Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    
    
    About 650 pounds in the U.K. which means 600 when they start arriving
    and about 450 by the time all the shops have them in stock. Which
    means about 400 u.s. dollars.
    
    					Paul.

    the competition range would seem to be higher......
    
    	$1000-$1500
    
    no???????
    

< Note 1952.0 by WEFXEM::COTE "The fool screams no more..." >
                             -< Alesis 1622 Mixer >-

Edd,

Is it rack mount? If so, how many rack spaces? Any EQ? What types of inputs?
Balanced outs?

dave

    Yeah, it can be rack mounted. Looks to be about 8 spaces. Or can
    be laid down normally.
    
    Doesn't appear to have onboard eq.
    
    16 1/4" inputs. 8 of those are doubled with XLR.
    
    I can bring the blurb in tomorrow...
    
    Edd

    The thing that scares me when Alesis does something for half the price
    everybody else does it for is "what did they leave out?" (e.g.,
    quality control?).
    
    len.
    

> Is it rack mount? If so, how many rack spaces? Any EQ? What types of inputs?
> Balanced outs?
    
    EQ:
    
    It does have EQ, +15db of cut/boost at 100HZ and 10kHz.
    
    INPUTS:
    
    16 �" jacks
    
    8 XLR inputs *AND* direct outputs (so you can create a stage mix and still
    	give the PA complete control over the house mix)
    
    Ring/tip/sleeve inserts each of the channel inputs, and all sub and master
    outs.
    
    BUSSes
    
    I'm surprised no one has asked, but if anyone is interested
    its a 16 x 2 x 2  (hence the model #: 1622)
    
    EFFECTS
    
    Six effects sends:
    
    	two pre, 4 post
    
    Six effects returns:
    
    	two stereo
    	four mono but each mono return is pan-able.
    
    It looks like it's primarily intended as a "live" board, however at
    that price, I imagine that many 4-track folks will leap for it
    (it's fine for 4-track recording, probably not the best option
    for 8 tracks however).
    
    As to Len wondering what it's misssing at that price, the claim is
    that the low price is do to a new technology called
    "Monolithic/Integrated Surface (TM)".
    
    The description I read in one of the trades was pretty warped and
    vague, probably due to the writer either not knowing or not
    understanding the technology.
    
    However, I get the impression that what it means is that instead
    of assembling  the various faders and pots by hand, the faders and pots
    are done as integrated circuits built into several layered boards.
    
    That certainly would make it (and a lot of other potential
    applications) significantly cheaper, but don't ask me how the
    mechanical aspects of faders and pots are done (although it's not
    hard to imagine).   That to my mind is where the big question
    marks are.
    
    However, the review did say that the board had excellent audio
    properties.  (Yeah, I know - how well does it hold up?).
    
    Anyway, it's certainly interesting and innovative.  If I decide I'm
    gonna stick with 4-tracks for awhile, I'll probably get one.
    
    	db

    I got the impression the pots and sliders were some type of resistive
    network built into the board, making it possible to elliminate all
    or most of the human assembly requirements.
    
    Same same with their new 30 band stereo eq....
    
    Edd

    I noticed that the Alesis newletter was somewhat vague in this area
    about the sliders & other mechanisums used. Might be good, then again,
    I'd hate to see what it costs to fix if only one of them failed & you
    had to replace a 60 pot assembly to fix the problem.

								Jens

    Yeah, but what are the chances of an Alesis product failing???
    
    {ouch}
    
    Edd

    That's what it seemed like to me- their multilayer board had not
    only conductive and insulative layers, but also resistive layers;
    and the slider contacts bear directly on the board layers.
    
    Hurm....
    
    	-Bill

    Another problem with the sliders built into the board is that if
    the board warps (heat, physical abuse, too much New Age) you'll
    probably see pot alignment problems.  Also, an integrated
    pot may be all but impossible to fix.  Disposable mixer ...
    
    Steve

    RE: howmuch
    
    The price/availability in the latest Keyboard (you know, the one
    with the guy sticking the knife into the Mac, with 'blood' showing
    behind it - talk about violence in advertising) was $799 (like .2
    said), available next month.  
    
    I'll probably get one in the fall, depending on quality/performance
    reports. 
    
    Rodney M.

    If you can live without the EQ (which I can), the M160 looks to be
    every bit the value as the Alesis - without the propensity to failure
    for which Alesis is so well known.

    Not only that, it's only 4 rack spaces high.

-b

    re .14 - Brad didn't say it, but the M160 (16*2 line level rackmount
    board with 4 effects sends/returns) is by Roland.  You know, those
    guys who build all that overpriced stuff us overpaid types like
    to buy.
    
    len.
    

    ...it goes without saying!
    
    Edd

    RE: ALesis quality control
    
    
    Yeah you could buy digital and pay twice what it's worth and 40
    times actual manufacturing cost right?
    
    Or you could buy roland and pay lots and hope it never breaks 'cuz they
    take the better part of a year to ship service manuals right? 
    
    Or you could buy ALesis and pay a decent price for a product, for
    a change, and chances are real good that it won't break.
    
    dbii

    Well, I like my Alesis stuff, but outta 4 (HR and 3 MVIIs) 
    units I've owned, 2 have had fatal flaws, 1 had to be replaced,
    1 repaired by me hours after getting the unit new.
    
    I think they are a VERY innovative company, but slip up on the
    details.
    
    Edd

    Music gear, like yer real muso, is traditionally unreliable. I for one
    praise Alesis for continuing a great tradition of great if slightly 
    unpredictable gear.
    
    Richard.

    C'mon, Dave let's just agree that we've had different experiences
    with Roland and Alesis?  Roland fixed my MC-500/OM-500 upgrade for
    free in 4 weeks (including coast to coast shipping time).  That's
    the *only* piece of Roland gear (and I've got a lot) that's ever
    failed me.  I have heard of only two other problems with Roland
    gear - yours, and Dave Blickstein's.  Stories about Alesis problems
    are endemic - if there weren't, the issue wouldn't keep coming up.
    My HR-16 hasn't failed yet, but it just sits there as an SGU and
    I almost never use it in the mechanical sense.  My other Alesis
    investment, the XT reverb, failed after 6 months of easy use; it
    got moved around in a rack a few times.  It also got replaced by
    an SRV-2000 real quick.
    
    I don't consider Roland gear overpriced (look at Yamaha).  I'd like
    to pay a "decent" (meaning, I presume, low) price for stuff, but
    I want more than a "real good chance" that it will continue to work.
    What Alesis does is great in concept but leaves a great deal to
    be desired in practice.  They cut corners to make their stuff
    inexpensive (didn't want to say "cheap"), and it shows.
                                                             
    I'm sorry you had such a hard time with Roland, and I'm glad you've
    had good luck with Alesis.  But one point does not define a trend.
    And when you look at all the points (did you catch the extended
    USEnet discussion of Alesis QC problems?) the trends are clear;
    Roland stuff doesn't break, Alesis stuff does.
    
    If you want to compare Roland to Digital, fine (and our markups
    are *not* "40 times" manufacturing cost); but then I'll compare
    Alesis to Data General.
    
    len.
    

RE: len  Yah, you tell them... :-)

Really though, my M160 was bought locally for $790 plus tax and can be had MO
for about $750 (I've heard, no details).  I got a good sturdy quite 16x2
with 4 effects send and only 4-spaces high mixer.  And I've moved it around
in my rack a bit and had it for about 6-8 months with absolutely 0 problems.
My d-50 hasn't given me problems in the about a year I've had it and it's
been moved around etc etc etc  My R8 hasn't moved yet and is onlly 1.5 months 
old but it is heavy duty and cost/performance wise wasn't any more than
an HR16.  My point is that Roland delivers good quality, durable, 
performance packed products at a competitive price.

I must admit however that I'm going to buy a quadraverb, the new stereo 
30 band eq and perhaps some micro-gear from Alesis.  They seemed to be doing
better with the QC and while I don't own any Alesis yet, I'm willing
to try them out for some stuff.  It will be probably 9 months before I get
anything (if anything) due to financial reponsibility that I am developing :-)
but I'm going to try it out.



Sorry for going down the rathole...

Chad

re. last few...

	This is turning into one of those Japanese vs. American car debates.
Next thing, it'll be is 'Consumer Reports is *the* authority' vs. 'no they're 
not'.  They sure do have a way of starting ratholes...

    Len,
     Wanna check that DEC price markup figure?
    
    I do work in manufacturing...we sell options that cost less than
    $100 to manufacture for well over $1K, gee that's 100 times....not
    40....Not everything gets marked up that high, but lots of them
    do...
    
    
    Roland stuff does break, alesis stuff breaks...the USEnet discussion
    was over a year ago and stopped over a year ago...since then the
    net discussion was to the effect that they had a problem but it's
    been fixed....
    
    however, in the interest of dropping it forget it...
    
    
    dbiii

    
    re.-1
    
    ($100) x (100) = $1k????????

    Egad.  Seems that every note I write lately gets flamed.

    I own an HR16 and an MVII.  Other than needing to put a screw in the
    HR16, I have no complaints - but I'm still suspcious of the gear. And
    back to the topic ... I have some serious concerns about what happens
    to the mixer when a pot or two goes south.  If these things aren't
    component replacable, I view it as a serious maintenance issue. 

    Sorry I spun you up, dbii.  It most certainly wasn't intentional.

-b

    God, I really don't want to get involved in a Roland vs. Alesis
    thing.  But I gotta say that most of the people I know who are
    raving about Roland stuff are folks whose gear sits in their home
    studios and never gets moved, or subjected to smokey bars,
    etc.  It's not hard to make gear that sit on a shelf and work.
    
    The gigging folks I know have their fair share of problems with
    EVERY brand including "the R word"  ;-)
    
    All I disagree with is the depiction of Roland gear as something
    that's exceptionally reliable.  My uniform experience and observation
    is that it breaks like everything else.
    
    That's my 2 cents.
    
    	db - who nonetheless was recently introduced to a Roland rep
             as owning "just about everything you guys make"

re  < Note 1952.21 by NORGE::CHAD "Ich glaube Ich t�te Ich h�tte" >
>                      -< up with Roland, up with Alesis >-


>  RE: len  Yah, you tell them... :-)

>  Really though, my M160 was bought locally for $790 plus tax and can be had MO
>  for about $750 (I've heard, no details).  I got a good sturdy quite 16x2

	Gee, you shoudda gone to Daddy's in Nashua - they had one in 
there last night for under $700, that's  "ASKING PRICE"  and I'm sure 
they'd be willing to deal/negotiate on it.

	R

    I didn't say Roland stuff *never* breaks, but I've taken a lot of
    Roland gear on the road, and that stuff hasn't failed, in my experience,
    either.  But, and this is all I'm going to say on this tedious subject
    anymore, there's a fair amount of evidence that Alesis stuff breaks
    more often than just about any other vendor's.  I'm sorry if Alesis
    owners (and I'm among them) feel personally affronted by this
    observation.  I don't own any Yamaha gear (except my CD player),
    because mostly for what it does it's too expensive.  I own very
    little Alesis gear, because, attractive as its price is, it doesn't
    do what I want or need, and I am concerned about its reliability based
    on my own and many other people's experiences.  My Roland gear isn't
    perfect, and I have a long list of stupid things that they've
    done that could easily have been done better.  But mostly it does
    what I want, reliably, and for a reasonable price.
    
    The new Alesis board sounds neat, but I (and a few other people)
    have some legitimate concerns about it.
    
    Enough said.
    
    Now, on with the show.
    
    len.
    

RE: $700 mixer

Good news!  Now more folks can be tempted by the beauty.  Unfortunately,
as I stated in my note, I've had mine since last August or so and back then
$790 was the best local price (DECMS) I could find.

RE: len an y*  -- agreed -- my only two yamaha pieces are the TX16W which
only cost 1195 (in my book a good price for a lot of bang) and my WX7 - 300.00.

RE: Roland and Alesis -- yes, on with the show

CHad

RE: $700 mixer

Bad news!  I just got back from there (Daddy's Nashua) and I noticed
the mixer.  Its asking is $899.  There is an MC500 on top with
a big paper hanging that says $695 but that price is for the seuqncer.
Too bad.  They did have a used M-240 that looks brand spanking new for
$9xx.

chad

    So, it's "next month" already.  Any sightings?

    6 months later, has anybody actually seen a 1622 yet?? Even better, has
    anyone actually *heard* one???
    
    Tax time is a-comin', y'know???
    
    Edd

    Still haven't seen one, but I've been avoiding midistores lately. I
    have seen real ads in the midimags, and the latest Alesis newsletter is 
    dedicated to it ("Inside the Alesis 1622 Mixer, Sends, Returns, and
    Effects").
    
    Rodney

    NO, but I'm kinda wondering about Alesis ... in their last trade rag,
    they had a pretty good sized article that said (in effect) "we're not
    going to fix our equipment for free anymore". 

    Given that my HR16 has been back 3 times and my MIDIverb II has been
    back twice, I won't be seriously considering Alesis gear from here on
    out unless they reverse the policy.  I'd rather pay more for something
    that needs fixed less ... and I have no reason to believe that the 1622
    will be any different than any other Alesis product. 

    Cynically yours,

-b

The latest Daddy's Junky Mail has an ad/review on the 1622.

    Well, I finally saw and touched one.
    
    Daddy's in Nashua got the 1st one for the Daddy's chain (it's probably
    gone by now, but they expect more).  Tim (salesman) was kind enough to
    give me a call and a chance to play with it some before it walked
    out the door.
    
    Well, it's a typical Alesis product in that it has properties that
    one might normally associate with "cheap" and "unreliable", although
    in this case, I think that would probably be a mistake.
    
    It is extremely light (not surprising given the new technology behind
    the design) and the controls "feel" sort of rough and cheap.
    
    However, the new technology strikes me as one that is likely to
    be more realible than the old technology (although god help you
    if it does break cause there's not many "replaceable components").
    
    Anyway, this all sounds very negative.  In fact, my reaction was
    extremely positive.
    
    It is very quiet. The controls may "feel" a bit rough, but perform
    rather smoothly.  The board itself is well laid out.  It has mounting
    screws but given the design I'm not sure what exactly your supposed
    to mount it in or on.
    
    And of course, it's exceptionally inexpensive considering what it
    does.
    
    I'm currently debating between getting a 688 or a 1622 + 1/4" 8-track
    combo.
    
    I'm not going to bother describing the functionality of the unit.
    The description given in the last Alesis Newsletter was as good a
    description of a board as I've seen.
    
    The main thing is that it's here, it's real, and it's about what
    we would expect.
    
    	db

    From one who's tried using a 2 buss board with an 8-track machine ... 

    DON'T.  It's an exercise in frustration.

-b

    I, too got to play with a 1622 over the weekend at Wurlie's in Boston.
    It was very quiet. The knobs and sliders felt cheap to me, mostly
    because they were very light and offered no resistance. I got the
    impression that if the sliders weighed just a little bit more they
    would slide down on their own accord if the unit was rack-mounted.
    Of course the real test will be a few months down the road when we find
    out if they hold up to heavy use.
    
    Chris

    	Some time has passed now...  Has anyone bought one of these?  Does
    anyone *know* anyone that's bought one?  Are there any success stories? 
    War stories?
    
    	Dan
    

The band playing  at  sunday's  Canobie  Lake  Park outing was using one,
together with one of  the  Alesis  drum machines and a MIDIVERB II, and a
bunch of other stuff.  The mix sounded very good.

/Mitch

    Would you, by any chance, remember who the band was?  I'd like to find
    them and get their opinions on using it for PA.  I've received a couple
    of replies from my USEnet posting from people who use it (and are very
    satisfied) in their home studio.  They both advise against taking it on
    the road, though.
    
    While at the store during lunch hour today, the salesman said that a
    number of independent sources have tested the 1622 and found the
    specifications published by Alesis to be very accurate.
    
    It seems that this is a VERY quiet board.  Lot's of flexibility for the
    price.
    
    	Dan
    

    	Oh, I called a couple of Mail order houses (best price, so far, is
    $719 at Sam Ash) and one store said that it would never cost more than
    $70 for any single repair.  The only question, then, is how often do
    you have to send it in for repairs.
    
    	The manual for the 1622 states that it has a 90 day warranty. 
    Yikes!
    
    	Dan
    

    > $70 for any single repair...
    
    Hmmmmm, the very technology that makes this board possible is the
    "Monolithic (mumblemumble) board".
    
    Seems to me that most repairs could well involve swapping that board
    out. $70 seems way too cheap...
    
    Maybe $70 for warrantee repairs, but what about boards older than 2
    years?
    
    Have you seen the latest Alesis rag "First Reflection"? It's dedicated
    to the 1622. It was supposedly used at the Rose Bowl for all kinds
    of goodies...
    
    It seems like quite the board, but my HR16 is also quite the drum
    machine...
    
    Edd

    > Would you, by any chance, remember who the band was?  I'd like to find
    > them and get their opinions on using it for PA.  
    
    The band was called "Hollywood".  I may have a card of theirs at home.

    	I got a number of responses from USEnet 1622 owners.  The general
    concensus is that its a great studio tool, but most would not trust it
    as a road mixer.  No-one has been disatisfied with its utility in the
    studio.
    
    	I looked at a schematic of the signal path last night in a local
    store.  It has some (what I consider) design flaws.  For instance,
    it'll send out a master and submaster L/R outputs, but the submaster does
    not receive any of the signal processing from the fx loops.  That may
    be a flaw and may be good, depending upon your point of view.  The
    master and submaster outputs get exactly the same fader mix (i.e., it
    derives its mix from the same post fader point on each channel) unless you
    switch a channel completely out of one of the mixes (i.e., you can set ch 
    1 to send output to master but not submaster, ch 2 to send to submaster but
    not master, ch three to send both, ch 4 to neither).  The
    monitor output (which is what you get out of the built in headphone)
    gets exactly the same output as the master outs.  Now, you can get a
    customized monitor mix by using one of the two pre-fader aux sends, but
    you have to add a headphone amp to hear it on your phones.
    
    	Given these flaws, the fact that I want my board to be useable on
    the road, and the fact that you don't know what kind of repair costs you 
    may have to face down the road, I think I'll avoid this mixer.  Too
    bad, though, because it might have been a good alternative if just a
    few of these things were different.
    
    	Dan
                                           

One of the sales people at PROSOUND (Colorado Springs) indicated that it's
a great studio mixer or a live keyboard mixer, but didn't feel that it
was designed as a all in one P.A. mixer.

By the way, they haven't sold that many and wouldn't comment on the 
reliability.

My biggest grip was the lack of equalization (only 2 bands) & too many
sends (this is for live work, not for studio mixing where there is
never enough sends).
								Jens

    Of course it's just marketing hype, but a recent "news rag" I got from
    Alesis had articles in it raving about the reliability of the 1622.
    They claim this is partly a result of their slide pot design, which
    uses contacts directly on the board rather than separate components.
    They had an interview with a supposedly well-known LA sound guy who has
    done sound for the Olympics. He was talking about how someone picked up
    a 1622 and thought it was just a shell because it was so light. He
    claimed it was very durable for road use. FWIW.
    
    - Ram