I have been using the ATI 8MX2's for years. I find them to be of fairly robust construction. The power supply and architecture are really quite impressive. Sonically they are similar to the API's. I have used them in classical, jazz, world music, rock, theatrical, spoken word and just about anything else imaginable. I have used them all over the world, and they have survived shipping and various climates without a hiccup. As all of my gear uses DSub-25 connectors for i/o I find this to be an advantage rather than a disadvantage.
In the Plus column: Continuously variable limiter threshold. Plenty of headroom on the pre's. Line level Tape returns!
The units are bussable in a master/slave configuration for monitoring, so that all the stereo monitoring, and solo logic functions can be daisy-chained using the 9 pin connectors. There is a control room out in addition to a 2Mix out which is handy for performer's headphone mixes, while the engineer can still solo channels. The 2Mix return is also quite useful.
Minus: Fan noise, which I can accept, as I am seldom in the same room where the music is being played.
I have also used the True P8, which I found to be quite sterile. The same mic seemed to have more depth using the ATI's. The dual outs are useful,
but I would rather have better monitoring. And they do run hot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobAnderson  Howdy folks
True P8
Pro's: continuously variable gain; dual outputs - a real asset for me; and the on-board MS encoder might end up being useful
Con's: 16 dB is the lowest gain setting; no on-board pad; it runs really hot, so it ends up being a 2RU box since you have to leave space above and below;
API 8MX2
Pro's: on-board mixer; limiters on every channel; pretty good sound when I've used it on classical stuff
Con's: single DB25 output; fan; stepped gain pots which are not really calibrated; and these units don't stand up so well to abuse
Whaddya think? |