The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Yamaha QL5 vs Midas Pro1
Old 14th December 2019
  #1
Gear Head
 

Yamaha QL5 vs Midas Pro1

Hi everyone.

I just landed a deal that will allow me to use a 1000m2 space for my church meetings. It will seat around 1000 people.

I also bought a Nexo Geo M10 and RS18 subwoofers. And I was thinking of using my old M32R for the console.

But people are saying that for the M10s, using a M32R is just adequate and I will be better off using a QL5.

The QL5 and the Midas Pro1 are in my price range.

Anyone can help weigh in on which mixer I should get?
Old 14th December 2019
  #2
Gear Head
 

Forgot to mention that the Midas Pro1 is more expensive than the QL5 in my country. Thanks
Old 14th December 2019
  #3
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelgunawan94 View Post
Hi everyone.

I just landed a deal that will allow me to use a 1000m2 space for my church meetings. It will seat around 1000 people.

I also bought a Nexo Geo M10 and RS18 subwoofers. And I was thinking of using my old M32R for the console.

But people are saying that for the M10s, using a M32R is just adequate and I will be better off using a QL5.

The QL5 and the Midas Pro1 are in my price range.

Anyone can help weigh in on which mixer I should get?
Sounds like you got some things mixed up or got bad advice from people trying to pressure you.

1. The PA system's purpose is to cover the crowd with the best sound possible.

2. The Mixer's purpose is to handle all the inputs in the best way possible.

Those things are not related in the way people told you.

If the form and function of the mixer works for you then that's all that matters. The mixer would work just as well playing through studio monitors as it would through a 1 gillion watt PA.
Old 14th December 2019
  #4
Lives for gear
 

gear doesn't matter much these days - unless it does: the automix function on the ql5 imo is better so if you got some talking heads, that might be something to consider. if subgroups and efx matter, the yamaha wins as well. eqs and comps however are better on the midas etc.

anyway, use the desk you're most familiar with and/or what most visiting egineers can work with! or how about renting the desks for evaluation? - there's no correlation between the size of a venue or audience and the desk in any regard: i've mixed on an analog mackie in front of tentousands but i drag out my studer vista for an audience of 400...
Old 14th December 2019
  #5
Gear Head
 

Thank you for the reply. So it seems to me that the Midas sounds better but functionality-wise the Yamaha wins. Is that correct?

So I’ll just buy whatever is cheapest?
Old 14th December 2019
  #6
Gear Head
 

So is there no relationship between the sound quality and the mixer? I’m just curious to wheter which sounds better.
Old 14th December 2019
  #7
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelgunawan94 View Post
So is there no relationship between the sound quality and the mixer? I’m just curious to wheter which sounds better.
there are no objective criteria to measure 'sound quality' - they are both decent desks, offering a somewhat different set of features.
Old 14th December 2019
  #8
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
gear doesn't matter much these days - unless it does: the automix function on the ql5 imo is better so if you got some talking heads, that might be something to consider. if subgroups and efx matter, the yamaha wins as well. eqs and comps however are better on the midas etc.

anyway, use the desk you're most familiar with and/or what most visiting egineers can work with! how about renting the desk? - there's no correlation between the size of a venue or audience and the desk in any regard: i've mixed on an analog mackie in front of tentousands but i drag out my studer vista for an audience of 400...
In my experience churches don't normally have many talking head events, aka Panel discussions.

But if yours does then an automix/autogain/gain sharing feature is pretty awesome.

However, you never said if your current mixer isn't cutting it.

IMO, it's not good stewardship to spend 5-10k on a new mixer when it's not needed. However, if it is needed that's another story.
Old 14th December 2019
  #9
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelgunawan94 View Post
So is there no relationship between the sound quality and the mixer? I’m just curious to wheter which sounds better.
There are of course some real (and measurable) differences in audio performance between mixers, but they are comparatively small, particularly once you get beyond the bottom of the barrel of mixers (which you've very much done). The mixer is pretty far down on the list of things that are likely to greatly affect your sound quality. Room acoustics will have a much greater impact. Speaker selection and positioning will have a greater impact. Microphone selection will have a greater impact. The quality of your source material--the skills and talents of the people speaking or playing, and the quality of their instruments--perhaps has the largest impact of all.

That being said, having a mixer that supports a workflow that you can easily and rapidly work with, and gives you the tools you need to mix good audio, will indeed affect the sound quality--but that's mainly because you're better able to mix well, not because the mixer is itself intrinsically better sounding.
Old 15th December 2019
  #10
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DownTheLine View Post
In my experience churches don't normally have many talking head events, aka Panel discussions.

But if yours does then an automix/autogain/gain sharing feature is pretty awesome.

However, you never said if your current mixer isn't cutting it.

IMO, it's not good stewardship to spend 5-10k on a new mixer when it's not needed. However, if it is needed that's another story.
i'm not getting your point (besides your estimation that church rarely has panel discussions - dunno, the 'genre' hardly exists over here and i would wanna be involved)...
Old 15th December 2019
  #11
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
i'm not getting your point (besides your estimation that church rarely has panel discussions - dunno, the 'genre' hardly exists over here and i would wanna be involved)...
The point is that if this guy's church doesn't need "better" automix features then it doesn't make any sense to purchase a desk that has it just for that feature.

What "genre" are you talking about anyways?
Old 15th December 2019
  #12
Lives for gear
 
MIKEHARRIS's Avatar
I assume you have a copper snake...the Pro 1 may sound better...but it is only 24 mic pre without adding a DL151.
The Pro 1 will be a sonic upgrade from the 32R
Without discussing your reasons for a new mixer...there are benefits to both choices...QL5s + are pres/fader count/functionality/Dante...which may beat out the Midas’ sonic edge. Your call.
Old 15th December 2019
  #13
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DownTheLine View Post
The point is that if this guy's church doesn't need "better" automix features then it doesn't make any sense to purchase a desk that has it just for that feature.

What "genre" are you talking about anyways?
you got me wrong: i was simply listing several features and compared them between the two desks the op seems to be interested in but i did not recommend buying any of them at all costs!

if the desk has lots of well implemented features (automix being just one of them), it could help to rent out the desk and generate some revenue...

and the 'genre' i was referring tio is 'church sound' - which is pretty much irrelevant as all gear is genre-agnostic!
Old 15th December 2019
  #14
Gear Maniac
 

Hmm if you don't need more than 32 inputs (you can have 32 inputs from m32r by buying dl32 stagebox), 12 mono aux, 8 fx racks, i think m32r is enough.

Mixer choice are mainly based on channel count needs. If you are only running acoustic guitar with vocal using a million dollar line array, you won't need a 100k mixer.

BUT if i were you, having extra budget, i'd go for QL. More channels (64 vs 48 on pro 1), sick high quality premium rack, and dante as the main audio protocol is a steal.

Last edited by 1jordyzzz; 15th December 2019 at 09:01 PM.. Reason: Adding comparison
Old 15th December 2019
  #15
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
you got me wrong: i was simply listing several features and compared them between the two desks the op seems to be interested in but i did not recommend buying any of them at all costs!

if the desk has lots of well implemented features (automix being just one of them), it could help to rent out the desk and generate some revenue...

and the 'genre' i was referring to is 'church sound' - which is pretty much irrelevant as all gear is genre-agnostic!
I get what you're saying.

Besides talking head events, some churches, with enough budget and people will put on big Christmas events, etc. where they can use 20-30 wireless inputs for singings/actors, etc. in such a case good automix is a necessity.

If the OP wants good advice he should state what his needs and goals are.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #16
Gear Head
 

Thanks for the reply!

I will be using it for church (around 20 channel) all year round.

Many wireless mics will be used & instruments will be used.

Should I just get a M32 then?

The M32R will be used in another location and I am given the budget to get another for my new location
Old 4 weeks ago
  #17
Lives for gear
 

I bet an M32R would suit you fine, you're just getting jerked around by the shop into spending more money. Rent any M32 or X32 model and see how it works.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #18
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelgunawan94 View Post
Thanks for the reply!

I will be using it for church (around 20 channel) all year round.

Many wireless mics will be used & instruments will be used.

Should I just get a M32 then?

The M32R will be used in another location and I am given the budget to get another for my new location
If you AV dept. is already used to the m32r then get the M32. Why change mixer format when the m32 fits your needs?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #19
Lives for gear
 
MIKEHARRIS's Avatar
Seems you’ve been talked into keeping what you already have.
Use it if it works ok and sounds good spend the money on better wireless’ or microphones.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #20
Gear Maniac
 

u re in church?
For longer term, QL5 will do good and will help with multitracking and future expansion for the church music, in case you wanna add strings and brass section, and you wanna record all 64 channel. Plus, it has more mix busses in case your church wanna expand to stereo in ears for players.

If you have the budget and considering the future problems (expandability, etc), get the QL. The premium racks is sick and will help you with the mix. And it is futureproof. You will not need an upgrade anytime soon.
Meanwhile, i'm doing many church gigs on my M32R and all is smooth and silky.
Old 1 week ago
  #21
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by AC2SPL View Post
I bet an M32R would suit you fine, you're just getting jerked around by the shop into spending more money. Rent any M32 or X32 model and see how it works.
I agree that the M32R should be fine. From my experience, good microphones and FOH speakers (with lots of headroom) are the key to getting a good live sound (assuming the musicians are good too).
Old 1 week ago
  #22
Lives for gear
 
Papanate's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelgunawan94 View Post
So is there no relationship between the sound quality and the mixer? I’m just curious to wheter which sounds better.
The QL5 sounds 'different' then the Midas - but neither sound better than the other in a live situation.

We have16 QL5s and CL5s in our warehouse. They have been as rock solid as the past Yamaha models. And the Dugan auto mix is second to none for talking heads. Also the Dante is exceptionally versatile and integrated into the Yamahas.

However if it were me - unless you are out of channels why not stay with the M32R?
That's a perfectly fine Console.
Old 1 week ago
  #23
Lives for gear
 
Papanate's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1jordyzzz View Post
And it is futureproof. You will not need an upgrade anytime soon.
No console these days is future proof. However Consoles are one of the few pieces in a sound system that don't have to be upgraded every year. I see plenty of people doing fine work on LS9 32s and M7s.
Old 1 week ago
  #24
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Papanate View Post
No console these days is future proof. However Consoles are one of the few pieces in a sound system that don't have to be upgraded every year. I see plenty of people doing fine work on LS9 32s and M7s.
Depends on what you think future proof is. My definition is that it will fulfill it's purpose within the lifespan of the console. That's why you are seeing people are still doing fine work on ls9, pm1, etc.

My other criteria of a future proof console is that it has some connection to allow for upgrades and expansion. You cannot expand the channel of course, but you can expand it's processing capability by adding cards and external hardware such as waves or lake.

That, for me, is enough for the lifetime of the console, and for what i will do with it (say 10 - 20 years).

Consoles are not like computers. It has increasing work load all the time. You've got dvd 20 years ago, after that you have HD, 4k, and now 8k. Audio will mostly stay the same for the rest of our lives. 44.1 khz sampling rate is the standard from 30 years ago and it is not bad. We are not going to double it every 5 years or so. Are 8k movies had a 384 khz sampling rate audio on it? No.
Old 1 week ago
  #25
Lives for gear
 
Papanate's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1jordyzzz View Post
Consoles are not like computers. It has increasing work load all the time. You've got dvd 20 years ago, after that you have HD, 4k, and now 8k. Audio will mostly stay the same for the rest of our lives. 44.1 khz sampling rate is the standard from 30 years ago and it is not bad. We are not going to double it every 5 years or so. Are 8k movies had a 384 khz sampling rate audio on it? No.
44.1k is not the standard these days. 96k is - except in video where audio is at 48k.
For most people - 44.1k is fine - the average person are not critical listener - and really with our increasing deaf society the average person won't even hear 44.1 k in full.

Regarding the 384 k sample rate? AFAIK I can't see it happening - due to the lack of information above the 192 k rate - which is currently at the theoretical limit of our hearing I think.

That said I don't disagree with your premise - but in the next Five years Console Audio is going to change quite a bit. I doubt the changes will affect someone who bought a QL5 today - as it will still do the job it was intended for. But it will change in the grand scheme of things when AI integration is applied to audio support.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump