Assuming this is the Apogee Rosetta 800, you should try to break the problem down to isolate what is causing the trouble. The Rosetta 800 is quite a complex unit, and can be configured through use of internal jumpers as well as multi-use push buttons on the front panel

The Rosetta 800 is an A-D (and D-A) converter box that needs to be driven with (and gives out) balanced line-level signals. What type of pre-amplifiers are you using to feed the 800 and have you got Tascam-compatible interconnection cabling?

Boswell, post: 468354, member: 29034 wrote:
Assuming this is the Apogee Rosetta 800, you should try to break the problem down to isolate what is causing the trouble. The Rosetta 800 is quite a complex unit, and can be configured through use of internal jumpers as well as multi-use push buttons on the front panel

The Rosetta 800 is an A-D (and D-A) converter box that needs to be driven with (and gives out) balanced line-level signals. What type of pre-amplifiers are you using to feed the 800 and have you got Tascam-compatible interconnection cabling?

Hi, thanks for your help. I have a XLR to DB25 Snake cable, 8 channels of guitar, bass, mics, connected to apogee input, then I have it connected through a toslink cable to the motu 828 mk3 input, As the motu didn’t recognize then apogee I had to aggregate device on the Audio midi setup application, I configured the 8 channels that on the audio menu are from 17 to 24. Then I add every channel on logic, and it works, but the signal input of each is very weak, every instrument marks some level, but almost no sound at all, my monitors hardly sound so I have to record and normalize every track after that to get some level. Is there something wrong on my setup?

What piece(s) of equipment do you have between the microphones/guitars and the XLR connectors on the end of the cable to the Rosetta input?

Boswell, post: 468358, member: 29034 wrote:
What piece(s) of equipment do you have between the microphones/guitars and the XLR connectors on the end of the cable to the Rosetta input?

Nothing, i'm connecting directly to the guitar and mic

That's what I suspected. The Rosetta 800 needs to be fed with signals that have been through a pre-amplifier. This would bring their amplitudes up to the level that the Rosetta needs. Exactly what figure that is for your 800 depends on the settings of jumpers inside the box and the push-button settings on the front panel.

You were probably expecting that the Rosetta 800 would take microphone signals, but unfortunately that is not the case, as it is an analogue-digital and digital-analogue converter.

If you make a list of the make and model of your microphones, we could make some suggestions about the pre-amplifiers you could consider for this job. How many sound sources do you record at any one time?

Boswell, post: 468361, member: 29034 wrote:
That's what I suspected. The Rosetta 800 needs to be fed with signals that have been through a pre-amplifier. This would bring their amplitudes up to the level that the Rosetta needs. Exactly what figure that is for your 800 depends on the settings of jumpers inside the box and the push-button settings on the front panel.

You were probably expecting that the Rosetta 800 would take microphone signals, but unfortunately that is not the case, as it is an analogue-digital and digital-analogue converter.

If you make a list of the make and model of your microphones, we could make some suggestions about the pre-amplifiers you could consider for this job. How many sound sources do you record at any one time?

Yes, i expected that because i was told that if i bought the rosetta i could record my drum kit with voice, bass and guitar digitally from the snake. If that's not true then it's been a waste of money, because now i have to buy more equipment. I have a shure drum kit, a sm58 for voice and my guitars

Can I just check? You do know this device is a line level +4dB unit? It doesn't have preamps in the usual sense at all, and is just an interface from A to D and back. The max input level is +6dB, so plugging in anything other than high level source devices won't produce much at all. I doubt a dynamic mic would even tickle the meters? The DB25 to XLR cables are pretty standard as they go, and very expensive - and I use them on some audio devices - but they don't cater for mics and guitars?

EDIT - sorry that post was late, it didn't go for some reason.

The apogee website makes no mention of anything that would give the impression it's for mics - some of their other products do - like the element 88. I don't know how you missed it. Do you have any cooling off period where you can return it? Other than that, then you could buy an older analogue classic mixer and use this to get mics and guitars up to pro line level?

Cant return becaiuse i bought it used, thah apogee is old model. ªSo. what do i haver to do now to make it work?

If you only need a few channels - then if we assume you have no money, you could buy a cheapish mixer - this kind of thing.

You'd need to chop off your expensive xlr=db25 fanout and replace it with 3 circuit jacks that would let you 'sniff' the mixer channels from the inserts, but it would work. However - maybe it would be better to sell the apogee - there is one going for nearly 600UKP on our ebay at the moment - and buy something different. In all fairness - you could get something that can do many roles for that kind of money. Even maybe a Behringher X32 rack - and you'd have all sorts of possibilities and pretty decent preamps - and lots of them.

paulears, post: 468365, member: 47782 wrote:
If you only need a few channels - then if we assume you have no money, you could buy a cheapish mixer - this kind of thing.

You'd need to chop off your expensive xlr=db25 fanout and replace it with 3 circuit jacks that would let you 'sniff' the mixer channels from the inserts, but it would work. However - maybe it would be better to sell the apogee - there is one going for nearly 600UKP on our ebay at the moment - and buy something different. In all fairness - you could get something that can do many roles for that kind of money. Even maybe a Behringher X32 rack - and you'd have all sorts of possibilities and pretty decent preamps - and lots of them.

I nedd at least 8 channels, i own a motu 828 mk3 and i wanted digital, so they told me i needed the apogee, but iuf it doesnt work, what is recommended for thaht work, digital input and 8 channels, maybe there's one thing and i can sell both the apogee and the motu

I think you would do better by selling the Rosetta 800 - you could probably get the best part of USD800 for it. For that sort of money, there would be many 8-channel pre-amp/converters available. However, you would have to spend a little more to get a unit that would give you similar conversion quality as the Rosetta, but the Audient ASP880 would do that.

The MOTU828 is worth keeping as that gives you the computer interface, MIDI I/O and a further 8 ADC inputs.

I was a Tascam user, then switched top Presonus - and I think that if my current firewire one died, I'd buy a Studio 1824C - not too sure about the USB-C, but it would be this or maybe a Scarlett 18i20 I think at the moment - I wouldn't use the higher sample rates, that's something I'm uninterested in - and the preamps usually get the transparent tag - and I'm not again interested in preamps that you can 'hear'. I appreciate some want this kind of thing - but not me.
 

At Normandy we had a Rosetta 800 connected to an 828mk3 via adat just like the OP. The difference in quality is not particularly subtle. Id personally keep the 800 because its a world class unit from not too long ago. It since it does ad an da you will have very high quality inputs and outputs to your speakers.

The focusrite octo pre (non dynamic) is a good bang for the buck unit. It gives you 8ch of mic pres and adat out. Its probably not as good as the audient, but is a good performer per dollar. I have not used its adat outs (conversion) but routinely used the pres.

For an all in one motu makes an interface with 8ch of pres, and the focusrite scarlett and clarrett models have 8ch pre units too. None of the onboard pres will be as good as the audient. They will be similar to an octo pre.

A fair compromise of quality vs price would be the antelope discrete 8. I haven't used the unit but based on specs and reputation i would suspect it would hover somewhere around the audient and Rosetta middle ground.

kmetal, post: 468369, member: 37533 wrote:
At Normandy we had a Rosetta 800 connected to an 828mk3 via adat just like the OP. The difference in quality is not particularly subtle. Id personally keep the 800 because its a world class unit from not too long ago. It since it does ad an da you will have very high quality inputs and outputs to your speakers.

The focusrite octo pre (non dynamic) is a good bang for the buck unit. It gives you 8ch of mic pres and adat out. Its probably not as good as the audient, but is a good performer per dollar. I have not used its adat outs (conversion) but routinely used the pres.

For an all in one motu makes an interface with 8ch of pres, and the focusrite scarlett and clarrett models have 8ch pre units too. None of the onboard pres will be as good as the audient. They will be similar to an octo pre.

A fair compromise of quality vs price would be the antelope discrete 8. I haven't used the unit but based on specs and reputation i would suspect it would hover somewhere around the audient and Rosetta middle ground.

So, you recommend i keep it and? Get a focusrite and connect the 8 channels out to the aògee 8 channels in?

aliberesco, post: 468370, member: 52558 wrote:
So, you recommend i keep it and? Get a focusrite and connect the 8 channels out to the aògee 8 channels in?

you have painted your self into an enviable position. i don't think i would be wrong to say almost anyone would be happy to own the Rosetta. a lot of us actually prefer having line inputs rather than something that forces us to use built in sub par mic pres. since you already have the Apogee, the best move would be to invest in a few mic pres or better yet, channel strips.

aliberesco, post: 468370, member: 52558 wrote:
So, you recommend i keep it and? Get a focusrite and connect the 8 channels out to the aògee 8 channels in?

That's what id do personally, then upgrade to better pres as time moves on, one or two channels at a time.

Boz's suggestion is perfectly logical.

I would just personally would prefer the top notch ad-da conversion over better pre amps to start with in this case.

Its difficult to say whats best for you, so i can only say what i prefer.

If you sold the motu, you may be able to aquire a used interface with adat in/out and the used 8 channel pre (or other pres) for little to no extra cost.

The motu is a decent unit, but you do have that option.

kmetal, post: 468372, member: 37533 wrote:
That's what id do personally, then upgrade to better pres as time moves on, one or two channels at a time.

Boz's suggestion is perfectly logical.

I would just personally would prefer the top notch ad-da conversion over better pre amps to start with in this case.

Its difficult to say whats best for you, so i can only say what i prefer.

I dont understand, i need preamps for apogee, so, you recommend to get the focusrite to use it as a pre 8 ch and connect it to the rosetta via toslink or the snake? Please consider i'm a newbie so i must go step by step, nothing is implicit. I own a rosetta connected to the motu and to the computer. I have a 8 ch snake but no preamp, so you recommend a focusrite to preamp my inputs, right? I have no money but i have gear so i can trade it for the focusrite or something like that, but before i must know if it'll be the right gear, because i need to record right away and i cant be trying several gear that wont fit my needs and ive been misguided before. Thanks

Kurt Foster, post: 468371, member: 7836 wrote:
you have painted your self into an enviable position. i don't think i would be wrong to say almost anyone would be happy to own the Rosetta. a lot of us actually prefer having line inputs rather than something that forces us to use built in sub par mic pres. since you already have the Apogee, the best move would be to invest in a few mic pres or better yet, channel strips.

Ok, like what, i mean, i don't know so i want to learn what would be the best choice to make my recording process available asap. Thank

Well, you have to work within your constraints, both financial and time. If you absolutely have to avoid spending any more money, then it's clear you have to sell something in order to fund what you need at least to get you on the path towards where you want to be. The two audio items you possess that have told us about are the MOTU 828 and the Apogee Rosetta 800.

At the moment, the MOTU is your interface to the computer. If you sold that, you would have to buy a piece of equipment that not only had pre-amps to act as the inputs to the Rosetta, but would need a computer interface section as well. That would turn out to look something like another MOTU, but with 8 pre-amps instead of 2, and access to the pre-amp outputs so you could use them to feed into the Rosetta. That's a very tall order to buy with what you would get for the MOTU. I don't know what the market for 20-year old audio gear is like in Mexico, but here in the UK you would maybe get the equivalent of USD200.

The Rosetta 800, on the other hand, has a far higher intrinsic value. As I mentioned earlier, putting that on Ebay US would probably attract considerable interest, and I would be surprised if you did not get at least USD800 for it. That's still not enough to buy pre-amps plus converters that had a similar sonic quality to the Rosetta, but it does mean you could buy something that would give you 8 more analogue channels. Even getting 6 more pre-amp only channels that you would feed into the rear-panel line inputs of the MOTU would give you a total of 8.

A better alternative would be a set of pre-amp/converters with ADAT output to feed into the digital ADAT input of the MOTU. In this way, the signals would not pass through any of the analogue or converter section of the MOTU, so the sonic quality of the external pre-amp/converter would not be degraded by lower-standard converters. My previous suggestion of an Audient ASP880 is a good fit for this. However, I looked at US prices for the ASP880, and was pained by how much more they sell for in N America than in the UK, even allowing for the exchange rate. In addition, I did not see any second-hand units less than about USD1000.

So there is no easy solution, I'm sorry to say. It's possible that others here on RO would have further ideas as to what to do.

Boswell, post: 468381, member: 29034 wrote:
Well, you have to work within your constraints, both financial and time. If you absolutely have to avoid spending any more money, then it's clear you have to sell something in order to fund what you need at least to get you on the path towards where you want to be. The two audio items you possess that have told us about are the MOTU 828 and the Apogee Rosetta 800.

At the moment, the MOTU is your interface to the computer. If you sold that, you would have to buy a piece of equipment that not only had pre-amps to act as the inputs to the Rosetta, but would need a computer interface section as well. That would turn out to look something like another MOTU, but with 8 pre-amps instead of 2, and access to the pre-amp outputs so you could use them to feed into the Rosetta. That's a very tall order to buy with what you would get for the MOTU. I don't know what the market for 20-year old audio gear is like in Mexico, but here in the UK you would maybe get the equivalent of USD200.

The Rosetta 800, on the other hand, has a far higher intrinsic value. As I mentioned earlier, putting that on Ebay US would probably attract considerable interest, and I would be surprised if you did not get at least USD800 for it. That's still not enough to buy pre-amps plus converters that had a similar sonic quality to the Rosetta, but it does mean you could buy something that would give you 8 more analogue channels. Even getting 6 more pre-amp only channels that you would feed into the rear-panel line inputs of the MOTU would give you a total of 8.

A better alternative would be a set of pre-amp/converters with ADAT output to feed into the digital ADAT input of the MOTU. In this way, the signals would not pass through any of the analogue or converter section of the MOTU, so the sonic quality of the external pre-amp/converter would not be degraded by lower-standard converters. My previous suggestion of an Audient ASP880 is a good fit for this. However, I looked at US prices for the ASP880, and was pained by how much more they sell for in N America than in the UK, even allowing for the exchange rate. In addition, I did not see any second-hand units less than about USD1000.

So there is no easy solution, I'm sorry to say. It's possible that others here on RO would have further ideas as to what to do.

i just found a focusrite octro pre 8 ch preamp that i could trade for pedals, do you think i could use it as pre for the rosetta? And if its positive how could i connect it to make it work with the setup i own?

aliberesco, post: 468379, member: 52558 wrote:
Ok, like what, i mean, i don't know so i want to learn what would be the best choice to make my recording process available asap. Thank

API, Neve 1073 or 1081 or any of the clones of these classics. standard fare in the studio world. UA 610 is a tube pre with a long pedigree.

Focusrite ISA's are probably the best all around mic pres available. they have a little character and heft while not adding a lot of distortions or coloration. sort of the best of all worlds.

it would be had to go wrong with any of them. all world class stuff.

Yes you can use the OctoPre as your analog input into the Rosetta 800. You will need a DB25 to TRS cable for this.

I'm assuming you have been looking to use the MOTU828 as your interface into a computer thru the firewire?? I'm not sure you even need this part??

The computer can determine what sort of interface you can use and the DAW that you are choosing to use will determine whether you can interface whatever signal your sending. It looks like you want to use Logic.

The Rosetta comes with 8 channels of ADAT or AES I/O. ADAT thru lightpipe. So if your computer has a light pipe In/Out you simply need two lightpipe cables as you'll need a round trip to and fro.

There are jumpers inside the Rosetta for all kinds of settings. Get a BOOK it'll tell you all you need to know.

The Rosetta is miles above the Motu 828 in terms of conversion. I have a 200 and an AD16x in my rack along with the Avid analog and Avid Omni.

The Rosetta BOOK will tell you all you need to know about interfacing your system. You can monitor directly from the Rosetta....no delay...

Davedog, post: 468387, member: 4495 wrote:
Yes you can use the OctoPre as your analog input into the Rosetta 800. You will need a DB25 to TRS cable for this.

I'm assuming you have been looking to use the MOTU828 as your interface into a computer thru the firewire?? I'm not sure you even need this part??

The computer can determine what sort of interface you can use and the DAW that you are choosing to use will determine whether you can interface whatever signal your sending. It looks like you want to use Logic.

The Rosetta comes with 8 channels of ADAT or AES I/O. ADAT thru lightpipe. So if your computer has a light pipe In/Out you simply need two lightpipe cables as you'll need a round trip to and fro.

There are jumpers inside the Rosetta for all kinds of settings. Get a BOOK it'll tell you all you need to know.

The Rosetta is miles above the Motu 828 in terms of conversion. I have a 200 and an AD16x in my rack along with the Avid analog and Avid Omni.

The Rosetta BOOK will tell you all you need to know about interfacing your system. You can monitor directly from the Rosetta....no delay...

Excuse my ignorance, but rosetta only has one db25 input and one db25 output, and one optical input and ouput. And i already have a db25 to XLR snake connectet to the input, and the optical output connected to the motu, but if i get the focusrite that has the very same connectons 2 dbs and 2 optical, i wont use that snake anymnore, right? And instead i should get a dbs to dbs cable and connect the focus output to the rosetta input, right? And dont touch the optical rosetta output cionnected to the motu, right? I just wanna make it right this time

Yes. Each DB25 carries 8 channels of either input or output depending on what your needs are. The buttons on the front select which protocol you are using. The optical I/O also carries 8 digital channels of in and out.

You could use all optical I/O from the focusrite to apogee and back. I would still look at the analog outputs from the focusrite to the analog inputs on the Apogee as my inputs rather than the light pipe.

So.Since all this gear seems to be used, it will be handy to know exactly which versions you have of all the pieces you are planning to use. There are several generations of each. Please help us help you by giving the exact model of the devices.....ie: MKI....MkII etc....Thanks

edit: Does your computer have ADAT I/O? How are you getting into it?

I think the snag here is you have bought kit without considering the quality level you wish to work at. It's something newcomers really should migrate to when they become dissatisfied with their end products. To be clear - we are talking about differences in areas of audio that do NOT even have technical terms to describe the 'improvement' in sound, and once I stopped working in studios with monitor speakers that cost the price of a decent car, my view is that this level of sonic performance I simply cannot hear. Other people can, and that is for them often the only thing that matters. Right back to the start of digital audio, the holy grail quest was perfection in the process of converting analogue to digital and back again. We have bit depth and sample rate as often talked about standards, but your new interface is more accurate in the conversion process and has for want of a better word, more quality. That is accurate information. Most interfaces have microphone and line level preamps, volume controls, gain controls, monitoring controls and meters all built in, and then internally the D/A A/D hangs off the end. The one you bought is designed to do more thing - the conversion. All the gizmos are assumed to be in other bits of kit. Based on your story so far, you really need something much more basic to start with, then when your mics, monitors and most critically listening environment are good enough, you buy kit like this .......... or not.

There's a danger in assuming too much about this Octopre. On the face of it, it could be the ideal stop-gap solution to the problem. However, I very much doubt that it will have the digital option (ADAT output) fitted, so it's essentially 8 microphone/line pre-amps with analogue outputs via a Tascam 25-way connector.

With the correct cable (25-way D to 25-way D), it would connect well with the Rosetta 800, and its pre-amps, while not being in the top echelons, are in a grade above those in the MOTU.

Go for it! It will get you recording quickly, and you would keep the pleasure of using the Rosetta converters.

aliberesco, post: 468377, member: 52558 wrote:
I dont understand, i need preamps for apogee, so, you recommend to get the focusrite to use it as a pre 8 ch and connect it to the rosetta via toslink or the snake? Please consider i'm a newbie so i must go step by step, nothing is implicit. I own a rosetta connected to the motu and to the computer. I have a 8 ch snake but no preamp, so you recommend a focusrite to preamp my inputs, right? I have no money but i have gear so i can trade it for the focusrite or something like that, but before i must know if it'll be the right gear, because i need to record right away and i cant be trying several gear that wont fit my needs and ive been misguided before. Thanks

Yes you need pre amps to connect to the Rosetta. The focusrite would be an example of an 8 ch preamp unit.

The adat output is included stock in the (non platinum version) octopre units. Channel counts decrease with sample rates. I would avoid the 1st gen/platinum model. Go mk2 or newer. The adat out will allow you to expand into other pre amps, and keep the octopre, (or sell the Rosetta).

This is the newest model.
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/ScarOctoPre--focusrite-scarlett-octopre-mic-preamp

This is the model i used (do not bother with the "dynanic" model.

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/focusrite-octopre-mkii-mkii-dynamic

The Apogee is nice gear, but given that you're new at this (so you still need to learn basics before you get great sound anyway), you need preamps and you have no money, I'd suggest trading it in for a Behringer ADA8200. Sure, it's not in the same class as the Apogee, but it gets the job done within budget. Maybe in a couple of years, after you've mastered using your mics, you can swap the ADA for something better.

For the records, i appreciate all your help. Finally i could trade some pedals for the focusrite octopre and it works really great. I'll start to rehearse right away. Take care.

Premium gear rarely equates to premium recordings. Small things make all the difference. In our store we have two behringer X32s and a Midas 32. People say how the price premium on the Midas gets the better preamps which make a world of difference. My colleague always takes the Midas out, and I take the Behringer - simply because I can get that in it's case out of the van on my own, and the Midas is considerably heavier. I can't hear the difference, he can (he says). I claim that maybe, just maybe in the studio it's possible to hear it, but in a venue? Nope!

I have to disagree. I think its low quality gear that rarely equates to premium recordings.

If you compare how many classic and great recordings were done on great gear vs cheap gear, the great recordings on cheap gear are the exception not the rule.

Just think about your favorite recordings. How much berringer and nady and samson gear is on it, vs neve, ssl, ect.

Im speaking about recording, not just mixing with samples/loops.

Think about it. A great vocal track on a u67 into a neve. How much "engineering" is really getting done on that? Next to none. Your a tape op. All the work is done by the vocalist and gear.

I think is a complete misnomer that good gear isn't necessary, or isn't useful for beginners, or in general. Great gear makes the job easier. Experience gives you the ability to fine tune, maximise, and handle problems. A big part of being a beginner is working around crappy gear, and rooms. You end up chasing your tail, partly because the gear is doing things you can't undo, cheap condenser overblown mids, noisey mackie eq and pre amps, crap rooms.

Not all great gear is expensive. Dbx 160, sm57, presonus eureka. But all other things being equal better gear will give you better recordings and mixes. Barring creative things or just mis matched peices for the source. You get less artifacts, and better depth. A drum kit mic'd up and split to an octo pre, and a rack of api or neve, the neve/api will win except for rare cases. Its the difference between "ok" and as good as it gets.

This applies to pluggins too. Premium pluggins often sound better than freeware plugs. There's quite a wide range of plugs, but again, look at the great mixes. Are they full of freeware or plugs you pay decent money for. Its mostly premium plugs with some oddball and stock stuff sprinkled in.

The situation with the midas/berringer is berringer making a cheapened version of the midas. The x32 is an example of a good lower cost unit.

comparing current Midas to Behringer is an apple to apple comparison. almost without exception do i see any Behringer product on the used market without at least one fault. doorstop potential is high.

kmetal, post: 468411, member: 37533 wrote:

I think is a complete misnomer that good gear isn't necessary, or isn't useful for beginners, or in general. Great gear makes the job easier. Experience gives you the ability to fine tune, maximise, and handle problems. A big part of being a beginner is working around crappy gear, and rooms. You end up chasing your tail, partly because the gear is doing things you can't undo, cheap condenser overblown mids, noisey mackie eq and pre amps, crap rooms.

I agree with this but would add that the build quality, thoughtfulness of the design and robustness of the user interface make the biggest difference in the usefulness of product. Usually cost increases for that kind of detail and time. While price tag does not necessarily equate to quality, its hard to make quality equipment cheaply.

imo, budget gear is intended for the casual user that will most likely loose interest in a short time. disposable consumer products for instant gratification. there's no need to build for long term reliability because the next best new thingie is just around the corner.

Midas is owned by Uli's Music Group. If I'm not mistaken the technology can be cross platformed throughout the holdings. This includes Klark-Teknik also as well as several others. Now which way the integration will go is anyones guess. My bet is on Behringer products taking advantage of Midas designs but still retaining the cheap manufacturing protocol. I can't imagine them doing much to the Midas line but one never knows.....

You're miles behind Kurt - the old problems are long gone. The new group even just got their hands on Aston mics - their portfolio is huge now with pretty prestige brandish there. The fault rate for the mixers is very, very low. the old troubles are now 15 years back, and that kit is ancient now. Service, if you ever need it is really good. It's now branded music tribe - and has some rather decent products in it. This is not even new here in the UK - The cross pollination works well - like Turbosound PA using the X series connects - so you can run digital direct to the speakers for all kinds of control and monitoring. The P series personal monitoring has been a godsend in our band for a long time now. I have a rack mount X32 in the stage rack, a front of house 32 (either the Behringher one or the Midas) I can do so much with it and I'm very happy with the quality, reliability and design. The preamps from the Midas desks found their way into the behringers and new features appear all the time.

paulears, post: 468417, member: 47782 wrote:
You're miles behind Kurt - the old problems are long gone. The new group even just got their hands on Aston mics - their portfolio is huge now with pretty prestige brandish there. The fault rate for the mixers is very, very low. the old troubles are now 15 years back, and that kit is ancient now. Service, if you ever need it is really good. It's now branded music tribe - and has some rather decent products in it. This is not even new here in the UK - The cross pollination works well - like Turbosound PA using the X series connects - so you can run digital direct to the speakers for all kinds of control and monitoring. The P series personal monitoring has been a godsend in our band for a long time now. I have a rack mount X32 in the stage rack, a front of house 32 (either the Behringher one or the Midas) I can do so much with it and I'm very happy with the quality, reliability and design. The preamps from the Midas desks found their way into the behringers and new features appear all the time.

aside from bad sound, reliability and build quality, Behringer and similar gear is not made for long life. teenie- tiny sfm capacitors on mass populated boards are difficult to access and replace and are always the first things to fail or affect performance. i suppose the point is moot with a live audio company that requires constant updating inventory but personally i want gear that will last a lifetime. it seems like every time i see a Behringer for sale on CraigsList, it has a bad aux or a channel is out. they always suggest it could be an "easy fix" .... lol.

I also use the Behringer P16 system as my headphone monitors. It is very satisfying. Any time I have had a problem, one or two, the next day air paid by them more than made up for any down time. And they didn't blink when I told them I wa in the middle of sessions when it went down. They sent a new unit, a shipping label for the old one and offered me the repaired one at 10cents on the dollar if I wanted a spare.

Yep, my experience when I dropped a monitor on the faders and one bent and rubbed. I told them the truth and next day a lorry collected it and dropped off a new one. Kurt must have the worst luck in the world to have all these problems because today’s behringer is very far from what he describes, and in the past five years so many X32 mixers come through my venue on tours. Even better, I have a 32 in mic box with the Midas preamps and this works on the X32 desk.

surface mount technology is here to stay. Home repairs very very difficult without the right kit, but it is statistically more reliable, discrete through board components are relegated to prototyping and short run. SMT is used in virtually every product now at every price range. Kurt, I’d totally agree about Behringer in the old days, but fifteen years ago now, they started to up their game and your old views have become, frankly, history. They made the decision to fix it, and they did. The days of seeing NO BEHRINGER on riders has gone. A second hand X32 rack is an amazing 32 in and 32 out interface, even if you ignore every other facility.