moving up from XR18 with splitters to X32 and digital snakes

  1. #1 by John Bloom on 06-25-2018
    John Bloom's Avatar
    Posts: 16

    moving up from XR18 with splitters to X32 and digital snakes

    Guys maybe you can provide some advice. And please be gentle as I am a complete newbie to live sound (long time musician, but never was in the position before to have to figure out a traveling stereo wireles IEM setup)

    Our band (5 members) is using an XR18, and 5 p16s. 3 members are using stereo wireless IEMs, and 2 are hard wired stereo IEM. We are now realizing we need more inputs, we want to directly record gigs, and we have more cables running around than we'd like. For example, to send stereo P16 mixes we have to run two 1/4" cables back to our rack from each p16 unit to the wireless transmitters. Several of us like using the p16s while a few are fine moving to ipads to control IEM mixes. We send all of our signals to the FOH via 2 XLR splitters

    Our overall goal has been to have the easiest to setup (at gigs) system with consistent IEM mixes night after night. We want to just show up at gigs, set up our stuff and hand a lume/snake to the FOH guy and he deals with mixing us for the FOH only.

    We are thinking about using digital snakes and upgrading to an X32 core. We'd drop SD8s or SD16s down on the stage and therefore cut down on long cable runs back to the rack. Just a daisy chain of Cat 5s. So inputs aren't really a problem - we'd have enough.

    The problem is outputs. I know that if we play in a venue with a behringer board, they can connect up to our unit via AES50 and everything is straight forward. But if it's a not behringer house, how do we send them 32 channels? Even the S32 only has 16 outs, and I don't think you can use two of those with an X32?

    Keep in mind my goal is to send the FOH clean signals without creating sub mixes of drums etc ourselves. I really like the simplicity of just handing off a labeled up snake from the splitter and giving them total control.

    I'm probably way way off base here in my thinking, and there is probably a simple solution. I just ask that your are gentle with your responses
  2. #2 by Richard YClark on 06-26-2018
    Richard YClark's Avatar
    Posts: 2,861
    Just a quick reminder that. unfortunately, Behringer has dropped the X32 Core from the X32 range and it is no longer available unless you find one second hand. There is still the M32 Core but it is more expensive and doesn't have all the same features as the X32 version. This may cause you to have to rethink your plan I'm afraid.
  3. #3 by Spence Woodford on 06-26-2018
    Spence Woodford's Avatar
    Posts: 493
    John. At least some of what you are asking was discussed recently in this thread - that may provide some answers to your questions, notably how to provide separate feeds to FoH and Monitors. In short, you'll need to buy additional analogue equipment (like the ARTS S8) to split the signals - trying to do it using digital kit is probably not practical/cost-effective.

    Richard has already informed you of the sad demise of the X32 Core, so that will not work for you unless you can find one 'pre-loved'(!). However, depending on how many inputs and outputs you need, an X32 Rack may be just the ticket. In big handfuls, the X32 Rack can provide
    • 23 Inputs (total) - 16 XLR, 6 TRS (balanced) plus the talkback mic, which can be routed to any channel you like
    • 16 Outputs (total) - 8 XLR, 6 TRS (balanced), plus the Monitors Headphone out, which can be used on the Main L/R (or using the Solo function) to provide an additional IEM output
    • Up to 18 monitor busses that can be used to generate stereo IEM bus mixes and FX sends, but note that you can only sensibly use 8 pairs for IEM mixes, which is plenty for what you need


    So, depending on exactly how many inputs you want of each 'type' (mic, line, etc.), and how you intend to arrange your IEMs once you have an X32, that may determine what other kit you need to buy.

    Re: P16-Ms. Note that if you have more than 16 inputs, you will need to create (shared) bus mixes containing groups of channels, e.g. 'drums', 'keys', etc. That will consume busses, which may then start to impact on how many busses you have available to create dedicated IEM bus pairs for control via the wireless apps. With only 5 band members, I'm confident that you will be able to reach a suitable compromise, but I just thought I mention it, as you indicated a desire to increase your channel count. You also mention moving to iPads. If you already have iPads, then that can work OK. If you're thinking of switching and people don't yet have tablets, Android tablets running Mixing Station Pro are a much more powerful (if slightly less aesthetically pleasing) option. They're also likely to work out (potentially much) cheaper than iPads.
  4. #4 by Craig Fowler on 06-26-2018
    Craig Fowler's Avatar
    Posts: 2,072
    2x S16s + 2x ADA8200s gets your 32x32 analogue IO, add an X32Core\M32Core\X32Rack for DSP+recording+ extra IO if needed, and keep the P16Ms.

    Alternatively, you could go with 4x ADA8200s for your 32 analogue outs to feed the venue's console, and use the 16x analogue outs on the S16s for stereo monitors, all controlled via tablets, and sell off the P16Ms to offset the cost. Obviously you'd still need a core\rack for dsp+recording.
  5. #5 by Steve Schow on 06-26-2018
    Steve Schow's Avatar
    Posts: 178
    If it were me I’d get an old school analog mic splitter box to put on stage. Every mic goes in to that box and splits the signal to send one feed to your on stage sd8’s and another mic signal goes into the house snake. Most every venue is prepared to accept N number of mic inputs at the stage one way or another. Just give them that and let them worry about FOH, then you can do whatever makes sense for you on stage for stagemix.

    one advantage of this is that absolutely nothing in your onstage x32 needs to be configured in any way at all to support FOH. They are completely independent from you and visa versa.

    Last edited by Steve Schow; 06-26-2018 at 07:59 AM.
  6. #6 by Steve Schow on 06-26-2018
    Steve Schow's Avatar
    Posts: 178
    Like this for example: there are numerous products to accomplish this.

    https://www.seismicaudiospeakers.com...BoCXMwQAvD_BwE

    https://www.seismicaudiospeakers.com...e-15-30-trunks

    Last edited by Steve Schow; 06-26-2018 at 09:23 AM.
  7. #7 by John Bloom on 06-26-2018
    John Bloom's Avatar
    Posts: 16
    Steve yeah that's basically our setup now, except we use ART S8's for splitting the XLR signals. Works great, and I had reached the same conclusion when we set up the system a few months back that this was the cleanest solution for being able to work in any venue.

    I like the ART splitters vs the splitter snakes mainly because they have transformer isolated splits. I don't believe the splitter snakes have that unless you spend a bunch.

    Regardless, I've decided to buy a few smaller snakes and drop those down between musicians on stage. I'll run the outputs back to our rack with 4 ART S8's (actually we have one ART s8 and one behringer splitter which seems to work fine). X32 and an S32 in the rack. Done!
  8. #8 by James Paul on 06-26-2018
    James Paul's Avatar
    Posts: 134
    - Steve Schow wrote View Post
    If it were me Id get an old school analog mic splitter box to put on stage. Every mic goes in to that box and splits the signal to send one feed to your on stage sd8s and another mic signal goes into the house snake. Most every venue is prepared to accept N number of mic inputs at the stage one way or another. Just give them that and let them worry about FOH, then you can do whatever makes sense for you on stage for stagemix.

    one advantage of this is that absolutely nothing in your onstage x32 needs to be configured in any way at all to support FOH. They are completely independent from you and visa versa.
    This. KISS, no insult intended.
  9. #9 by Steve Schow on 06-26-2018
    Steve Schow's Avatar
    Posts: 178
    - John Bloom wrote View Post
    I like the ART splitters vs the splitter snakes mainly because they have transformer isolated splits. I don't believe the splitter snakes have that unless you spend a bunch.
    Definitely a good point.
  10. #10 by Spence Woodford on 06-27-2018
    Spence Woodford's Avatar
    Posts: 493
    - Craig Fowler wrote View Post
    2x S16s + 2x ADA8200s gets your 32x32 analogue IO, add an X32Core\M32Core\X32Rack for DSP+recording+ extra IO if needed, and keep the P16Ms.
    Craig, knowing how your mind works, you'll have had a good reason for suggesting this approach. Can you explain the benefits of this, vs the more 'traditional' splitters, please?

    Alternatively, you could go with 4x ADA8200s for your 32 analogue outs to feed the venue's console, and use the 16x analogue outs on the S16s for stereo monitors, all controlled via tablets, and sell off the P16Ms to offset the cost. Obviously you'd still need a core\rack for dsp+recording.
    In this option, would you really need 2x S16s and 4xADA8200s? Or, could it be reduced to 2x ADA8200s (16 I/O), 1x S16 (16 In, 8 Out + ADAT) and an X32 Rack (16 In, 8 Out plus 2x P16-M and 3x IEM feeds from TRS)?

    Without understanding the benefit(s) (e.g. immediate digital conversion) I'm not sure which option is 'best', but would be keen to understand more, if you have the time & inclination.