Allen & Heath XONE: S2 thoughts?

[AshG]

that def was NOT the case a few years ago.

glad they changed that, but its bizarre that it was once originally that way.

[coleridge]

I'm a big fan of the classic Urei 1620 and the Bozak CMA-10. My dream is to buy a refurbished original 1620 but I still can't justify the $2000 to myself. I learned to mix on a mixer with no EQ so I've always been comfortable with no EQ on each channel. On a good system you don't even need EQ in my opinion. When I played Stereo years ago it felt like the records were mixing themselves.

I've played on the A&H V6 once, back in the System days, and that thing was terrible. Don't remember my specific issue with it but it sucked.

I always liked the Rane 2016, we used that at System in the early days. It had/has the best EQ section of any mixer I've used. The curves and the frequency range of the EQs were perfect. While they fixed the cueing issue with the 2016a series, the sound quality was diminished over the original model.

I currently have an A&H 42 and I'm disappointed with it. In just over a year, one of the channels isn't working properly and the send/return knobs leak sound because of faulty connections (I know this because if you press down on the knobs hard the problem goes away).

[Mrs. Pink]

I had a chance to play on Element's Rotary, Systems Rotary and Boa's.....and they all seemed....i dunno, different from the other, if that makes any sense. The one thing i REALLY enjoyed was the isolation on the eq's. You cut the bass, and the bass was GONE. As Mike had mentioned, a bit tougher with the rotary when in the mix, hard the check your signals etc.....and yes, i believe on all three rotaries that i got to play on, you could not cue more then one channel....not that i really ever had the need, as i'm a fairly basic mixer. lol....

I remember watching Derrick May play at Element, and he probably played for a good 45 minutes...without any headphones whatsoever....

it was pretty rad.

[TRK]

So I am about to buy a Rane 2016a with the eq section - Can anyone make a case for why in this price range there is a far superior mixer? I am looking at it as the last mixer I will own for a long time. I agree with a lot of the complaints about the Xone 92, but I wonder if I am missing something. Are there features on the Xone 92 that I am going to miss with something like the Rane? Is there another mixer out there I am missing?

[in2house]

TRK - Are you buying new or used? If your buying new then you'll be getting a 2016S which is identical to the 2016A but does away with the traditional outboard power supply in exchange for an internal one.

I would classify the Rane as the today's "Urei". It's a well designed/built mixer.

I made a list of mixers early in this thread, here are a few additions

A&H V6/S6 - Can be combined with the A&H VF1 Filter and Dual V6 Isolator
Formula Sound FF-6000 (UK)
Hi-Level PM5000 (Germany)
Bozak AR-6/EQ-6 (UK) - Not available yet.
Alpha Recording System 4100 (Japan)

They all seem to place emphasis on sound quality not necessarily features but that depends on what your looking for. None of the mixers listed above have effects or filters.

I would say that if you like to use effects get a Pioneer EFX-1000 and use it in the effects loop of the 2016.

If you haven't used both units (the 2016 or X92), rent them and try them out. We can talk about features all day long but if you don't like the feel of the mixer then chances are you won't be happy.

[octo]

i really appreciate everyone's input!

...

bozak is back eh? i'm going to keep tabs on that mixer

i've thought it through and the biggest reason for wanting a new mixer is to improve the sound quality over my current set up. i want a new mixer to be several steps up in terms of sound quality while being as fun to use as my pmc 25. it has to be a solid foundation of my stereo system that i plan on upgrading.

it's sounds like the S6 is a pain in the ass. i can't handle cramped eq's.

gonna wait and see what this bozak is like. maybe jump on a 2016 or save for DJR 400 and get it modified with tubes.

i found a demo of that Alpha 4100
dude seems a little timid with the dials. i'd be rockin the shit out of that iso.



i found LLV being a tad self indulgent with the bozak ISO. it brings a smile to my face none the less



rotary dials are more natural to use. they seem like an extension of your hand. you can mix by feel.

[AshG]

Originally Posted by coleridge

I currently have an A&H 42 and I'm disappointed with it. In just over a year, one of the channels isn't working properly and the send/return knobs leak sound because of faulty connections (I know this because if you press down on the knobs hard the problem goes away).

i thought i read that a&h had moved their manufacturing to china a couple years ago. is that true? if so, i wonder if that might account for this.

Originally Posted by TRK

So I am about to buy a Rane 2016a with the eq section - Can anyone make a case for why in this price range there is a far superior mixer? I am looking at it as the last mixer I will own for a long time. I agree with a lot of the complaints about the Xone 92, but I wonder if I am missing something. Are there features on the Xone 92 that I am going to miss with something like the Rane? Is there another mixer out there I am missing?

well, ... ok in today's sort of music world, there's 2 ways to approach this i guess. many mixers today are midi-mappable, so if you're at all considering using your mixer to mix things completely in the digital domain, you'll want a mixer that is in fact midi mappable. the Rane, while an amazing audio mixer, is not set up for midi.

a&h 92 is(i think), as are many others.

as well, many of these midi mixers have great sound quality, but if you're simply looking for a good audio mixer, then this simplifies your choices, or at least your considerations.

next thing to consider would be effects. many mixers come with fx built in, including the a&h92(great filters). some mixers seem to almost place those first(pioneer), while others, such as the Rane, have no effects at all. for most 'audiophiles', built in fx count for squat, so the Rane would sit equally alongside any other mixer as far as that goes.

now what about value? some mixers would probably do a very good job, comparable to the Rane, and yet cost a fraction of the price. the Urei 1603 is a mixer that - while completely diff to the Rane - would fall into this category. it has its own quirks, but naturally has superb sound quality and build, but costs 1/4 of the price of the Rane:



but just look at that thing. it doesn't exactly ooze that classic look or feel, which generally speaking is another factor. some people really don't like some of the christmas-tree type looks some of today's mixers have(most of a&h), and certainly nothing touches the Rane for the classic look and feel, so you've a clear winner right there if that matters to you.

but ultimately...

Originally Posted by in2house

If you haven't used both units (the 2016 or X92), rent them and try them out. We can talk about features all day long but if you don't like the feel of the mixer then chances are you won't be happy.

there you go!

[solacevip]

Originally Posted by coleridge

I currently have an A&H 42 and I'm disappointed with it. In just over a year, one of the channels isn't working properly and the send/return knobs leak sound because of faulty connections (I know this because if you press down on the knobs hard the problem goes away).

That doesn't surprise me Matt.....I personally love A&H mixers....but when I decided to upgrade from my xone 32....I bought a xone 42. Mikeryan and I played with it new out of the box.....and we had issues with it. Particularly the VCF to crossfader function. I was much happier with the 62 when I returned it.

Yes....they do make the gear now in China.

[TRK]

Good points all - Played around with the A&H 92 - My concern, as others have mentioned is layout - Things are packed way too close together.

[RumRogerz]

^^

You get used to it.
It's seriously a solid, solid mixer. I don't think i will need to purchase another one ever again - sound quality is sublime, the eq range is borderline godly. That shit will kill once you bump it down to 0. Plus, who can deny those awesome 3 band filters? mmm mmm MMMM

[AshG]

Originally Posted by RumRogerz

^^

You get used to it.
It's seriously a solid, solid mixer. I don't think i will need to purchase another one ever again - sound quality is sublime, the eq range is borderline godly. That shit will kill once you bump it down to 0. Plus, who can deny those awesome 3 band filters? mmm mmm MMMM

that is, i'll readily admit, a HUGE improvement over their honestly stupid 4 channel eq setup. not because of the idea, but because of the execution.

it really redeemed itself in that regard, no doubt!

[mikeryan]

i double checked the 92. to get two or three or four queues going at once you have to, with no queues on, hit the ones you want at the exact same time. it's a little counter-intuitive and you have to be pretty in time when you make the hit. i guess i never want two in the queue. or i mix the master in the headphone sometimes. anyhoo.

[Wiseman]

at the same time? that's so dumb. I just don't get how they can make such a great sounding mixer with awesome filters and royally screw up layout and cue sections.

I mean how can you get the cue section wrong?

[mikeryan]

if you consider that 95% of the time you just want to toggle to the other queue then it's mildly useful. if i just mixed out of channel 1 and am now wanting to hear #2 in the queue then all i have to do is hit the #2 queue button. i don't have to turn off #1. that saves me 0.13 of a second which i need. because i'm so fast. and i need to do so many things at once. and every millisecond counts.

you also have to remember. there's a standard form factor for the mixers. and the more crap they jam onto it the less space they have to work with. the two aux send dials on each channel are a huge waste of space on the 92 if you don't use outboard effects at all and this very much constricted the amount of space they had to make knobs bigger and spaced further apart. so it's a trade off. features over form factor.

[TRK]

I ended up going with the Rane MP/XP combo. I like simple, I like good sound, and I decided I wanted a rotary mixer with a clean layout. Unpacked it last night, just waiting to get a chance to put it to work. Merry Christmas me. If I even understood what MIDI was I might want something to control it. At some point I got old.....

[djSwank]

Originally Posted by TRK

I ended up going with the Rane MP/XP combo. I like simple, I like good sound, and I decided I wanted a rotary mixer with a clean layout. Unpacked it last night, just waiting to get a chance to put it to work. Merry Christmas me. If I even understood what MIDI was I might want something to control it. At some point I got old.....

nice, welcome to the club, I know you will enjoy it!

if you are using CDJs on the Aux connections, I recommend turning 3 or 4 of your channels to Aux1 say and playing around with just one track playing. i love doing that and isolating each range. the parallel routing of the signals really gives you alot of options for mixing.

i just wish it had a per channel Send/Return selector for an EFX unit.

[SubMissioN]

I don't know about you guys but this one heres the bad boy, in my opinion.



here take a look.
http://www.evobyecler.com/5/index.html

[Wiseman]

Yeah I would love that mixer. So many things are right. little things like the record out being accessible from the top.

[AshG]

+'s - layout
everything looks super sensible, which for some reason, many mixer manufacturer's have huge problems accomplishing

-'s - fx
i've yet to come across a mixer with built in fx that makes the price increase anything close to worth it

but this is just an off the cuff opinion.
maybe this one is diff

[SubMissioN]

Originally Posted by Wiseman

Yeah I would love that mixer. So many things are right. little things like the record out being accessible from the top.

Thats right i can hear it just like a sports playback in slow mo. A tweak of the nob here a wet to dry or dry to wet cross fade curve with some eq curve filtering adjusting the frequency and the biggest bitch slap of a crossfade you ever felt in your life. Knock you right on your ass.

[SubMissioN]

Then the place explodes....body parts everywhere.
Just kidding.