Experience with Midas Venice series?

[PStamler]

Hi folks:

Have any of you used any of the Midas Venice series mixers, particularly for live sound gigs? Any comments about performance, long-term reliability, etc.? A local folk club which does occasional electric acts is thinking of getting one of the 24-input units.

In particular, how does it compare to similarly scaled Allen & Heath products, in your experience?

Peace,
Paul

[Nate Najar]

I have no long term experience with them so cannot comment on reliability, but I've been in situations where they were the installed board and they always sounded quite good.

[hank alrich]

If you're talking about the Venice 240, they're decent. Think they have
60mm faders. Was a cheaper "Midas" following acquisition of DDA and
preceding Midas' acquisition by Behringer, and many Midas console fans
were down on it. I'd prefer to mix on a A&H.

One was supplied for years for the Armadillo Christmas Bazaar, but there
weren't enough busses to cover all the feeds properly. We've used a
PreSonus StudioLive 24 channel board the last two years.

If you're talking about a newer model, I know nothing.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[hank alrich]

PStamler <psta...@pobox.com> wrote:

> Have any of you used any of the Midas Venice series mixers, particularly
>for live sound gigs?

One more thing: if they're going to be doing some rock bands, make sure
there's busses enough to satisfy. Venice 240 has only four auxes, and if
one or two are needed for any effects you can wind up short of mon
mixes.

[Tom McCreadie]

PStamler wrote:

>Have any of you used any of the Midas Venice series mixers, particularly for live sound gigs?

There's a long-running thread over in the Gearslutz web forum.
(in subforum:" Remote Possibilities....")

[Sean Conolly]

"PStamler" <psta...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:c58f3ac5-b9c2-4277...@googlegroups.com...

=====================================

For that application I can't think of any reason to not use the A&H... but
I'd look at the Soundcraft Si Expresion if the club doesn't have already
have (good) outboard gear. About $3G street price new.

Or the A&H QU-16 if you can live with 16 channels - at about $2G. I see
myself going for one of those in the next year.

Sean

[Mike Rivers]

On 2/25/2014 8:33 PM, Sean Conolly wrote:
> I'd look at the Soundcraft Si Expresion if the club doesn't have already
> have (good) outboard gear. About $3G street price new.
>
> Or the A&H QU-16 if you can live with 16 channels - at about $2G. I see
> myself going for one of those in the next year.

I haven't looked, but isn't a 24-channel Venice about $1500, without the
24x24 channel Firewire interface, which they probably don't need?

I wouldn't recommend a digital console in a venue where there may be a
lot of different people mixing on it. It's one thing if you're booking
big acts that are accustomed to (and maybe have in the rider) Yamaha,
DiGiCo, or Avid digital consoles, but you don't find people with that
level of technology savvy going along with folk acts.

And if there's a house engineer, why are you asking us? Ask the person
who's going to be operating it.

--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[PStamler]

On Wednesday, February 26, 2014 9:45:43 AM UTC-6, Mike Rivers wrote:

> And if there's a house engineer, why are you asking us? Ask the person
>
> who's going to be operating it.

The chief house engineer asked me what my experience was with the Midas. Since I didn't have any, I told him I'd ask folks who might have, namely y'all.

Peace,
Paul

[Stuart Barkley]

We have an older A&H Mixwiz 16 channel mixer and a few years back got
a 16 channel Midas Venice as a replacement. These are used for large
dances with live folk type music a couple of times a week. I'm glad
we kept the A&H setup for secondary uses. I far prefer the older A&H
over the Midas and use it whenever possible:

- The Midas 16 channel is really only 12 mixer channels (4 are
stereo channels).
- The A&H has 6 aux outputs all with 1/4" outputs (2 pre fader, 2
switchable, 2 post fader). The Midas has dedicated function Auxes
with a mixture of 1/4" and XLR outputs (2 monitor, 2 effects, 2
Aux). This Midas puts the controls in different places for the 3
different functions.
- The Midas has 4 submixes going to the mains which is occasionally
useful. I usually find using left and right sufficient for a mono
house mix on the A&H.
- The connectors on the A&H are easy to figure out. The Midas outputs
diagram is impossible to read (both on the physical mixer and in the
printed/pdf manual).
- Some claim the channel EQ on the Midas is superior.

Both mixer have been in for service on occasion over the past few
years, but I don't know that one is more reliable than the other.

Stuart
--
I've never been lost; I was once bewildered for three days, but never lost!
-- Daniel Boone

[hank alrich]

IME they are equally reliable. Good post, Stuart.

[Scott Dorsey]

PStamler <psta...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>Have any of you used any of the Midas Venice series mixers, particularly fo=
>r live sound gigs? Any comments about performance, long-term reliability, e=
>tc.? A local folk club which does occasional electric acts is thinking of g=

>etting one of the 24-input units.

They work well, they sound good, the EQ is bypassable. They are very cheaply
made.

If they are taken on the road, the pots become intermittent and when the
EQ stage becomes intermittent it starts to oscillate. Bypassing the EQ
takes the whistle out of the sound path.

Whenever I rent one, I carefully exercise all the EQ controls back and forth
and usually they are fine.

>In particular, how does it compare to similarly scaled Allen & Heath produc=
>ts, in your experience?

I think the EQ sounds better and I think the A&H might be more rugged.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:

>Stuart Barkley <stu...@4gh.net> wrote:
>
>> Both mixer have been in for service on occasion over the past few
>> years, but I don't know that one is more reliable than the other.
>

>IME they are equally reliable. Good post, Stuart.

Don't forget the Crest. And you know, the Presonus digital is not bad
for someone who has never used a digital board before.

[hank alrich]

Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:

> hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
> >Stuart Barkley <stu...@4gh.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Both mixer have been in for service on occasion over the past few
> >> years, but I don't know that one is more reliable than the other.
> >
> >IME they are equally reliable. Good post, Stuart.
>
> Don't forget the Crest. And you know, the Presonus digital is not bad
> for someone who has never used a digital board before.
> --scott

True, but those are not the greatest preamps. IME not even Mackie Onyx
grade. An operator who realizes that and gain stages aptly will do okay
with most sources. There is one here in Austin in the Rattle Inn, Ray
Benson's club. Jim FInney says he can't run Ray's voice through the
board pres, so he takes a good outboard preamp with him when Ray plays
his own club.

[Sean Conolly]

"hank alrich" <walk...@nv.net> wrote in message
news:1lhuuz6.u0uqz41xex1esN%walk...@nv.net...

> Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>> >Stuart Barkley <stu...@4gh.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Both mixer have been in for service on occasion over the past few
>> >> years, but I don't know that one is more reliable than the other.
>> >
>> >IME they are equally reliable. Good post, Stuart.
>>
>> Don't forget the Crest. And you know, the Presonus digital is not bad
>> for someone who has never used a digital board before.
>> --scott
>
> True, but those are not the greatest preamps. IME not even Mackie Onyx
> grade. An operator who realizes that and gain stages aptly will do okay
> with most sources. There is one here in Austin in the Rattle Inn, Ray
> Benson's club. Jim FInney says he can't run Ray's voice through the
> board pres, so he takes a good outboard preamp with him when Ray plays
> his own club.

+1 on Presonus preamps. Actually the whole board is a bit disappointing.
While it sounds good or at least good enough, it's never really sounds
satisfying. When I'm tweaking a channel I'm always finding myself say
'that's as good as it's going to get', instead of feeling like I've found
just the right sound for it.

I've used one a lot, along with my trusty XR20, and I think the Crest sound
better in every way AND was faster to dial in.

Sean

[hank alrich]

I'd much rather spec the Crest, but I am constrained by budget. I have
managed over five years to bring incremental improvements to every
aspect of our production, and am now to the point that things are really
quite good, and making further improvements will require additional
cost. We'll spend a little for more acoustical materials this year
because those don't cost much and useful life is long.

The big picture is that this little music festival is embedded in one of
the world's best arts and crafts fairs. Absent that part of it the music
wouldn't fly, if only because this is in Austin, The Free Live Music
Capitol of the World. We restrict bookings to Central Texas artists that
one can hear very often in town, so my goal has been to raise the
quality of our production such that on stage the environment is superb
for performing and in the audience the listening is better than one will
get hearing the same aritst anywhere else around these parts of the
world.

[Sean Conolly]

"hank alrich" <walk...@nv.net> wrote in message

news:1lhvu7b.cfpdsp1o2ru4gN%walk...@nv.net...

Used ones aren't that much now. I see them from time to time in the $600 to
$800 range which is a really good value. These are the ones with 12 mono
channels, but even some of the larger Crest boards come up at bargain(ish)
process.

> I have
> managed over five years to bring incremental improvements to every
> aspect of our production, and am now to the point that things are really
> quite good, and making further improvements will require additional
> cost. We'll spend a little for more acoustical materials this year
> because those don't cost much and useful life is long.
>
> The big picture is that this little music festival is embedded in one of
> the world's best arts and crafts fairs. Absent that part of it the music
> wouldn't fly, if only because this is in Austin, The Free Live Music
> Capitol of the World. We restrict bookings to Central Texas artists that
> one can hear very often in town, so my goal has been to raise the
> quality of our production such that on stage the environment is superb
> for performing and in the audience the listening is better than one will
> get hearing the same aritst anywhere else around these parts of the
> world.

Sounds like fun - wouldn't mind helping out on that one year.

Sean

[Les Cargill]

Scott Dorsey wrote:
> hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>> Stuart Barkley <stu...@4gh.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Both mixer have been in for service on occasion over the past few
>>> years, but I don't know that one is more reliable than the other.
>>
>> IME they are equally reliable. Good post, Stuart.
>
> Don't forget the Crest. And you know, the Presonus digital is not bad
> for someone who has never used a digital board before.
> --scott
>
>

"Never used a digital board before"? I get the feeling they're awfully
fiddly to set up beyond just setting faders. Pretty sure you have to do
menus just to EQ a channel.

They appear to be quite popular, but I feel like Presonus stuff is
a tactical error from a "getting it fixed" point of view. 'Course,
nothing new about that.

The problem will be like with a Fostex VF16 - when it wears out, you
can't replace it and have to start over. I did use the VF16 for a mixer,
for really simple party-band applications only.

I'd like to seriously investigate using Reaper as a live mixer - I
use it for cue mix now in my "studio". It's not that much an improvement
over a Presonus from an operating complexity standpoint, but at least
you can replace all the hardware without losing your investment
in knowing how it works.

--
Les Cargill

[hank alrich]

Sean Conolly <sjcono...@yaaho.com> wrote:

> Sounds like fun - wouldn't mind helping out on that one year.

I post from a valid email addy. Make contact. Ya never know. <g>

[Mike Rivers]

On 3/2/2014 8:04 PM, Les Cargill wrote:

> "Never used a digital board before"? I get the feeling they're awfully
> fiddly to set up beyond just setting faders. Pretty sure you have to do
> menus just to EQ a channel.

Oh, it's not that bad, but you might have to press two buttons, one to
select the channel that you're working on and the other to bring the EQ
controls to the surface. The PreSonus mixers have enough channels so
that when you select a channel, each channel strip's pan pot becomes the
control for a parameter and its LED meter ladder becomes the indicator
for the setting of that parameter. So by pressing one button, you have
access to all of the dynamics and EQ settings for the selected channel.

> They appear to be quite popular, but I feel like Presonus stuff is
> a tactical error from a "getting it fixed" point of view. 'Course,
> nothing new about that.

None of this stuff is easily fixable. The good part is that as long as
it works when you get it and there isn't anything loose inside (a
manufacturing flaw) it will probably last as long as you find it useful.
Things that might fail, like power supplies, are usually stocked as
repair parts for a while, but after ten years or so, they're all gone. I
hear this story all the time with people who have a first generation VLZ
or Onyx mixers with a dead power supply and there are no longer any
available from Mackie. On the other hand, a $1,000 mixer that lasts 10
years isn't a bad investment as long as it's been making money for you.
And if it's not making money for you, hey, hobbyist photographers
replace their $1,000 cameras that are still working more frequently than
that.

> I'd like to seriously investigate using Reaper as a live mixer - I
> use it for cue mix now in my "studio". It's not that much an improvement
> over a Presonus from an operating complexity standpoint, but at least
> you can replace all the hardware without losing your investment
> in knowing how it works.

There are people who do that, but then you have the problem with the
lack of a control surface. I don't know what kind of live sound
requirements you have, but I'd go nuts if all I had to work with during
a show was a mouse and monitor. And of course if you add a hardware
control surface, you have another piece of soon-to-be-unrepairable hardware.

And then there's the problem that you might not even be able to see the
screen if you're working outdoors on a sunny day. This, by the way, was
one of my criticisms of the PreSonus StudioLive. The only display you
can read in sunlight is the LED that shows the number of the selected
channel. You can't see the LED meters (either when they're working as
meters or as indicators for the EQ and dynamics controls) and you can't
see the LCD for menus where you select reverb algorithms, among other
things, or select scenes.

There's a trend toward interfacing an iPad to a digital mixer and using
an app as a control surface. That has its fans (I'm not one) but mostly
because the iPad is considered a cheap and disposable accessory. It's
certainly convenient for setting up monitors, and with systems like the
PreSonus, any performer who has his own iPad, iPod Touch or iPhone can
adjust his own private monitor mix.

[mcp6453]

On 2/26/2014 7:42 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>> Stuart Barkley <stu...@4gh.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Both mixer have been in for service on occasion over the past few
>>> years, but I don't know that one is more reliable than the other.
>>
>> IME they are equally reliable. Good post, Stuart.
>
> Don't forget the Crest. And you know, the Presonus digital is not bad
> for someone who has never used a digital board before.

I have a Presonus 16.4.2 in excellent condition for $900 plus shipping, if
anyone is interested. It has never been out of my home studio.

[hank alrich]

Mike Rivers <mm1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> There's a trend toward interfacing an iPad to a digital mixer and using
> an app as a control surface. That has its fans (I'm not one) but mostly
> because the iPad is considered a cheap and disposable accessory. It's
> certainly convenient for setting up monitors, and with systems like the
> PreSonus, any performer who has his own iPad, iPod Touch or iPhone can
> adjust his own private monitor mix.

For the Ray Benson Roadhouse venue at ABIA they've gone to the little
Mackie DL1608, and having played shows there both before, with an A&H
Mix-something or other and the typical mid-grade outboard, and again
with all that replaced by the Mackie, the functional differences are
extreme, and the sound much better now.

Nancy Coplin has recently retired from her Austin Music Office job,
after setting up the ABIA program and booking over seven thousand shows
there. She is no techie at all. She had no trouble using the new system.
The young man who has taken the ABIA job, Michael Pennock, is a good
techie, a good musician, and a good sound system op.

In both cases the new system has been a treat. Mike comes up on stage
while we're getting monitor levels together, stands right beside us in
the same soundfield, we can speak directly to each other in a normal
speaking voice without any hollering or talkback system, and _very_
quickly get exactly what we want on stage. The efficiency and precision
of this approach is undeniable, at least at this scale of operation.

While we're performing he is sitting out in the audience mixing the
little touches as we go. The mixes are great, his listening perspective
is that of the audience members, and the whole deal is one big treat.

The digital EQ in the console performs way above the old outboard kit,
and honestly, that little Mackie sounds damn good. IMO it kills the
PreSonus in almost every regard but one: it's too damn small for larger
gigs, and Mackie didn't include any means of ganging consoles to allow
modular expansion.

[Les Cargill]

Mike Rivers wrote:
>
> On 3/2/2014 8:04 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>

<snip>

>
> There are people who do that, but then you have the problem with the
> lack of a control surface. I don't know what kind of live sound
> requirements you have, but I'd go nuts if all I had to work with during
> a show was a mouse and monitor.

You still have the trims, which are what I mainly make mix level
adjustments with anyway. IOW, that's usually "oops, well that was
hotter than I thought."

I'd be fine with it. I'm very hands off. Takes me about a song to get it
dialed in and I leave it. With Reaper, I'd ring the room, then
call up presets.

I'm not mixing metal bands or orchestras, and I am not trying to get AS
MUCH SOUND AS POSSIBLE out of the mains. When you run things
cooler, you don't get feedback and cheap gear sounds better.

If the guitar player is too loud I can't fix that anyway. If he doesn't
turn up on solos, too bad. If the backup singer's mic feeds back, *all*
the monitors are coming down. If the musicians know how to support a
singer it's not a problem anyway.

You can probably deduce I don't do a lot of live mixing. And when I do,
I do it to make it sound good to me. You want a thunderous kik and
screeching vox, get somebody else.

SO they do. Everybody's happy.

> And of course if you add a hardware
> control surface, you have another piece of soon-to-be-unrepairable
> hardware.
>

'Course.

> And then there's the problem that you might not even be able to see the
> screen if you're working outdoors on a sunny day.

Very true.

> This, by the way, was
> one of my criticisms of the PreSonus StudioLive. The only display you
> can read in sunlight is the LED that shows the number of the selected
> channel. You can't see the LED meters (either when they're working as
> meters or as indicators for the EQ and dynamics controls) and you can't
> see the LCD for menus where you select reverb algorithms, among other
> things, or select scenes.
>

Yeah, it's a big problem.

> There's a trend toward interfacing an iPad to a digital mixer and using
> an app as a control surface. That has its fans (I'm not one) but mostly
> because the iPad is considered a cheap and disposable accessory.

*Sigh*.

>It's
> certainly convenient for setting up monitors, and with systems like the
> PreSonus, any performer who has his own iPad, iPod Touch or iPhone can
> adjust his own private monitor mix.
>

Yeah, that'll end well - although with in-ears it's much more
achievable.

>
>--
Les Cargill

[Sean Conolly]

"mcp6453" <mcp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:rMidnZGMXZQTEonO...@giganews.com...

That's about the current going price for the 16.0.2, which has considerably
less features. Good deal for someone!

Sean