EMUSIC-L Digest Volume 67, Issue 09 This issue's topics: New gear discussion NAMM Summer Session (first look) (7 messages) Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon . You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text. The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the University of North Carolina. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Aug 1994 12:57:56 +0100 From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: NAMM Summer Session (first look) >Honestly, the SP+ you see is just an SP with >an SP+ face plate" NOT even a proprotype. Waaah! Did I ever tell you about the first Emulator III in the UK? Years ago, oh, 1984 perhaps, a session musician at the BBC had an Emulator III. Turned a few heads, that did, especially since there was no such thing. Eventually the smart-ass roadie removed the strip of white sticky tape from the back. >Nice stats. The ProMix confuses me. You wanna know *why* the ProMix confuses me? I'll tell you why the ProMix confuses me. It confuses me because it's $2000. Yet only a few months ago Yamaha came out with the DMP9-8 and DMPM9-16, the latter in particular being a 3U rackmount 16-channel (or 8 stereo, I forget) digital mixer ... for $4000. I find it strange that the ProMix has come along so soon afterwards at half the price. Either the DMP9-16 is seriously superior in ways we cannot yet comprehend (I've seen no reviews so far), or the ProMix is seriously capability-challenged. I wonder which? Nick Rothwell CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance nick@cassiel.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Aug 1994 12:54:00 +0100 From: Stefan Scheffler Subject: Re: NAMM Summer Session (first look) >The ProMix confuses me. You wanna know *why* the ProMix confuses me? I'll >tell you why the ProMix confuses me. It confuses me because it's $2000. Yet >only a few months ago Yamaha came out with the DMP9-8 and DMPM9-16, the >latter in particular being a 3U rackmount 16-channel (or 8 stereo, I >forget) digital mixer ... for $4000. I find it strange that the ProMix has >come along so soon afterwards at half the price. Either the DMP9-16 is >seriously superior in ways we cannot yet comprehend (I've seen no reviews >so far), or the ProMix is seriously capability-challenged. I wonder which? > > > Nick Rothwell CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance nick@cassiel.com The little difference is the fact that the ProMix got only a digital Out not a digital In and Out, that mean digital cascading is not possible with the ProMix1. Though I do not really know why that digital In is worth $2000. (I did not count the Motorfaders, bommer) I saw a sample unit a few ago it is as great as Arne Claassen mentioned. Ciao, Stefan --------- stefan@mms-gmbh.de Stefan Scheffler, Software Development Steinberg Soft- & Hardware GmbH --------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Aug 1994 11:20:31 -0700 From: atomic city Subject: Re: NAMM Summer Session (first look) Stefan Scheffler jotteth.... > >>The ProMix confuses me. You wanna know *why* the ProMix confuses me? I'll >>tell you why the ProMix confuses me. It confuses me because it's $2000. Yet >>only a few months ago Yamaha came out with the DMP9-8 and DMPM9-16, the >>latter in particular being a 3U rackmount 16-channel (or 8 stereo, I >>forget) digital mixer ... for $4000. I find it strange that the ProMix has >>come along so soon afterwards at half the price. Either the DMP9-16 is >>seriously superior in ways we cannot yet comprehend (I've seen no reviews >>so far), or the ProMix is seriously capability-challenged. I wonder which? >> >> >> Nick Rothwell CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance nick@cassiel.com >The little difference is the fact that the ProMix got only a digital Out >not a digital In and Out, that mean digital cascading is not possible with >the ProMix1. Though I do not really know why that digital In is worth >$2000. (I did not count the Motorfaders, bommer) >I saw a sample unit a few ago it is as great as Arne Claassen mentioned. Only two sends that aren't dedicated to the internal FX, limited insert capability, and no damn KNOBS. It'd solve a lot of problems in some areas, but the idea of a mixer without knobs makes me twitch. I guess I'm just getting old; I think I'll OTTO my Mackie and count myself lucky. -- mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Obviously had a wonderful time. You can tell by the way I hobble." (ziggy) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Aug 1994 21:20:00 -0500 From: Arne Claassen ISE Subject: Re: NAMM Summer Session (first look) > The ProMix confuses me. You wanna know *why* the ProMix confuses me? I'll > tell you why the ProMix confuses me. It confuses me because it's $2000. Yet > only a few months ago Yamaha came out with the DMP9-8 and DMPM9-16, the > latter in particular being a 3U rackmount 16-channel (or 8 stereo, I > forget) digital mixer ... for $4000. I find it strange that the ProMix has > come along so soon afterwards at half the price. Either the DMP9-16 is > seriously superior in ways we cannot yet comprehend (I've seen no reviews > so far), or the ProMix is seriously capability-challenged. I wonder which? Well, i haven't touched the DMPs, but i have played with the ProMix. I still cannot believe the price. A few things that have annoyed me, tho: 1) no channel inserts 2) first 8 channels XLR only, second 8 1/4" only 3) no digital IN, i.e. sure you can chain several Promix's together, but you still have to go through the DAs and back through the ADs. Instead of that Stereo analog in, they should have added a digital in. Would have even saved another set of 20-bit ADs... 4) it claims that there are 16 + 1 stereo channels, but they do not mention anything about the two AUX sends and where they may return... I looked at that thing and found no returns. What does that mean? Well, i guess you're gonna eat up 2 of those 16 for effects returns (for the external effects only) 5) the way its built as a compact, i see no upgrade path. I mean this thing screams for a a 4-bus or something add on and other extensions. Everything inside is DSP and software based, but no provisions are given to upgrade in the future. So expect bigger and better versions of the ProMix to come out in the future and you'll sit with a neat but unexpandable box. Don't get me wrong, i'd sell my soul for one right now (unfortunately i've already got a second mortage on my soul), but i feel that limitations of the wonderbox will become evident in the next few months... -- Arne F. Claassen ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nine Inch Nails on MTV Unplugged - "The whole band is onstage. Chris is behind the drums and a tape deck not plugged in, no sound. Everybody's waiting to play. He hits it again. Nothing. I yell at him. He hits it again. Nothing. Then we smash our gear and walk offstage!" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Aug 1994 21:29:13 -0500 From: Arne Claassen ISE Subject: Re: NAMM Summer Session (first look) > Only two sends that aren't dedicated to the internal FX, limited insert > capability, and no damn KNOBS. It'd solve a lot of problems in some areas, > but the idea of a mixer without knobs makes me twitch. I guess I'm just > getting old; I think I'll OTTO my Mackie and count myself lucky. Since i'm a Sequencer tweaker, i like the complete MIDI control, but i do agree that the lack of KNOBS is kind of frightening. The Three bands of parametric EQ are just excellent though, especially since you get a graphical representation of the entire EQ spectrum for the channel you're teaking on the ProMix screen. Now, if there was a KNOB board (not even motorized) that let you adjust these parameters instead of having to hop through menus or using a sequencer (mouse that knob, eeek), than i'd be happier. But what can you expect for $2000? Clearly more than i thought already. -- Arne F. Claassen ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nine Inch Nails on MTV Unplugged - "The whole band is onstage. Chris is behind the drums and a tape deck not plugged in, no sound. Everybody's waiting to play. He hits it again. Nothing. I yell at him. He hits it again. Nothing. Then we smash our gear and walk offstage!" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 19:08:25 +0100 From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: NAMM Summer Session (first look) metlay schreibt mit seiner crayons: >Only two sends that aren't dedicated to the internal FX, limited insert >capability, and no damn KNOBS. It's the effects send/return architecture which most concerns me. Mind you, after the Fostex mixers, anything else would be a luxury. Maybe this is one of the things that the DMP9-16 does better. That wouldn't surprise me. Nick Rothwell CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance nick@cassiel.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Aug 1994 08:59:43 EDT From: "william.b.fox" Subject: Re: NAMM Summer Session (first look) Nick notes: > metlay schreibt mit seiner crayons: > >Only two sends that aren't dedicated to the internal FX, limited insert > >capability, and no damn KNOBS. > > It's the effects send/return architecture which most concerns me. Mind you, > after the Fostex mixers, anything else would be a luxury. Maybe this is one > of the things that the DMP9-16 does better. That wouldn't surprise me. When I was still living in Ohio, I had a duo and I wanted to be able to choose which voice to send to the vocal processor (Roland VP-70) on a per song basis. A spare effect send automated by MIDI is what I needed so the VP-70 never was integrated into the system. I share Nick's concern for the effects send/return architecture. Bill Fox wbf@aloft.att.com ------------------------------ End of the EMUSIC-L Digest ******************************