Are Yamaha & Peavey Bad?

[SHARYNF]

Before we beat this thing to death
Production riders tend to ask for the top brands, midas, yamaha, soundcraft some will accept A & H many will include a statement no Mackie BEHRINGER OR PEAVEY. Many will on small productions allow for the use of the Yamaha digital famliy
The high schoolers that you have met based on your comment were never taught properly. To dismiss a high school students ability to learn and use a piece of equipment IMO is a serious mistake

If we took that same approach we would have to also say they could never learn to play a musical instrument, write a computer program, develop a game, design a web site, fix a car, fly a plane, etc. do ld for show, record a cd etc.

The way forward is definitely digital, the feel has been improved all the time, and if you want to train the person for the future, learning the digital approach provides a much simpler reverse implimentation back on analog than the transition from analog to digital. High school students today are totally capable of learning menu strutures, navigation, and also the theory and practice behind sound design. It is a serious mistake to take ones own personal experience and what they were or were not capable of accomplishing and transfering it over to others coming along behind. The when I was in high school I know i could not do it, therefore no one else can is simply not a valid argument.
Sharyn

 

[jbeutt]

I understand the progression of discourse, but I think this thread has been seriously hijacked by people with a bit of an agenda. I think the original question has been slightly overlooked, but I'd like to chime in anyway.

No, it isn't a serious mistake to universalize personal experience. It's an efficient one.

It's just as bad to take examples of good students who were quick learners and apply that universally as it is for bad students.

We're talking about high school. Apply the concept you're talking about to chemistry. They do not request nor are they expected to have advanced nor even very current equipment or facilities.
High schools just don't accommodate people's specific interests. They operate by giving a similar education to all students and exposing them equally to different subjects. They have to make each of those subjects accessible to all the students as well, which certainly hurts the ones with specific interests in a topic, but is an easier system to implement.

Let's get real. Audio is a specific field with far fewer participants than there are musicians, programmers, mechanics or even pilots. Those with interests in it work independently to find out more and get educations in it.
It's certainly disappointing to those with a biased interest in it, but schools cannot be expected to pay for nor maintain a quality theatre, let alone audio program.

Digital is obviously the future, but just as with chemistry, english or any other subject one learns, there are unchanging fundamentals that are necessary to understand in order to learn the current techniques or applications in said field. You can get as many digital components as you want, but ultimately live sound starts and ends analog. For a long while still, audio will consist of many analog components.

I think, sharyn, you're being hypocritical. Not nearrrrrly every theatre, hall, club, or rider has a digital board. Just because it's what you use, or what people should be using, doesn't mean that's reality. I can not picture an audio program that doesn't first teach analog systems putting out knowledgeable students. I think it would be leaving out major components and may produce techs only able to work on digital systems.
I do think, though, digital technology helps those with better visual learning capabilities and understanding. Whether audio is the best place for visual people, I don't know, although I'm one of them so I shouldn't talk.

I think a better question is not how able are people to learn, but how motivated. The reality of many high school theatre programs is that they're seen as obligatory by the school and the administration. They always consist of students with, at best, a passing interest in theatre. I, for one, think that public schools are about the worst place for anyone who wants an education. I think students of every type with any interest are hurt by the bland equality and consistency between subjects that are forced on them.

 

[Chris15]

I shall at this point say that I waas talking to someone the other day who said that he would not touch a Yamaha with a 10 foot pole, the reasoning being that it was cheap and that you get what you pay for. (As a side note, he was at the time mixing on a Euphonix, recording for broadcast.)

Each and every product has its pros and cons, it is a case of balancing all of these things to choose what is best for the application.

 

[PhantomD]

I shall at this point say that I waas talking to someone the other day who said that he would not touch a Yamaha with a 10 foot pole, the reasoning being that it was cheap and that you get what you pay for.

I vehemently disagree. Yamaha mixers are reliable workhorses.

 

[Chris15]

Now I did say that it was not me who held that opinion. It was the audio engineer for ABC TV's Outside Broadcast...

 

[SHARYNF]

I think Chris' comment just serves to show that everyone has their own opinion and the answers will vary all over the lot. Sometimes the off hand comment from someone such as ABC might refer to a specific model, or might have been based on personal experience. Someone who has been let down with a failure at a key point in a production will tend to have a less than thrilling view on a piece of equipment.

This thread has brought out alot of opinions, and that is a good thing, and not everyone will have to agree with any position.

I made my comments from a very specific perspective, and really had little to do with what equipment I use personally.

I do tend to try to look to the future, what direction technology and products are taking, and what will offer the most function, quality at the best price.
I don't agree with comparing theater and audio programs in High Schools to chemistry. My comments re digital as being a favored solution was based on what I see in the industry.

A few years ago, people would have said perhaps that to teach video editing you needed to teach a dual tape with vision mixer and stand alone titler system, TODAY most people would agree I believe that Non linear editing computer based solutions are the way to go

A number of years ago people would have talked about analog tape recording and tape splicing etc as the way to teach audio production, yet today the dramatic drop in prices and increase in functionality briings even the power of pro tools at a very attractive price point.

I believe that the functions learned on a digital mixer are a superset of the analog mixer, and that they are not mutually exclusive and that there are no functions that are learned on the analog mixer that are lost on the digital. The interface is different, but at the same time manufacturers are striving to provide as easy an interface as possible, many times duplicating the analog inerface on a channel basis.

I believe that in a rapidly changing technology area such as audio and video that it is a mistake to take ones personal difficulty with a specific technology and use that in the vein of "I know when I was... I could not have done it"

I think that it is very common to confuse lack of experience and youth with the inability to learn a more complex system. In my experience the learning ability for technology difference between high school and college is not all that great. Classes that are based on pervious experience and knowledge might be different, but again IMO learning an analog desk and learning a digital desk with todays teen's technical orientation is not all that great as might be assumed.

There certainly are different opinions, and perspectives, and I think a great advantage of this forum is the ability for various people with various backgrounds to argue their case.

My "argument" would be that in todays market, the advances in technology on a software based digital solution, have allowed for significantly more technolgy to be included in a product at a price point where in the recent past a analog solution was only possible. From a learning experience there is little to be lost by going with a digital solution, and a lot to be gained

Sharyn

 

[Chris15]

I do agree that digital is the way forward. Further I do agree that an individual's preference is based on a number of factors and as a result of this, everyone has their own opinions. People tend to form opinions easily and it is rather hard to change opinions once they are formed. People are stubborn. One bad experience, be it with an early model or whatever can be put you off a product for life. There is also the issue of linking products and purposes. What is most suitable for one application can be very difficult to use in another. That is why they make monitor and FOH mixers as different products.

 

[PhantomD]

Now I did say that it was not me who held that opinion. It was the audio engineer for ABC TV's Outside Broadcast...

Who cares. I vehemently disagree.

 

[Andy_Leviss]

This is the problem with casting a wide net. Yamaha makes some crappy consoles, some alright ones, and some great consoles. You can't dismiss them all together, nor can you say they're all great. Take each on its own. Give me an M3000, I'll laugh at you. A PM3500 or newer, or one of the higher end digitals, and I'm cool. Not a Midas, but there's a time and a place for each, and given that an XL8 isn't a viable option in most situations, in circumstances where the benefits of the digital console outweigh the better sound of the Midas, I'll happily take the Yammy.

 

[Chris15]

Who cares. I vehemently disagree.

And that is your right. If everyone agreed on everything we would have a very boring world.

 

[PhantomD]

If everyone agreed on everything we would have a very boring world.

I vehemently agree.

I must admit though, we do have a new Yamaha 24-ch unpowered mixer, and after its first trip in a road case the right-hand channel ceased working on the output.

 

[Chris15]

I vehemently agree.
I must admit though, we do have a new Yamaha 24-ch unpowered mixer, and after its first trip in a road case the right-hand channel ceased working on the output.

Sounds like a ribbon cable that has come loose to me... The sad fact is that it is not a manufacturer specific problem. Something like thing can happen in any mixers (expect I guess for those ones that use a single PCB, but that creates far more problems in my opinion.

 

[SHARYNF]

Look for a ribbon cable as mentioned or a bad solder joint on a connection. One of the problems in recent years is that the manufacturers are being forced to switch over to lead free solder based on EU toxic waste directives. The new solder is harder to work with, but more importantly harder to tell visually a good or bad solder connection. Problem is if your board is made with the new solder, it is totally incompatible with your standard home solder etc, so it gets trickie to fix it. I also suggest that it is well worth the small price to order the service manual.

Sharyn

 

[Chris15]

One of the problems in recent years is that the manufacturers are being forced to switch over to lead free solder based on EU toxic waste directives. The new solder is harder to work with, but more importantly harder to tell visually a good or bad solder connection.

Don't you just love it when people come up with good ideas and don't consider the knock on effect that they might have? I think I also heard that the lead free solder tends to dry joint more easily than the old stuff, so I can see that problems are going to start being more prevalent. Sadly this will affect people at all levels, from high end manufacturers right down to low end.

 

[SHARYNF]

Not to steer this thread into yet another direction, but the implications for our industry is really dramatic.

One is that it is not easy to determine with equipment built around the time of the change over which type of solder was used, but also that the new solder connections in many cases look like cold joints

If you mix the two solders you have problems

A bit more subtle problem is that manufactures have a choice of either re engineering a product, or how to repair a product with spares, and in many cases the easier choice is to just drop support. In general the new directives encourage a move away from using sockets, and to surface mount devices. This then reduces the needs for components that are in more traditional "packages" that can be socketed, or more easily replaced, and with the low quantities of parts for the audio and video/ lighting industry some of the semiconductors are likely to rapidly become obsolete.

Anyway, I agree with Chris, it was a decision that on the surface to some people could have looked like a good idea, but is likely to have very negative consequences for our industry. Even though it is coming out of the Eu since most products are designed for world wide distribution, it has consequences for all of us.

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/aug2005/tc2005089_9729_tc_215.htm

Sharyn

 

[PhantomD]

Meh easier to pull the manufacturer's service tech out of their way to fix the problem.

Each Yamaha desk is hand crafted with a serial number, so if there are a number of problems from the one assembler guy, then they can get onto him and fix the problem instead of a nightmare production line situation.

 

[herr_highbrau]

My 2p worth now, as a person who works on pro audio, but is known to help those with less budget out.

Basically when it comes to Yamaha and Peavy, its a matter of cash. If you have shedloads, go Midas, D&B, Lexicon, or someone like that.

If you don't, then Yamaha's low end stuff and peavy are perfect

High end stuff is nice. If I had the choice between a peavey and a D&B, I'd go D&B. But often, you don't get the choice.

It's easy enough to make Peavy and Yamaha equipment sound good. You just need to know what you're doing. No matter what kit your using, whether its an MC7L or an EMX2000 (an early 90s yamaha powered mixer ), you still have to set up the system correctly - ring out, set delays if need be, use proper mic placement, just generally get things right.

I learned on an 8 channel powered mixer hooked up to a pair of 8" full rangers, for my 200 person church. I still use what I learned there, no matter how big or important the gig.

So overall, Peavy and Yamaha are not bad, if you use it correctly

 

[PhantomD]

There's an article on Hartley Peavey in CX magazine.

Seems like quite a great and knowledgeable guy for sure.

 

[nicsim]

Not really.

My venue, has quite alot of Yamaha mixers. The pre-amps are good or should I say more "musical" sounding. A good choice for bands, vocals

Peavey on the other hand has Hi-Z inputs on their mixers, which makes it useful for guitars.

All in all, It depends on how you use the mixer.

 

[What Rigger?]

Does Peavey suck? I don't think sooooooo! And neither does Ted Nugent, so there!

I've beat the living H3ll outta my Peavey 1x12 bass combo for 8 years now over thousands of miles of transport, playing indoors, outdoors, and my neighbors garage (scarier than it sounds) and it is BOMBPROOF!

Yamaha makes nice mixers, really good bass guitars (if you're not a snob, you Zon players!), and even better dirt bikes. Doug Henry forever!