot. It's very compact and gives you a mixer, audio interface and control surface all in the one package. This makes the £1500 cost seem fairly reasonable and the preamp quality and latency are both excellent, sure, as Hugh would point out, there will be boutique preamps with a few dB more range and a little lower noise floor but this is unlikely to matter to most people.

Ah well, we will see. If Yamaha add Dugan in a firmware upgrade that might swing the balance in some scenarios. Also it would look cute in a conference breakout room and be easily tucked away given its size.

[AlecSp]

Well I only have the non-dante version (indeed, I'm not sure the Dante version is even shipping yet) but I *think* what you do is put the extra Dante channels on the two custom fader banks so at that point you *do* have four switchable banks of 8 faders to work with.

The spec and block diagram still say just 16 mono & 1 stereo channel in the DSP. So, unless there's an upgrade in the future, that's 4 custom layers of the same stuff arranged differently.

But you would surely think an sq5 would be more attractive, sure you have to then add a stagebox to augment its built-in 16 inputs but the dm3d and a stagebox will hit £3500 and the base sq5 can be had for just over £3000 now.

Agreed on SQ. Out of the box, SQ will give 17 mic (you can use the talkback input) plus 4 line inputs - already more than DM3, no expansion box needed. And, of course, your SQ will scale up to 48 mix channels.

Another strange dm3 omission is that it can only record stereo mixes to a usb drive whereas the sq5 can do a full multitrack recording to usb. (Though I hear this can be tricky unless you're careful about the external USB storage device you use).

Don't need to be too careful on USB device. Any decent SSD will be just fine.

Ah well, we will see. If Yamaha add Dugan in a firmware upgrade that might swing the balance in some scenarios. Also it would look cute in a conference breakout room and be easily tucked away given its size.

Corporate, where having a Yamaha badge gives you entry, is surely the top market for this, where it looks like a bargain - except for that inexplicable automix fail.

[ajay_m]

Yeah, I hadn't really looked at the custom layers much but when I checked this out today I believe you are correct, as the Dante options do appear elsewhere on the dm3s but are ports and not channels and hence in a custom view you can only select sets of channels.
Mind you they are useful for stereo pairs as you can just assign one of the pair in a custom channel and with the faders linked on the main view you now can cram twice the stereo pairs into one fader bank which is quite handy. But exactly how you're supposed to mix 16 extra Dante channels with only the two fader banks I don't know. Perhaps Yamaha expect you to set up multiple scenes and switch between them. I assume that remote gains etc would stay where they were if you did this, but it seems rather unwieldy.

[Sam Spoons]

The X32 still gives 38 analogue inputs and 22 analogue outputs, 32/32 I/O over USB and 96 inputs (with 40 available at any one time) using AES50 and a stagebox or three.

[Eddy Deegan]

The X32 still gives 38 analogue inputs and 22 analogue outputs, 32/32 I/O over USB and 96 inputs (with 40 available at any one time) using AES50 and a stagebox or three.

I'm more than pleased with the recent acquisition of a PreSonus StudioLive 64S which, in conjunction with the StudioLive 32R I was using as an interface previously, provides a combination of 64 analogue mic/line inputs which are available at all times. There are a handful of additional line-only inputs (tape/aux/FX-returns) that can be employed to boost the input count by 8 or so but I'm not fully set up and tested with it all yet so I can't number those exactly.

A max of 48kHz (I use 44.1) but at 24-bit that's just fine for me. The onboard processors providing limiter/compressor/gate/EQ per I/O channel and FX (8 internal effects slots usable for send/return purposes) are a decent subset of those provided as native plugins with Studio One, with the option to extend the mixer-hosted ones to the full complement (or near to it - again I'm not fully set up yet).

The 64S also provides deep integration with Studio One. While providing normal standalone mixer functions, at the press of a button it flips into a full bi-directional control surface for both the DAW and a variety of plugins. A friend of mine uses Logic, bought a StudioLive after seeing mine, and much of the functionality works just as well for him through the Mackie control capability it provides.

Behringer have been promising their "free DAW" for a long time but as of the time of writing it's not materialised. PreSonus have a superb DAW in Studio One and if Behringer can come anywhere close to that functionality combined with an equivalent for the tight-knit integration between PreSonus' hardware and software they'll probably do quite well out of it but I'm not holding my breath.

Apart from the fact that Behringer's DAW is a complete unknown and will come out with early versions to start with their hardware is not a budget purchase and in addition to my subjective ethical objections I have trust issues with them as a company.

Subjective judgements on corporate ethics aside I've had dire experiences with the lack of support from Behringer in years gone by and it's no secret I've sworn off them for reasons I've documented at length in other topics here but I prefer the PreSonus solution because the software/firmware is far better and I can get timely assistance from their support without having to resort to joining "tribes" or signing up to community forums etc. Additionally, PreSonus deliver a mature, well tested and stable ecosystem at this point.

I also see a pattern of firmware and software updates going back years indicating that PreSonus are committed to making life better for their users on an ongoing basis.

I've no association with PreSonus other than that of a happy customer. It's been a learning curve on occasion but I think they've got an offering that Behringer are unlikely to match. That same product is suitable for both live and studio use. I can't imagine gambling a four-figure sum starting with a number greater than '1' in the hope that Behringer delivers same.

[Sam Spoons]

Nowt wrong with Presonus, IIRC the Studio-Live was the first affordable digital mixer with remote iPad control. I first saw one when I was setting up a rig we'd rented to the band who owned it. I was hooked, though it took me a couple of years 'till the launch of the Mackie DL1608 for prices to fall enough for me to buy a digital desk.

The simple reason I bought my X32C was that at the time it was the only affordable digital mixer that offered the features I wanted, these days we are spoiled for choice

[ajay_m]

While my setup is somewhat more modest I would say that adding a digital mixer has significantly improved my workflow. Also I dismissed 96khz as just being good for bat fart recordings but it allows exceptionally low daw latencies so I'm currently using it and the laptop seems to cope very well.
As for behringer it's odd that they dont seem to understand that live sound products need good support. They maybe could get away with that when the x32 overturned the market but surely not now.

[portasonic]

perhaps the 'replacement' should be the 96kHz update to the M32/M32C that was promised. All owners should start a class action (whether they want 96k or not) and demand that it be done. For me personally it peeves me beyond words and ruins my entire system design which included buying the M32C on the faith that whatever remains of 'Midas' would actually stick to their promise instead of pretending it never happened. It's a ****** disgrace. CLASS ACTION AGAINST THE PLAGIARISING THIEVES OTHERWISE KNOWN AS BEHRINGER IS WELL OVERDUE

[shufflebeat]

perhaps the 'replacement' should be the 96kHz update to the M32/M32C that was promised. All owners should start a class action (whether they want 96k or not) and demand that it be done. For me personally it peeves me beyond words and ruins my entire system design which included buying the M32C on the faith that whatever remains of 'Midas' would actually stick to their promise instead of pretending it never happened. It's a ****** disgrace. CLASS ACTION AGAINST THE PLAGIARISING THIEVES OTHERWISE KNOWN AS ********* IS WELL OVERDUE

FTFY.

Yesterday's plagiarising thief is tomorrow's Upholder Of Intellectual Property Principles, your Honour.

[VTypeV4]

I believe the M32 is now out of production?