A&H Zed R16 Firewire Mixer

[greatgreatriver]

Originally Posted by gollumsluvslave

I was mainly interested in the Toft for the channel EQs which by all accounts are really nice. I've been following the Zed R16 for a similar reason - I want an analogue mixing solution that has decent inline EQ that can be used both at tracking and at mixing. It isn't the most aesthetically pleasing of consoles I agree.

I'm not tool fussed about the whole 'summing' thing, I simply want to be able to tweak my EQs with pots and hear my changes clearly - I've never been able to do that ITB; mouse and monitor are clunky and make it hard for me to really listen, even my MCU is compromised when it comes to sweeping frequencies to find problems and sweet spots.

Most of this for me isn't to do with quality of plugins or summing bus or whatever, it's I simply don't have much fun mixing ITB, it's a bit of a chore (bear in mind I'm a computer programmer/solutions architect by profession, so I'm looking at monitors for 9 hours a day - the last thing I want to do is be staring at them at the weekend etc)

I'm in the same camp bro!

[AlienHealth]

Originally Posted by Dave Ferris

Mike-

I'm not really an engineer type, more a musician/player so bear with my non-engineer speak. I've read the first few pages of this long thread and the last few pages or so here. From what I'm reading the converters and preamps are on the level of many standalone pres and converters on the market today?

I've been on the fence about a Crane Song Spider that I can pick up at just under 5K here in town from a private owner. The R16 has the firewire in addition to the D/A conversion unlike the Spider?

My use is very simple, to record my Steinway D with 2 SDC mics (DPA 4011s) and one LDC room mic in an acoustic jazz context . Also record my vocal live with the piano, so 4 mics maybe down to a 2 track HD recorder like the Tascam DV-RA1000 or Sound Devices 702. Possibly in the future to a Macbook Pro with Logic. I'm obviously trying to get the best sound for the Steinway & vocal without spending 8K on a Radar V or Nagra VI.

I don't need all those channels is one downside. But even has configured it's half the price of the Spider. Just wanted to clarify the preamp and converter quality in the Zed R16 in comparison to something like the Spider, Prism Orpheus or the new Metric Halo ULN-8 in an acoustic setting.

Thanks for your time.

Hi Dave,
Sorry for the late reply....
I've worked on a few pre-amps in my time as an electronics engineer with varied companies and I don't think you'll find better performing/sounding pre-amps without spending a huge amount of money, and even then you'll probably only get the small benefit of 0.5dB better EIN which is negligible and might get lost in subsequent processing. I doubt if linearity would be improved at all - and in transformer coupled circuits you'd get some coloration of the sound from the microphone. You may be able to switch the loading to different settings to match specific mics.
If you can audition the ZED-R16 against your alternative suggested gear I would recommend doing that - and would love to hear what you think.
Same goes for the converters, they're well matched to the rest of the circuitry - and in the being in the same box keeps the interfacing circuitry minimal (additional circuitry can sometimes add noise or artefacts).

I hope that helps, let me know if you need more specific info.


Cheers,
Mike.

[Stuart Wild]

Originally Posted by microwave

Hi Stuart,
I have compared the AD/DA of the R-16 against my RME FF800 and adi 8 DS when I bought the mixer and found it to be just as good. In real world terms this means that the converters will pretty much handle anything you can throw at them, so unless what you do and your target audience demand a totally "audiophile" signal path (you mention Crane Song AD, we are talking five grand or more for a set of converters!!!) they shouldn't disappoint you.
The preamps are really very good, much better that I expected I have to say, and I find myself using them more and more. They are clean, detailed and transparent yet have a lot of "weight". Again, they hold their own against respected mid price gear like spl or the dav bg-1, and to get sixteen of them thrown in is quite something.
As to how to interface external preamps: I too have some outboard pres I use when I want a dirtier or more colored sound at the source. I use the insert ins via a patch bay, which is the cleanest way in (unbalanced, but I never had a problem). The line input shares the path with the mic preamp so using the inserts is definitely neater. Also there is no provision for switching between mic and line - if you have a lot of microphones plugged in you have to keep repatching. Alternatively, I plug them into the RME adi 8 ds i have connected on the adat i/o.
Hope this helps
MW

Originally Posted by AlienHealth

Hi Stuart,

The channel ADCs are Cirrus Logic CS5368, 114dB dynamic range, 24bit and we run them up to 96kHz sample rate. The DACs are Burr Brown PCM4104, 118dB D/R again 24 bit and up to 96kHz.
The digital conversion performance is closely matched to the analogue circuit performance so as not to degrade either the dynamic range or linearity.
Regarding the pre-amp question, I would try the on-board pre-amps first before making additional purchases - the circuit is super-linear, having active feedback on both phases, has an EIN figure of -128.5dBu (minimal self noise), and maintains excellent performance across its wide gain range. The pre-amps and EQ are the main features on which the rest of the mixer is based! Not wanting to do anyone else's pre-amps down at all, but try ours first before shelling out more dosh!

I hope that helps,

Kind Regards,
Mike.

Thanks for those posts guys, I'm now fairly confident with the preamp and AD conversion on this desk. It's something I want to do alot of research into as there aren't any demos available where I'm from (Brisbane, Australia)... So I'll be buying based on internet research alone. Maybe I should ring the Australian distributors (TAG, I think they are, have dealt with them before with my old production company)?

The main reason I wanted an additional preamp was for colour, so you're right, wait until I have the desk...

One more question for Mike - I'm considering waiting for the possible R24 if it will have things like Direct Outs, a Solo button (curious as to how that'd integrate with the DAW mixer - maybe thats why it was left out?) and an option for motorised faders... Sorry to ask a possibly tough/silly question, but do you think the R24 will be out within the next 12 months? If so I'll wait and see what it's like. I'm hoping for this mixer to see me as far into the future as possible, so I'm choosing carefully.

Thanks again for your help microwave and Mike!

[Dave Ferris]

Originally Posted by AlienHealth

Hi Dave,
Sorry for the late reply....
I've worked on a few pre-amps in my time as an electronics engineer with varied companies and I don't think you'll find better performing/sounding pre-amps without spending a huge amount of money, and even then you'll probably only get the small benefit of 0.5dB better EIN which is negligible and might get lost in subsequent processing. I doubt if linearity would be improved at all - and in transformer coupled circuits you'd get some coloration of the sound from the microphone. You may be able to switch the loading to different settings to match specific mics.
If you can audition the ZED-R16 against your alternative suggested gear I would recommend doing that - and would love to hear what you think.
Same goes for the converters, they're well matched to the rest of the circuitry - and in the being in the same box keeps the interfacing circuitry minimal (additional circuitry can sometimes add noise or artefacts).

I hope that helps, let me know if you need more specific info.


Cheers,
Mike.

Thanks for taking the time to reply Mike.

And thanks for the other recent quoted posts regarding the converter and preamp quality.

[Fireside Studio]

Originally Posted by pschneider

Technical problems aside, I am extremely pleased with the quality of the ZED R16's preamps and AD. I am using it to record classical orchestra, and the results are far better than I expected - I don't think I could afford 16 outboard preamps of this class! It would be perfect if I didn't have to be afraid of light switches...

Feel free to listen to a sample from last week's recording:

http://idisk.mac.com/pschneider/Publ...ips/ZEDR16.wav
http://idisk.mac.com/pschneider/Publ...ips/ZEDR16.mp3

Peter

Man, this is about as close to the smoothness of tape as I've ever heard from a digital source. Quite an affirmation of other reports about the low jitter and great preamps of this desk. I listened to the .wav file and could really appreciate the almost total absence of jitter and very low distortion, even during the loudest sections.

Are there any other sound clips out there someone might be willing to post????

[awediohead]

I got my Zed R16 a couple of days ago and it has required a major re-think of how I have my studio set up. Being much more familiar with straightforward audio interfaces (such as my FF800) and being pretty unfamiliar with desks in general, I'd welcome some advice on setting things up. . . .

1) I have nearfield monitors (Adam A7's), some (deliberately) crappy PC speakers and a couple of Opera 415's. The 415's we use for rehearsal /practice with keyboards, V-drums and bass going through them. Previously I had these set up with a Presonus Monitor Station for different speaker options and also the four headphone outs with Main and Cue mixes.

Clearly the R16 shares many of the Monitor Station's features - (and I'm wondering whether to sell it ?) . . . but having the four headphone outs with different source options, will be still be very useful I think. Also because its a dedicated unit its very quick and simple to select the various options compared to the R16 - though I'm sure this will change as I wrap my head around it over the next few weeks!

I'm thinking of maybe using the R16's Studio Outs 1 & 2 to feed the Monitor Station's Stereo 1 & 2, while using the R16's Control Room Monitors (CRM) for the A7's and the 2 Track 1 Outs for the Opera 415's - on the basis that the Opera's are only ever actually switched on for rehearsals. My idea here is to use the Monitor Station just as a headphone "mixer" on the basis that running the main mix stereo signal through it is less than ideal given it doesn't have passive circuitry . . . mind you I've never noticed any problem, I'm just going on what I understand might lead to a loss of imaging etc in theory.

thoughts anyone?

2) Secondly I still have my Fireface - and please forgive if this is a dumb question, but I was wondering about how it might be usefully integrated with the R16? Specifically I was thinking about how useful it might be to have A->D for the four AUX outs on the R16?

I'm probably just trying to dream up reasons to hang on to a much loved bit of gear!

Sorry this is so long - hope somebody here can remember the first time they looked at a desk and felt their brain melt!!

cheers

[lovekrafty]

Originally Posted by awediohead

I got my Zed R16 a couple of days ago and it has required a major re-think of how I have my studio set up. Being much more familiar with straightforward audio interfaces (such as my FF800) and being pretty unfamiliar with desks in general, I'd welcome some advice on setting things up. . . .

1) I have nearfield monitors (Adam A7's), some (deliberately) crappy PC speakers and a couple of Opera 415's. The 415's we use for rehearsal /practice with keyboards, V-drums and bass going through them. Previously I had these set up with a Presonus Monitor Station for different speaker options and also the four headphone outs with Main and Cue mixes.

Clearly the R16 shares many of the Monitor Station's features - (and I'm wondering whether to sell it ?) . . . but having the four headphone outs with different source options, will be still be very useful I think. Also because its a dedicated unit its very quick and simple to select the various options compared to the R16 - though I'm sure this will change as I wrap my head around it over the next few weeks!

I'm thinking of maybe using the R16's Studio Outs 1 & 2 to feed the Monitor Station's Stereo 1 & 2, while using the R16's Control Room Monitors (CRM) for the A7's and the 2 Track 1 Outs for the Opera 415's - on the basis that the Opera's are only ever actually switched on for rehearsals. My idea here is to use the Monitor Station just as a headphone "mixer" on the basis that running the main mix stereo signal though it is less than ideal given it doesn't have passive circuitry . . . mind you I've never noticed any problem, I'm just going on what I understand might lead to a loss of imaging etc in theory.

thoughts anyone?

2) Secondly I still have my Fireface - and please forgive if this is a dumb question, but I was wondering about how it might be usefully integrated with the R16? Specifically I was thinking about how useful it might be to have A->D for the four AUX outs on the R16?

I'm probably just trying to dream up reasons to hang on to a much loved bit of gear!

Sorry this is so long - hope somebody here can remember the first time they looked at a desk and felt their brain melt!!

cheers

Greetings and congratz

I opted to keep my Central Station for a few reasons
A) easy calibration of monitors
B) has decent meters
C) good headphone mons
D) speaker switching from one source
E) has a audio thru for my Dorrough Meters

I sent the balanced main outs of the console to the Central station
this bypasses the control room knob on the console effectively
eliminating another gain attenuator in my monitor path.

I then use my Layla via ADAT i/o as another set of DAW outs to the
second set of inputs to the Central station.

That way I can send a DAW AUX mix to a seperate headphone feed if needed.

Not sure about the FF800 , if it has ADAT optical i/o's you could use it for additional i/o's to the DAW, which I find very useful in my Layla, gives me 8 additional inputs and my 5.1 monitor outs / aux outs

Cheers
LK

[Songcatcher]

Hello all,
I'm trying to decide between this desk and a 50% dearer option of a desk and converters. A much raised missing feature of the R16 is the lack of a solo butoon, quesion I have to ask is why the pre fade button is not considered a solo. It's in place in stereo, just not switchable to PFL.
Regards, Denis H

[microwave]

Originally Posted by awediohead

I got my Zed R16 a couple of days ago and it has required a major re-think of how I have my studio set up. Being much more familiar with straightforward audio interfaces (such as my FF800) and being pretty unfamiliar with desks in general, I'd welcome some advice on setting things up. . . .

1) I have nearfield monitors (Adam A7's), some (deliberately) crappy PC speakers and a couple of Opera 415's. The 415's we use for rehearsal /practice with keyboards, V-drums and bass going through them. Previously I had these set up with a Presonus Monitor Station for different speaker options and also the four headphone outs with Main and Cue mixes.

Clearly the R16 shares many of the Monitor Station's features - (and I'm wondering whether to sell it ?) . . . but having the four headphone outs with different source options, will be still be very useful I think. Also because its a dedicated unit its very quick and simple to select the various options compared to the R16 - though I'm sure this will change as I wrap my head around it over the next few weeks!

I'm thinking of maybe using the R16's Studio Outs 1 & 2 to feed the Monitor Station's Stereo 1 & 2, while using the R16's Control Room Monitors (CRM) for the A7's and the 2 Track 1 Outs for the Opera 415's - on the basis that the Opera's are only ever actually switched on for rehearsals. My idea here is to use the Monitor Station just as a headphone "mixer" on the basis that running the main mix stereo signal through it is less than ideal given it doesn't have passive circuitry . . . mind you I've never noticed any problem, I'm just going on what I understand might lead to a loss of imaging etc in theory.

thoughts anyone?

2) Secondly I still have my Fireface - and please forgive if this is a dumb question, but I was wondering about how it might be usefully integrated with the R16? Specifically I was thinking about how useful it might be to have A->D for the four AUX outs on the R16?

I'm probably just trying to dream up reasons to hang on to a much loved bit of gear!

Sorry this is so long - hope somebody here can remember the first time they looked at a desk and felt their brain melt!!

cheers

Hi awediohead,
like lovekrafty I kept my monitor controller, im my case because of the logistics of my studio - I don't work with the boards in front of me. I also use a separate headphone amplifier connected to the Studio 1 output to send cue mixes to the recording room.

I would keep the FF800 because
1) its always an excellent idea to have a backup audio interface.
2) it can be easily configured to give you an extra 8 channels of i/o via adat. You might not need them now, but you never know. You can monitor the inputs and outputs without latency from the headphone/ line out (channels 9/10) or with a little modification from the spdif out. The outputs could go into the R-16's ST inputs. You could feed the inputs directly, or from a patchbay, or as you say from the aux outputs , in which case you could set up four busses of effects in your daw (two would be pre fade) and treat them as real outboard, feeding signals from the mixer. Or have the FF800 connected to a reel to reel multitrack in order to send it drums and other sounds that can benefit from the tape treatment, and back into the DAW... the possibilities are (almost) endless!
Hope this helps
MW

[awediohead]

Thanks lovekrafty and microwave - excellent advice in response to my question.

As it turns out I'll be keeping both because the R16 is going back. As has been my suspicion for a while actually having it to physically eyeball (I said before I'm not very familiar with desks compared to audio interfaces) and go through the features I confirmed my opinion that this is a "Mark 1" version of what I'm sure will be an excellent product in future: either as R16 mk II or the R 24 that's been discussed so much in this thread.

I ordered it on the basis of a misunderstanding - I believed it would be possible to have 16 + 2 + 4 ADAT channels all at 96k with a firmware update/option in Firewire mode. The option of using firmware to increase the ADAT sample rate (SMUX) is only possible in ADAT mode because of a limitation of FW 400.

I could have lived with this, but what killed it for me was having stereo channels, 2 with EQ, that cannot be routed to and from the DAW except of course one at a time through the L R. This just strikes me as plain *wrong* in a recording desk - meaning you'd have to eat into the 16 mono channels. I appreciate that this is stated in the manual, but somehow I managed to miss it despite a huge amount of reading beforehand: this represented a big investment for me, both in research time and cash.

Another minor gripe is that there are features available in the driver software for Windows that are not available in OS X. I thought we'd got beyond this kind of inequality, but it seems to be a thing with A&H as they do not supply Mac software for editing the effects in their MixWizard series either.

All that said, I was very impressed by the quality of the desk's build and I loved its sound. They have the analogue side of things totally wrapped up at A&H - it's the interfacing with the digital realm that lets it down (lack of word clock being the prime example) and I suspect they'll get these things ironed out by version 2 or the R24.

I'll be watching with interest!!

cheers - and again a big thank you to Mike for clear, quick and honest support. On that score A&H have been excellent.

[jahwise]

Originally Posted by Songcatcher

Hello all,
I'm trying to decide between this desk and a 50% dearer option of a desk and converters. A much raised missing feature of the R16 is the lack of a solo butoon, quesion I have to ask is why the pre fade button is not considered a solo. It's in place in stereo, just not switchable to PFL.
Regards, Denis H

I second that the R16 lack of solo button, and i really need it...
Is there a way to use PFL as solo button?

[lovekrafty]

Originally Posted by jahwise

I second that the R16 lack of solo button, and i really need it...
Is there a way to use PFL as solo button?

Not really, I just use the solo buttons in the DAW.

[Mertmo2]

Hi all. Never knew the ZED series existed until the other day when I was shopping for a tiny mixer with some faders. (the one thing I don't like about my mackie 1202 - no faders). Saw the ZED 14 and was very impressed with the feel and apparent build quality. That got me researching the whole line of ZED mixers on the internet, and of course eventually led me to this thread. Wow, long and exhaustive but a very encouraging discussion, especially the way Mike from A&H has engaged everyone here. Decidedly classy and professional, I like it. Bottom line: I am sold on the concept of the ZED mixer line, but I have some specific questions for Mike and/or anyone else that might have some answers.

Keep in mind that I am coming at this from the following perspective: I am getting out of the "audio work for others for money" biz for an indefinite while. I have been running a mid sized project studio for about 10 years, but I am tearing it all down and packing it up. And for the time being, moving back into my bedroom (!!!) to just make some of my own recordings and have fun. Also, at the same time, I am going all OTB with one or two blackface ADATs for now (always had good luck and was happy working with them), most likely soon to be replaced with an Alesis HD24XR. (Taking the computer and ProTools out of the picture for now, and am *very* excited about it, I'm totally burnt with PT computer recording)
My goal is to have a *small* but good sounding hardware recording and mixing studio that is simple in nature. I have one good channel of input that I really like, and that's really all I need as I'll be almost exclusively recording myself one track at a time. (UA M610 -> ProVLA) I don't even want a bunch of outboard to mix with, I really just want to be balancing faders and using EQ. Probably I will be printing mix effects to tracks, using my guitar pedals mostly. The idea being that mixing really only involves faders and EQ. Simplicity of workflow is paramount to me right now, I have lost myself in option paralysis and feel that I have to minimize the "engineering" aspect for a while so I can write some songs.
Again, this all has to be done in a very small space.

Whew, I know that was long winded as I usually am, but I thought some perspective was in order for my questions to make sense. Here goes:

First off, the ZED R16 is too much for me right now. Too much money, too much feature set, too many options, etc. Plus, 100 mil faders are an absolute must for me, no two ways about it. But it looks like a great product and moreover, the potential of the ZED R24 reaching maturity has me VERY stoked. Regardless of which smaller ZED mixer I might get for now, I can almost guarantee that a full blown ZED R24 will be a perfect product for me sometime down the road. But that time is not now. Sounds absolutely drool worthy, though, I can't wait for this product to surface!!!
But for now, I am trying to decide between the small and simple ZED 24, and the slightly bigger and badder ZED 420...

So, having said ALL THAT perhaps I should get to the point

1) Mike, earlier in this thread you stated that the mix buss circuit in the R16 was exactly the same as "the majority" of the rest of the ZED line... Can you be totally specific on this, are there *any* mixers in the ZED line that have an different mix circuit than the rest?

2) Let's talk EQ. How does the 4 band semi-parametric in the 420 compare to the R16. Obviously it's a different design and offers less control, being that it's not fully parametric. But is the sound in the same ballpark? I don't necessarily need that kind of control, especially since I'm looking to work with a "less is more" type of simple workflow. But it would be reassuring to know that the EQ in the 420 is a nice sounding EQ for mixing. I don't expect it to be the same EQ, just something that sounds nice.
Sub question: Is the EQ on the 14/24 the same as on the 420, just one less band? Or is it yet another different design? On your website it talks about the EQ on the 420 being borrowed from the GL mixers, but it doesn't say the same for the 14/24...

3) Are the insert points on the 420 the same as on the 14, in that you can use them as direct line inputs, bypassing the mic preamps? This is huge for me, I don't like mixing through mic amps and when I tried the difference on the 14 (listening to some CD's) I was very pleased with the sound of the direct input versus going thru the mic amp.

4) Is there any future possibility of the USB section being modded/upgraded to USB 2, so that one could potentially send and receive audio of higher sample rate and bit depth than 16 bit/48k...? This is mainly a curiosity, not a deal breaker in any sense.

I hope that is not too many tweaky questions! I am very excited about getting one of these for my tiny little bedroom studio, I just wanted to clear up some details to help me decide which one I really want.

These things look and feel really great, the 100 mil alps faders are way smooth and sexy. The second I put my hands on it at the store I knew I was buying one. Hell, I was happy back in the day with my Mackie 24x8 for mixing and I can't imagine that these are not at *least* on par in terms of EQ and a nice big summing sound.
Alas, the 24x8 is long gone and uhh... i won't be getting another mackie that's for sure.

Thank you Mike and anyone else who has input for me. Again Mike, the way you have handled yourself and represented your company in this thread is very impressive. Not that I needed more convincing on these mixers, but it's the icing on the cake. I love where you guys are headed with all this, especially the potential of the R24.

[plastika]

hi there

i bought one yesterday but i allready spend 30 hours only trying to connect it to my PC but no luck i did try it on 3 XP machines not one regonize it however on a laptop { vista] firewire 4 pins it does work as i said i try to hook it up on 3 XP PC's with 5 diverent firewirecards but no luck i did email to Allen & Heath but guess i have to wait for Monday for a answer if not it's goes back to the shop how painfull it is...my guess is that the last driverupdate is not correct for XP...any other ideas.?

Thx...Rico

[cybeross]

So... Has anyone commented on the "anologue mojo" factor of this yet? Is it primarily clean, or does it add warmth and smooth things out?

Also, my feature requests would be--

1-2 preamp inputs.
Motorized faders
100mm

Basically, if we get rid of the preamps (which as stated before, many people don't need this product for. I for example only really record either vocalists or 1 other thing at a time), can we exchange the cost of the preamps for the cost of motorized faders? I think if you have that, warm analogue sound, and daw integration, you will have a killer product that a whole different group of artists will buy...

Still, thinking about it as it is :) :)

ross

[jonnathaniel]

Zed R-24!
Zed R-16 MkII!
yeeeeeesh

[lovekrafty]

Originally Posted by cybeross

So... Has anyone commented on the "anologue mojo" factor of this yet? Is it primarily clean, or does it add warmth and smooth things out?

Also, my feature requests would be--

1-2 preamp inputs.
Motorized faders
100mm

Basically, if we get rid of the preamps (which as stated before, many people don't need this product for. I for example only really record either vocalists or 1 other thing at a time), can we exchange the cost of the preamps for the cost of motorized faders? I think if you have that, warm analogue sound, and daw integration, you will have a killer product that a whole different group of artists will buy...

Still, thinking about it as it is :) :)

ross

I think the pre-amps are great, I'd describe them as focused, meaty ( very solid sounding ), and accurate with just a hint of " mojo ", very usable and I could definetly get by without my outboards if needed.

I've noticed a remarkable difference in my mixes since using the R-16
between the pres / eq's and analogue summing. Much more focused and solid sounding, loving it, my mixes definetly have more presence now, individual parts don't get lost in the mix which I found was a little harder ITB.

As far as it being warm??? Hmm that's a subjective term
It's definetly not cold or sterile sounding.

Cheers
LK

[lovekrafty]

Mike any news on the driver updates???
They've been almost ready for some time.

Cheers
LK

[awediohead]

But for now, I am trying to decide between the small and simple ZED 24, and the slightly bigger and badder ZED 420...

So, having said ALL THAT perhaps I should get to the point

1) Mike, earlier in this thread you stated that the mix buss circuit in the R16 was exactly the same as "the majority" of the rest of the ZED line... Can you be totally specific on this, are there *any* mixers in the ZED line that have an different mix circuit than the rest?

2) Let's talk EQ. How does the 4 band semi-parametric in the 420 compare to the R16. Obviously it's a different design and offers less control, being that it's not fully parametric. But is the sound in the same ballpark? I don't necessarily need that kind of control, especially since I'm looking to work with a "less is more" type of simple workflow. But it would be reassuring to know that the EQ in the 420 is a nice sounding EQ for mixing. I don't expect it to be the same EQ, just something that sounds nice.
Sub question: Is the EQ on the 14/24 the same as on the 420, just one less band? Or is it yet another different design? On your website it talks about the EQ on the 420 being borrowed from the GL mixers, but it doesn't say the same for the 14/24...

3) Are the insert points on the 420 the same as on the 14, in that you can use them as direct line inputs, bypassing the mic preamps? This is huge for me, I don't like mixing through mic amps and when I tried the difference on the 14 (listening to some CD's) I was very pleased with the sound of the direct input versus going thru the mic amp.

4) Is there any future possibility of the USB section being modded/upgraded to USB 2, so that one could potentially send and receive audio of higher sample rate and bit depth than 16 bit/48k...? This is mainly a curiosity, not a deal breaker in any sense.

I hope that is not too many tweaky questions!

I'll also be very interested to read Mike's responses to these questions - same dilemma while I wait for the R16mkII or the R24. I've already expressed my opinion to Mike directly that I think the choice of 16/48 does the analogue side of these little desks a disservice.

cheers

[lovekrafty]

Thr R-16 does 88.1 and 96k

[Mertmo2]

I'm guessing that awediohead was referring specifically to the rest of the ZED line as opposed to the R-16...

[awediohead]

Originally Posted by Mertmo2

I'm guessing that awediohead was referring specifically to the rest of the ZED line as opposed to the R-16...

Exactly!

[cybeross]

Alright, this might be a stupid question, but maybe someone here has experience w/ both...

I have been hearing a LOT of good things about the dangerous 2-bus summing mixer. Obviously, a LOT of very high profile mix engineers swear by this product, which costs almost exactly as much as our little zed r16.

So, since zed r16 is also an analogue summing box, how does its summing compare to the dedicated 2-bus unit? Obviously I know you get many other things w/ the zed, but out of curiosity, how does the summing (esp the "punch" and stereo image said to be gotten from the dangerous 2-bus being SO highly praised) compare on these two units?

[AlienHealth]

Originally Posted by lovekrafty

Mike any news on the driver updates???
They've been almost ready for some time.

Cheers
LK

Hi Lovekrafty,

Yes we do have excuses but we've been a bit slack on the release!
Actually we held off because the WDM channels were not mapping properly. We're just compiling the new firmware today which corrects the mapping with the new (3.4.1) drivers, fixes the ADAT sync source remembering on power up (before the sync would default back to internal even if you'd set it to ADAT), and includes the L-R channels at 96k.
I reckon we can send them to you on Wednesday, and we'll put them on the website - I promise!
Sorry for the wait....

Cheers,
Mike.

[AlienHealth]

Originally Posted by Mertmo2

.



1) Mike, earlier in this thread you stated that the mix buss circuit in the R16 was exactly the same as "the majority" of the rest of the ZED line... Can you be totally specific on this, are there *any* mixers in the ZED line that have an different mix circuit than the rest?

2) Let's talk EQ. How does the 4 band semi-parametric in the 420 compare to the R16. Obviously it's a different design and offers less control, being that it's not fully parametric. But is the sound in the same ballpark? I don't necessarily need that kind of control, especially since I'm looking to work with a "less is more" type of simple workflow. But it would be reassuring to know that the EQ in the 420 is a nice sounding EQ for mixing. I don't expect it to be the same EQ, just something that sounds nice.
Sub question: Is the EQ on the 14/24 the same as on the 420, just one less band? Or is it yet another different design? On your website it talks about the EQ on the 420 being borrowed from the GL mixers, but it doesn't say the same for the 14/24...

3) Are the insert points on the 420 the same as on the 14, in that you can use them as direct line inputs, bypassing the mic preamps? This is huge for me, I don't like mixing through mic amps and when I tried the difference on the 14 (listening to some CD's) I was very pleased with the sound of the direct input versus going thru the mic amp.

4) Is there any future possibility of the USB section being modded/upgraded to USB 2, so that one could potentially send and receive audio of higher sample rate and bit depth than 16 bit/48k...? This is mainly a curiosity, not a deal breaker in any sense.

Hi Mertmo2
Hopefully, here are the answers to your questions:
1) On the 4 bus ZEDs I have designed the summing amp with a low noise transistor stage to reduce the noise from the summing amp when larger numbers of sources are routed to it. (In the 436 there are up to 42 sources to the main mix). With ZED-R16 this is not required because there are not so many summed signals, but the amplifiers are the same type.
2) Basically the ZED-4xx EQ is great, but the ZED-R EQ is stonking! The added dimension of width or Q control allows for great results, but the 4 bus EQ is also much liked and based on years of development.
The 14/24 EQ is based on it, but only having one mid means that the frequency needs to cover a sensible range.
3) Yes you can use the inserts to send from or to bypass the pre-amp.
4) Not just yet. Although customers see USB1.1 (16bit/48kHz) initially as a possible restriction, I think most/all find the interface perfectly ok for the intended use - it's just 2 track so it's not intended as a multi-channel studio interface, but it's fine for building a project or recording a rough 2-track mix at a show. It's as good or better than CD quality, and very convenient (no drivers required).

I hope that helps,
Let me know if you need more info (or email support@allen-heath.com in the next week because I'm on hols for a few days).
Kind regards,
Mike.

[lovekrafty]

Wow the Allen & heath driver fairy left a present
under my pillow when I woke up this morn.

Talk about quick response, I'll test drive the drivers.

Cheers Mike
LK

[Mertmo2]

Mike, thanks for all the answers!

Enjoy your holiday...

[RKrizman]

I haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this has already been asked.

First, can this be used with Protools, at least set up to use the digital ins and outs? For my application, I'd like to send to the individual channels and back as inserts in Protools. As far as I can see, there are no analog direct outs on each channel, right?

Seems like an incredible deal, with 16 pres, 16 converters and 16 eq's.

-R

[MartinHB]

Originally Posted by RKrizman

I haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this has already been asked.

First, can this be used with Protools, at least set up to use the digital ins and outs? For my application, I'd like to send to the individual channels and back as inserts in Protools. As far as I can see, there are no analog direct outs on each channel, right?

Seems like an incredible deal, with 16 pres, 16 converters and 16 eq's.

-R

I DEMAND you read the entire thread

Im pretty sure you know you cant use it as your Pro Tools audio interface, but I think your meaning some sort of adat system? Cant help you there, not clued up in that area.

Obviously you can do what your asking if its used as your main interface in appropriate software.

No direct outs and no sub groups (which I would have liked). But there are inserts on each channel. Can they not be wired in a way that makes them a direct out. You would need a patch bay though.

Im not a mic guy but last week I did use one of the Mic pres. Sounded pretty good to me although I dont really have a point of reference to compare. But it does seem from many user comments the mic pres are V good making the thing worth the money just for that. If i needed multiple mic inputs it would be a no brainer.

Heres some stuff you havent asked about. But Im going to mention them any way because theres nothing on TV

Build quality is Really solid.

The midi faders and pots feel really nice to me. Very smooth, less tension than the rest of the desks analog pots and faders which are great mind you, just the midi section feels so sexxxy haha. I cant keep my hands off them. As a controller section its ace!

I find the analog sections pots to close for comfort, but thats not a huge deal.

Its actually the perfect size. Not to big not to small.

2 of the sends are pre fade only. In my world thats not useful, but I guess for others thats just fine. They can be switches to post fade but thats an internal job with a soldering iron. I cant do that, it would never work again if I attempted that :)

The EQ is powerful. I wouldnt say its amazing, but it is very very useful and does have a degree of class about it. I liked the bottom end, seems punchy and the top end seems nice, not screechy at all.

One thing I always wanted to know when reading the thread was would the console work without the computer being on. Might have been obvious to some but not to me. It does of course so it can be used as a standard analog mixer (latency free of course)

For anyone with some outboard synths, drum machines this thing is perfect. It really takes the hybrid analog digital scenario and makes it fit together. I have some old bits of hardware sitting in the cupboard because it was never the same using them just plugging in to my soundcard. They will be coming back out again for sure.

Being able to use all the faders as mid controllers is just another part of its versatility. Probably not something I can see my self doing, but then again who knows. Its there if the user needs it. Gives you 20 midi faders, 12 midi pots, 8 midi buttons and a transport control section.

You also have a decent monitor system. A little thing like a button for alternate monitors and an actual knob to control the volume has been great. I forgot how useful such things were.

I still havent really been able to play around with it as much as I would have liked. I currently have the Zed on my PC system. At the same time as purchasing Zed I bought a Mac/logic/Euphonix combo so I have had to spent time with them due to the learning curve. I keep looking at Zed wanting to do an analog mix (im dying to do one). Thats the only way Im going to be able to tell how it all sounds in the mix and when I do I will come back and give my thoughts on it.

Its an incredibly useful and versatile bit of kit and I would highly recommend it. Im not saying that just because I want you to join the club.

[MartinHB]

Originally Posted by greatgreatriver

Maybe add more solid play, stop etc buttons. They looked very plastic, cheap on the youtube clip..
.

Their not plasticky at all. Their like industrial strength rubber. I think they have been built to withstand a lot of punishment.

And can I ask you why in every post your hammering home the need for you to have direct outs?

What am I missing?