Opinions of a Presonus 16.0.2 Wanted

[Ken Lustgarten]

I am considering the 16.0.2 mixer. I already have a Presonus Firestudio Tube which will connect with it for recording purposes, it has 10 mic pres (8 XMAX + 2 Tube) as well as 6 line. The Firestudio also could be used to submix drums when more then 12 channels are needed for live use. Most of my use is live but I do an occasional recording. My question is do you think the 16.0.2 is to limited compared to the 16.4.2 for live use? 12 channels is enough for 90% of what I do but that other 10% makes me wonder if a larger board would make more sense. Right now I use a Yamaha MG166CX that has 12 channel strips, 10 of them have mic pres. I can get the 16.0.2 for half the price of the 16.4.2 which is what makes it tempting.

[Dantreige]

I don't think you can go wrong with any of the Presonus Live models. Lots of features and flexability, not to mention all of the outboard gear that can be replaced by them. If 12 channels is enough for you, go for it. I'm not familiar with the Firestudio, so I can't comment on that. If it works with the 16.0.2, so much the better.

I've been trying to convince myself that I should get a 16.4.2 instead of a 24.4.2. I'll go with the 16.4.2 because I know several bands in my area that have one. If I need more channels, I should be able to rent one for a day or three instead of paying out of pocket for the larger model. I'm not sure if the 16.0.2 can be linked together or not.

It would be hard to pass up the four band eq (vs. three on the 16.0.2), the extra two aux sends, and the 31 band eq for each aux send for me.

Like all things, it's going to come down to $. If you have it or if you don't. Also, you need to figure how much time it will take to make that investment pay for itself. Can you get some of the cost back by unloading some of your outboard gear?

Either way, which ever you choose, I will be jealous of you until I get one for myself.

[Bruce Weldy]

I've also looked at the 16.0.2. I also have the same Yamaha mixer you have. For bigger situations, use 'em both. Run guitars, keys, etc through the Yamaha and save the Presonus for drums and vocals to make best use of the gates, compressors, effects, etc.

[Ken Lustgarten]

I don't think you can go wrong with any of the Presonus Live models. Lots of features and flexability, not to mention all of the outboard gear that can be replaced by them. If 12 channels is enough for you, go for it. I'm not familiar with the Firestudio, so I can't comment on that. If it works with the 16.0.2, so much the better.

All of the Firestudio and StudioLive products will work together in DAW software. They will not link like a pair of 16.4.2's will for live use but all of the inputs on up to 4 units will be available for use in your DAW to record. I tested this with a Firestudio Tube and a Firestudio Project.

I've been trying to convince myself that I should get a 16.4.2 instead of a 24.4.2. I'll go with the 16.4.2 because I know several bands in my area that have one. If I need more channels, I should be able to rent one for a day or three instead of paying out of pocket for the larger model. I'm not sure if the 16.0.2 can be linked together or not.

This is one thing that bothers me about the 16.0.2. I can't find any info about linking it. I am assuming that since there is no info most likely it can't be linked. Of course the main outs of any board such as my Yamaha can be fed into one of the channels with line inputs on the 16.0.2. For the occasional large show you could do the same with your existing board. The apparent lack of linking is swaying me towards the 16.4.2. I like to keep options open for the future.

It would be hard to pass up the four band eq (vs. three on the 16.0.2), the extra two aux sends, and the 31 band eq for each aux send for me.

I hear you on this one. At work I use a Allen and Heath GL2400-40 Channel Mixer. It has 4 EQ's and I have gotten used to having them. I miss the extra control that it gives on my Yamaha. There have been a couple of occasions where I have used 5 monitor channels, very rare but it happens during Easter and Christmas shows. I have a Behringer FBQ2496 that I use on my monitor channels. It gives me parametric eq's and feedback filters but I really like the idea of one package doing it all because that means less gear to haul

Like all things, it's going to come down to $. If you have it or if you don't. Also, you need to figure how much time it will take to make that investment pay for itself. Can you get some of the cost back by unloading some of your outboard gear?

Money is the issue. Right now the 16.0.2 will suffice but I have a feeling that a year down the road I will be kicking myself. Since I have a functional and great sounding rig I probably will just do more work and save up for a 16.4.2.

Either way, which ever you choose, I will be jealous of you until I get one for myself.

[Ken Lustgarten]

I've also looked at the 16.0.2. I also have the same Yamaha mixer you have. For bigger situations, use 'em both. Run guitars, keys, etc through the Yamaha and save the Presonus for drums and vocals to make best use of the gates, compressors, effects, etc.

I like my Yamaha and whichever route I end up taking I will be keeping it. I can have it handy as a backup, have two simultaneous setups, or use it to submix for more inputs. The killer for me is if I have to fully mic a drum set. So far I haven't had the need but I want to be prepared. I have all the mics that I need to do it just haven't had the occasion to use them all yet. I do use the mics for other things. For example last weekend I used a pair of Audix i5's to mic a violin duet, they did a great job. The i5's also sound great on vocals but only if the singer is good, they are very revealing. Otherwise I stick with the Behringer XM8500's for there ability to smooth things out a bit.

[Ken Lustgarten]

Thanks for the replies and the good points that were brought up. I really would like to get a Studiolive now but funds will only allow for the 16.0.2 at this time. I think that it will be wise to wait and save up for a 16.4.2. In the long run the extra features will be very much appreciated. Most likely this decision means that I will have to wait at least 6 months.

I have also considered SAC. It is supposed to work with firewire devices. I could get a Firestudio Project on ebay pretty cheap to go along with my Firestudio Tube and have a nice system provided that latency would be low enough? Another problem is that I like a real control surface. Using a mouse is to slow if (when) a quick reaction in needed. I guess that I have used analog mixers for to long to go the SAC route.

[Tom Smit]

I think that it will be wise to wait and save up for a 16.4.2. In the long run the extra features will be very much appreciated. Most likely this decision means that I will have to wait at least 6 months.

+1 .....sigh...I know the feeling.

Another problem is that I like a real control surface. Using a mouse is to slow if (when) a quick reaction in needed. I guess that I have used analog mixers for to long to go the SAC route.

Have you tried out the demo?

[Ken Lustgarten]

Have you tried out the demo?

I downloaded the SAC demo today. I plan to try it on a laptop with my Firestudio Tube. The laptop has a TI chipset. I will be testing to see if firewire proves to be reliable with an acceptable latency. It will also give me a chance to play around with the controls so that I can determine whether or not I would feel comfortable using it in a live situation. I have serious doubts but at the same time I do not want to be closed minded. A deal breaker for me will be if I can't record with my DAW (Reaper) while mixing live with SAC. I can not afford Saw Studio in addition to everything else that is needed in order to get a SAC system running. Multitrack recording of live performances is a must have for me, this is one of the reasons for looking into the Studiolive mixers.

[Ken Lustgarten]

I just pulled the trigger on a 16.4.2 on ebay. I low balled the dealer and he bit for $1579. I could not pass up that deal Since this mixer will take the place of several other pieces of gear I will be selling off some now "obsoleted stuff" I am going to try and hold onto my Yamaha mixer as a backup or in case I need more inputs.

[Tom Smit]

[Dantreige]

Grats! I'll be waiting a while for mine. Maybe there will be a price drop in a few months?

[Ken Lustgarten]

Grats! I'll be waiting a while for mine. Maybe there will be a price drop in a few months?

There is another seller on ebay that has one listed for $1500 that was supposedly used in a church for a couple on months. It was replaced by a 24.4.2. I know you said that you have to make up your mind between the 2 mixers but at about 3 grand the 24 channel is just to expensive. I would much rather have 2 16.4.3's and link them. More flexibility for the same money plus when a high channel count is not needed the 16.4.2 is smaller and rack mountable.

Now if the 16.0.2 was linkable I would have jumped on it. Proaudiostar is selling a few for $999.

I do not see how much cheaper these mixers can get. Even an Allen & Heath Mixwizard 16 costs a grand. With all the compressors, gates, limiters, eq's, effects, and recording abilities...... the price seems very reasonable at or around $1500. I didn't think I was going to be able to get one for a while because I initially saw prices over $2000. A little patience paid off with a price only a little above a new 16.0.2.

[mattaudio]

I'd sell the Yamaha MG166CX too... do you really want to submix drums on an analog board where the channels won't have the fat channel?

For smaller bands, the 16.4.2 seems plenty adequate (although I don't always mic toms and stuff) and just make friends with another local with the StudioLive to daisychain them if you need more inputs.

[Bruce Weldy]

I'd sell the Yamaha MG166CX too... do you really want to submix drums on an analog board where the channels won't have the fat channel?

For smaller bands, the 16.4.2 seems plenty adequate (although I don't always mic toms and stuff) and just make friends with another local with the StudioLive to daisychain them if you need more inputs.

The Yamaha would be for guitars, keys, etc......if it were me.

I'd save the fat channels for the drums, vocals, and bass guitar if it fits.

For what you'd get for the Yamaha used, I'd keep it without another thought.

[Ken Lustgarten]

I'd sell the Yamaha MG166CX too... do you really want to submix drums on an analog board where the channels won't have the fat channel?

For smaller bands, the 16.4.2 seems plenty adequate (although I don't always mic toms and stuff) and just make friends with another local with the StudioLive to daisychain them if you need more inputs.

I am with Bruce on this one. I paid about $250 for the Yamaha as an open box special plus I have made a nice case for it. I plan on keeping it. There are events where the Presonus is not necessary. Things like spoken word, weddings (with no band), background music, outdoor events that do not have a full band..... I would much rather use the Yamaha in these situations, why drag out more expensive equipment when it is not needed. Think of the Yamaha as an equipment protection plan when the environment is questionable. Also there are those rare occasions when I need more channels. Last Christmas I ran out of inputs for our church program (A&H Mixwizard 16) and at work I used our A&H GL2400 40 channel mixer plus the Yamaha for 10 wireless last Easter. The Yamaha earns its keep and it is the cheapest way to expand when needed, at least for now. Eventually in a year or maybe I can add another Studiolive to my arsenal.