yamaha M7CL vs Roland m-400

Discussion in 'Controllers, Audio Consoles, Live Sound' started by porpie, Nov 15, 2007.

  1. porpie

    porpie

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Connecticut
    I've tried searching the forums for discussion on the m-400, but couldn't seem to find anything. Anyone have opinions about this vs. the yamaha? The digital snake and lower price point make it look pretty attractive...
     
  2. sheet

    sheet

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kansas City, KS
    Home Page:
    It's a Roland product. Name one digital audio mixing product that Roland has launched with success, and continued to support it.

    If your Roland mixer fails, or your digital snake fails/is damaged, you have to locate another one locally to make your system work. That will be much easier to do with a Yamaha.

    The Yamaha has had some issues. I think that they are getting the bugs worked out. I would go Yamaha myself.
     
  3. moonbaby

    moonbaby Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    jacksonville,fl
    Amen to that! Besides, if you wait another couple of months, musicians' friend will have the Roland on sale for 80% off list!
     
  4. MadTurki

    MadTurki Guest

    I work at a production company that owns both of these. They're completely different animals. It's like comparing a lion and a zebra. If you have the money go with the M7CL. There's tons more power in it, it's easier to use and has those little "extras" like direct outs. Well, that's not an extra but the M-400 doesn't have em. Just an example of the dumb things Roland sometimes does.
     
  5. porpie

    porpie

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Wow, you guys already have one? Being so new, I figured there is much of a user base out there yet.

    I'm probably what you'd call your typical church volunteer who is feverishly researching and learning all I can about live audio and recording. We will be building later this year and will purchasing a new mixer at that time. I've more or less narrowed down to these two choices, but definitely like the price of the Roland (we don't have the massive budget that some churches have: we're in New England, way north of the Bible belt). We have a traditional style of worship, so no drum kits or bass guitars; just piano, keyboard, small orchestra, choir... We currently record with Cubase Studio 4.1 (this would be a vote towards Yamaha, I suppose). Does the Roland have an Asio driver or do they really ONLY work with Sonar? As far as the lack of direct outs... with the digital snake, can't you just use a standard ethernet switch to split your channel inputs to a DAW and essentially have no need for direct outs?

    As an owner of both units, can you give any more specific advice for someone in my shoes... hey, that would be me!

    Thanks!
     
  6. UncleEd

    UncleEd Guest

    m400

    we are a portable church and just bought the m400 with a 32/8 snake....this thing is AWESOME!!!....i have been using a gl2400 and have no experience with digital boards and it was a breeze....the fact you can connect the stage with the board with only a cat5 wire is amazing.... :D ...the whole system cost us just under 12,000.00....with a case included.....i would diff recommend the m400 so far so good
     
  7. sheet

    sheet

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kansas City, KS
    Home Page:
    It's great that it is working out for you now. Let us know how things go.
     
  8. jmanchickabow

    jmanchickabow

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know this is an old topic but the M-400 is a great buy. at its price point it is a great step for a church or theatre application. the fact that you can get a 90 source input system (48 channels of mixing at one given time) INCLUDING the s4000 snakes, and 40ch recording package, for half the price of a pain in the arse M7CL (CONSOLE ONLY) is huge. i notice some people have an issue with the m400s lack of a touch screen... i think this is a plus! if you have ever used the M7CL you know the headache of hitting the wrong button or having to navigate through menus to get to your compressor or eq.. live, this can really SUCK. touch screens also don't get bright enough for a show outdoors in the daylight... in this setting, your M7CL basically becomes useless unless you have shade. the m400 is very visible even in sunlight. there is also some speculation about Roland not supporting products which has been true, but this is RSS not Roland. RSS has had this mixer and snake system in mind for a little over 10 years even through all their other "BS" products. RSS is a division of Roland yes, but they are still a small company.. which means their product line consists of two main products the M400 V-mixer and the s4000 and s1608 Digital snakes... which means the staff and designers have dedication, and advocacy for the products and stand by them and will continue to stand by them. they have really paved the road to growth in this line from what i see, the mixer has been shipping for a little over a year now and they have already had 2 versions of the software which i downloaded to my thumb drive and uploaded directly into my console. the price point is a testament to their passion... they aren't trying to make you pay royalties for owning the "NAME" printed on the console or the "MICROSOFT" operating system, it is RSS goal to have people embrace the technology! These products being released is what RSS has really been waiting for the last 10 years and now they have finally arrived.
     
  9. Greener

    Greener Guest

    "SPAM"?
     
  10. moonbaby

    moonbaby Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    jacksonville,fl
    I smell a rat. I have a friend who is a Roland dealer in a major metropolitan city here in the sunny South. His crew has installed 3 of the Roland systems in local churches. EVERY ONE of them has experienced problems with the OS and the "included at no extra charge" digital snake (apparently intermittency issues). His big bitch, though, is that Roland is slow to rectify ( or even admit to ) these problems...What's new? LOL!!!

    Personally, I believe that Roland bit off more than they can chew on this product. That's to be expected when you have a poor track record in this biz and try to be an all-in-one product...
     
  11. Greener

    Greener Guest

    I own an Edirol UA-25 made in china but owned by Roland, and they know how to make things cheap. It's always done what it said it would on the box though.
    That being said I wouldn't have any Roland keyboard I've seen over any Yamaha, the only thing Roland beats is Casio.
     
  12. moonbaby

    moonbaby Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    jacksonville,fl
    I've owned several things made by Roland-still have a D50 that's outlived many other keyboards (save a DX7II) I've owned.
    My issue is that Roland has NEVER supported their "pro audio" products worth a flying f%^&.... NEVER. They dump un-sold product onto the market dirt cheap rather than spend the cash to support it. Let's see what happens here...Interesting to note that NONE of the original posters has returned to say how well their systems are doing. HMMMMMMMM
     
  13. Greener

    Greener Guest

    Inditing words Young Moon. A long history of not giving support, flooding the market with cheap/shady products. I'd always wondered why Roland, which doesn't have a bad name (well didn't as far as I was aware) here in Australia would sell things under the name of Edirol. I'm now guessing it's because they like to ruin brand names.

    And it appears they like to use internet marketeers to push spam down peoples throats.
     
  14. sheet

    sheet

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kansas City, KS
    Home Page:
    Edirol is everywhere. They are entry level A/V. Roland makes some good stuff. But they have never cornered the market and established product longevity in pro audio.

    They came out with multitrack hard disk recorders when ADATs and Mackie 8-busses were all the rage. Shortly after they were discontinued. That product was ahead of it's time and was too expensive. The other portable studio solutions have done really well for them. But live pro audio has not been an easy nut to crack.

    Their recent history has been to release something, then drop it. They either have product issues, pricing issues or dealer education and sales issues. I think that it is a combination of all of those. Mostly it is a product issue. I have tested this new digital mixer and it feels cheap. I can't imagine using the thing outside in the sun. I would not be able to get visual feedback. I didn't care how it sounded because if the thing is not rock solid enough build wise, then there is no use thinking about it further.
     
  15. RecordMan8915

    RecordMan8915

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Likes Received:
    0
    Roland Gear

    I have used Roland Gear sense the 80's and only had to send something off to be repaired 2 times. I have found all of there products including Mixers and recording equipment to be good.
    The only thing I don't like is there manuals they do a poor job explaining how to use their products.
    I have herd equal commits on the LS9 problems.
     
  16. moonbaby

    moonbaby Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    jacksonville,fl
    Well, good for you! And welcome to RO, sir!
    And so you've "herd commits" about the Yamaha LS-9? I've mixed on one of those every Sunday for the past 18 months. What problems have you experienced with YOURS?
    Just to clarify this, our comments- made almost a YEAR AGO- were aimed at a company whose strength is in MI gear, not digital live sound mixers. EVERY time-EVERY time-Roland has introduced live sound gear, so-called "pro audio" gear, it has FAILED and they yanked it off the market.
    I own a number of Roland pieces-a VK-7 organ that you'll never get me to give up. Ditto for the D-50, the JX-8P, the guitar synth, the TWO SD1000 ddl's, and the ubiquitous Dr Rhythm that are strewn around the studio. But I will NEVER-repeat, NEVER- own a Roland live sound product. I simply don't have the patience to deal with a half-baked product from that division...again.
     
  17. bent

    bent Guest

    I find it hard to believe that we would have a discussion of Roland mixers -vs- Yamahas in the first place.

    Like Moon, I'd love to read the comments you've heard about the LS9's myself. I have one LS9/32 going out tomorrow on a week long gig and am looking for one to cross-rent for a one off towards the end of this week. I'm pretty sure they will be more than sufficient for the task at hand, and if one goes down I'll send out an M7 in it's place. Can't think of any Roland gear that's equivalent to secure as a backup... Hmmm...
     
  18. sheet

    sheet

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kansas City, KS
    Home Page:
    Here is an update.

    While the history of Roland and digital audio products is well documented, and the pro community approaches Roland with extreme caution, I have sold and installed Roland systems and hope that Roland sticks with it.

    We have sold several systems installing them in churches, colleges, etc. These are venues with audio illiterates for operators. We set up the consoles with limited access. It works.

    The channel access is no more limiting than a Yamaha. I think that I prefer the GUI to the Yamahas. The latency is is about 2.5ms wich is lower than the Yamahas. Yamaha has had some firmware update issues. Since this thread was started these issues were resolved. If you use SM, firmware updates may cause computer compatibility issues down the road. They did for us.