RCF M18

[skidder652003]

Had an XR18. Couldn't get on with it. As others have said it's a steep learning curve and as me and the drummer were responsible for the sound during the gig, fiddling with a tablet mid song was too much of a faff so we went back to an analogue (RCF) desk. The ability to use it as a DAW during live performance would have been useful for sure but for us as a pub band recording our gigs on a zoom field recorder  to mix and release on YouTube and Facebook has been fine. We definitely would have found it handy to record our more recent "studio" rehearsals but we got a Tascam US-16x08 for that. For the money the Behringer is hard to beat but it depends on how much you want to get out of it and how much you're prepared to put into learning it. 

[BCH]

Update: We have upgraded our pa & IEM. We are now using a RCF digital mixer M20X, which is excellent( sound & functionality). A side effect is that; when we connect to our wireless IEM the latency and ground noise is much more noticeable. As we don't use any backline and we have a very high quality FoH, we want the best IEM, so we have decided to use studio quality amplifiers and have our in ear wired. I have been testing for a week and so far the results are very good, as a result the Co "DACS" is making a 1U rack for Fynnius Fogg. See page 1 for old rack pic,  and new system below. The new rack contains a isolated/ stable power supply + the headphone amps  + bass wireless unit with the mixer on top. We have a permanent set up installed in or rehearsal area, where we use headphones...For gigs we use high quality in-ear...hopefully:we will be setting this all up and fine tuning from 17th May...with our first open air gig 20th June. Hope this encourages others!

 

 

Edited March 14, 2021 by BCH
correct text

[EBS_freak]

Nice headphone amp there! 

[BCH]

Its the new +Power plug in module that provides all the ultra-clean drive the most power-hungry headphones need....have also added V-Moda M200 headphones for rehearsals ...very impressed

[EBS_freak]

15 minutes ago, BCH said:

Its the new +Power plug in module that provides all the ultra-clean drive the most power-hungry headphones need....have also added V-Moda M200 headphones for rehearsals ...very impressed

M200s too. Very nice!

[DaytonaRik]

On 22/01/2021 at 16:58, Phil Starr said:

Wait until he adds the x32

We did get some great sounds out of a borrowed X32 though

Could always go the X32 Rack route?  I use an SD16 digital stage box upstage and an SD8 downstage - both have 8 XLR returns and either 8 or 16 inputs and connects via a single CAT5 cable making setup/strike a doddle as you can use short cable runs to a conveniently placed stage box.  The SD16 takes care of the kit and backline mics/DI plus drummer's wedge and the SD8 for vocal mics, downstage wedges and FoH.

Edited March 16, 2021 by DaytonaRik

[BCH]

Very neat, what's your verdict on the Swissonic Professional Router 2? 

[DaytonaRik]

5 minutes ago, BCH said:

Very neat, what's your verdict on the Swissonic Professional Router 2? 

Router is pricey for what it is BUT there was no other rack mountable 2.4/5ghz router available so I really had very little choice if I wanted the aesthetics.  Personally I think it's worth it for the convenience but others may not be willing to part with the readies for the solution.

Performance-wise it's absolutely rock solid and no operational complaints.

Edited March 17, 2021 by DaytonaRik

[EBS_freak]

I'll give you a bit of background on the Swissonic router. I took one apart - It's basically a router that can be found on Aliexpress for $30 that has been rehoused in a nice rack unit. That's not to say that the router doesn't do the job, if it works reliably, then it works reliably... and as stated, it's a nice format in that you can keep it racked up and ready to go.

The reason that there isn't much out there in terms of rack mount WAPs (wireless access points) is that from a physics point of view, WAPs should be mounted away from metal as metal interferes with RF. When mounting WAPs/wireless units in racks (e.g. including microphones/IEMS), the antennae are usually external to the rack to avoid this issue. In larger scale gigging situations, the WAP is usually mounted with external antenna with hidden SSID(s). This not only reduces the risk of interference - but makes for a more reliable connection (assuming you have line of sight) You've probably noticed that a lot of home routers are very plastically and avoid metal construction - there is a reason for that - they are self contained and its often not practical to get the antennae away from the base unit.

So from a purist's point of view, the Swissonic is a terrible implementation as you are putting your WAP in an area that typically dense in metal structures - and additionally, combined with a load of electronics that produce EM that can also negatively impact the performance of RF. In @DaytonaRik's deployment above, things aren't quite as bad as they could be - as the antenna, although close to a lot of metal and electronics (including radio transmitters AND radio receivers - more on that in a minute) at least stand proud of most of the rack.

As for the placement of mic receivers and IEM transmitters, this is as about as worse practice you can get and it will be greatly reducing the amount of intermodulation free (e.g. interference free) channels that you will be able to access. Given that there's only two channels in play here, and they are on different channel bands (one on free to use, the other on shared mic license), it's likely, I'm guessing, you are getting away with it Rik! If you upped your channel count with this style of deployment, you would have a right ball trying to get your radio working!

Having said all of that, if the resulting performance is good enough to be reliable for your needs and you can justify the price, than for the neat integration into the rack, the router may be a good call. At the end of the day, if it works and meets your expectations, then jobs a goodun! I only included this post as anybody working with wireless should go into this with their eyes open.

@BCH - I would be wary of your stageclix system being placed right next to a 5G router - hopefully the device is clever enough to find a clean channel on 5G (there's a lot more of them compared to the 3 intermod free channels on 2.4 for starters) but you may have to set your router to fix on a channel that plays nicely with the stageclix. In short, always be prepared to ditch the Stageclix and ditch the wireless because a venues wifi may take yours out. A lot of conference centres are great at doing this.

Always cater for a wired connection to your desk too... because not being able to control your mixing desk is a bit err... stressful. (Been there, done that, without the cat5 cable...)

Hope this is insightful - this hasn't been written to run anybody's setup down - quite the opposite. I've tried to be helpful to avoid any mishaps down the road!

Edited March 17, 2021 by EBS_freak

[DaytonaRik]

3 hours ago, EBS_freak said:

I'll give you a bit of background on the Swissonic router. I took one apart - It's basically a router that can be found on Aliexpress for $30 that has been rehoused in a nice rack unit. That's not to say that the router doesn't do the job, if it works reliably, then it works reliably... and as stated, it's a nice format in that you can keep it racked up and ready to go.

I had long since expected it to be a completely run-of-the-mill router housed in a nice rack mount format

 

3 hours ago, EBS_freak said:

As for the placement of mic receivers and IEM transmitters, this is as about as worse practice you can get and it will be greatly reduce the amount of intermodulation free (e.g. interference free) channels that you will be able to access. Given that there's only two channels in play here, and they are on different channel bands (one on free to use, the other on shared mic license), it's likely, I'm guessing, you are getting away with it Rik! If you upped your channel count with this style of deployment, you would have a right ball trying to get your radio working!

Absolutely agree completely - in the past it took a lot of fault finding to identify which channels can operate without causing issues.  As the rig is never hired out and we only use 3 channels of UHF wireless - 1 x IEM, 1 x mic and 1 x guitar (separate) then we've managed to find a compromise that works well without problems.   If we wanted to go expand that count then have no doubt we'd go IEMs TX's in one rack and mic RX's into another, both served with paddle antenna and kept well away from one another, and probably all moved to a similar brand/model for ease of configuration.

 

3 hours ago, EBS_freak said:

Hope this is insightful - this hasn't been written to run anybody's setup down - quite the opposite. I've tried to be helpful to avoid any mishaps down the road!

Your insight and experienced opinion is ALWAYS always welcomed when it comes to PA, wireless and a plethora of other audio related questions.  You are the man!

Edited March 17, 2021 by DaytonaRik

[BCH]

Thank you, very helpful...I've opted for a low cost router as its only being used for FoH iPad set up on the M20X...before the crowd arrive with phones!!

 

Edited March 17, 2021 by BCH
spelling

[EBS_freak]

1 hour ago, DaytonaRik said:

I had long since expected it to be a completely run-of-the-mill router housed in a nice rack mount format

 

Absolutely agree completely - in the past it took a lot of fault finding to identify which channels can operate without causing issues.  As the rig is never hired out and we only use 3 channels of UHF wireless - 1 x IEM, 1 x mic and 1 x guitar (separate) then we've managed to find a compromise that works well without problems.   If we wanted to go expand that count then have no doubt we'd go IEMs TX's in one rack and mic RX's into another, both served with paddle antenna and kept well away from one another, and probably all moved to a similar brand/model for ease of configuration.

 

Your insight and experienced opinion is ALWAYS always welcomed when it comes to PA, wireless and a plethora of other audio related questions.  You are the man!

Thanks for the kind and words - and for acknowledging the case that my input on the topic is to help people not fall into any pits that they don't understand how to get out of!

[DaytonaRik]

19 hours ago, EBS_freak said:

As for the placement of mic receivers and IEM transmitters, this is as about as worse practice you can get and it will be greatly reducing the amount of intermodulation free (e.g. interference free) channels that you will be able to access. Given that there's only two channels in play here, and they are on different channel bands (one on free to use, the other on shared mic license), it's likely, I'm guessing, you are getting away with it Rik! If you upped your channel count with this style of deployment, you would have a right ball trying to get your radio working!

For reference @EBS_freak, ewhat would the industry 'statndard' method be that is expandable for multiple wireless etups, both IEM TX and wireless RX systems?  I'd like to add a few more wireless mic's and maybe persuade some other band members that IEMs are the right way to go with one guitarist flatly saying after 2 mins that they weren't for him, and our vocalist saying, and I quote "there's a strange noise...like aliens in my head"!!!!

[DaytonaRik]

On 22/01/2021 at 16:58, Phil Starr said:

We did get some great sounds out of a borrowed X32 though

Because of the channel count, we can do some neat things re monitoring with the X32 - e.g. we have 2 channels per guitar fed from the same input - there is a dedicated FOH channel and a dedicated monitor feed that has the guitar signal limited so not to rip everyone's head off in the wedges when a guitarist goes for a solo patch but the FOH is unaffected by the limiter - we set the limiter so the guitarist can hear his solo without overpowering everyone else's monitor mix with his solo signal.

Edited March 18, 2021 by DaytonaRik

[Jakester]

14 hours ago, BCH said:

Thank you, very helpful...I've opted for a low cost router as its only being used for FoH iPad set up on the M20X...before the crowd arrive with phones!!

 

I looked at the Swissonic router too - but as DaytonaRik says, it's ruddy expensive! 

I have ended up taping an old Netgear router to the bottom of the rack case, which seems to work fine. Not pretty though! If I had the time/money/inclination and I was doing it over again, I think I'd probably get a 1U sliding rack draw and mount the router to that so it can slide out when in use. However, that would compromise siting it on stage - at the moment, because it's all contained within the rack footprint  you can put it wherever - I did a gig where someone else had a similar setup and he chucked his under the raised stage at the side, and lying on its side! 

Edited March 18, 2021 by Jakester

[EBS_freak]

4 hours ago, DaytonaRik said:

For reference @EBS_freak, ewhat would the industry 'statndard' method be that is expandable for multiple wireless etups, both IEM TX and wireless RX systems?  I'd like to add a few more wireless mic's and maybe persuade some other band members that IEMs are the right way to go with one guitarist flatly saying after 2 mins that they weren't for him, and our vocalist saying, and I quote "there's a strange noise...like aliens in my head"!!!!

OK - the short answer is a little like this. 

You are most likely to be in either the Shure camp, or the Sennheiser camp. You can make both co-exist, but I would always suggest that your IEMs are of one make and model and likewise, your mics be of one make and model (or range, appreciating the fact that you may have a mixture of belt packs for lav/guitars and handhelds). If you running one brand, then you ideally put devices on a network and configure them all remotely via software - so Shure's Wireless Workbench or Sennheisers Wireless Systems Manager. More on those in a bit.

To run up large channels counts, you'll definitely want a shared mic license - so typically channel 38 if you are moving your band around venue to venue. You can up the count by using the free to use license (ch70) but you are more likely to have interferences with venues and dodgy DJs using cheap ch70 mics that will interfere with yours.

IEMs should be racked together on one side of the stage and mics racked together the other. You can get away with both rack units on the same of the stage - but aim for at least 3metres separation. Ideally, you want a distro and external aerials - however, this is not always a steadfast requirement. As long as the antennae on the units have line of sight - and ideally not on the floor, then for most venues you are likely to be OK. As mentioned before, its best that the antennas are clear of the rack - but if you aren't using external antennae from a distro, then have it so the antennae are closest to the performers, so the RF doesn't have to pass through the rack and electronics to get to and from the radio receivers/transmitters on stage. If lots of metal work comes into play, or if the venue has more stray RF noise, that's where the distros are going to help. And of course, if you are running dual diversity systems, you can have an antennae both sides, pointing across the stage, for better signal and less chance of drop outs. IEM dual diversity systems are expensive by the way - compare the price of a PSM1000 system over a PSM900.

Back to the software - this is where the magic happens and most people don't know/understand the importance of this. You can upload your inventory of wireless gear to say Wireless Workbench and it will have all the technical details associated with that piece of gear available to work with. You can then specify the portion(s) of the radio spectrum within which you want your wireless to operate... and then let the software work out all the intermod free frequencies for you so everything works together without interference. Of course, if you have a profile for mismatched gear, it can take that into account (hence you could mix brands - although you do tend to get more usable channels if you stick with brands and models as stated above) You can then manually program all the devices with the frequencies the software comes out with. If you have WW on the network and all the devices are on the network - you can remotely push out all the config to the rack units (although you are limited to Shure for WW and Sennheiser if using WSM - so you can immediately see the advantage of co-ordinating RF units from just one manufacture, especially if touring and large channel counts are involved) and then sync the portable units using the IR sensors that tend to be on the units. All clever stuff.

For relatively low channel counts, in the UK, its rare that you have to keep reprogramming your wireless units as Ofcom has got a pretty good handle on wireless control. I run 11 channels of wireless with my band and 99% of the time I can just turn up and play at a gig with the same settings as the last without any issue. If there is an issue, I use WW to scan the area for rogue RF (it can do this by using a receiver that it is on the network with) and choose to co-ordinate frequencies that are free of any troublesome RF. As I say though, for shared mic license, this is a pretty rare occurrence - but in the States for example, where wireless changes from state to state and generally abused, it can be a life saver. For big tours, you wont find bands on Ch38. They apply for licenses from Ofcom - which gives them legal access to other parts of the spectrum for specified durations. Of course - the gear has to be able to be tuned to that area of the spectrum. For completeness, you can also get a fixed license - so you will find that theatres tend to be allocated areas of the spectrum for their mic use... but obviously the equipment use on those frequencies are limited to the boundaries of that building.

Lastly, your wifi wireless should be kept away from everything. Typically you'd have another rack for your router and hang your WAP(s) off that - and that would also probably contain your pair of Dante switches of similar if you are making use of digital runs (for audio over ethernet).  

In short, wireless can take time and be a headache when it goes wrong. So be prepared and have a bail out solution where everybody can go to wired. For tours and the like, this stuff doesn't just happen. It's weeks, sometimes months of preparation to have the confidence that stuff is going to work as intended.

Hope this helps and gives you a brief insight!

Edited March 18, 2021 by EBS_freak

[EBS_freak]

4 hours ago, DaytonaRik said:

Because of the channel count, we can do some neat things re monitoring with the X32 - e.g. we have 2 channels per guitar fed from the same input - there is a dedicated FOH channel and a dedicated monitor feed that has the guitar signal limited so not to rip everyone's head off in the wedges when a guitarist goes for a solo patch but the FOH is unaffected by the limiter - we set the limiter so the guitarist can hear his solo without overpowering everyone else's monitor mix with his solo signal.

This is a great hack that not enough people know about. Mind you, most people wouldn't know how to split channels and delve into the realms of limiters!

I do similar but with two desks, where the audio is shared using Dante. One desk for foh, one for monitoring. You can do do similar natively with the X32 and say a M32C - although you would have to think about the patching of your physical outputs from the core back to your M32 because of their stupid block of 8 I/O  implementation... so you may be better off getting a pair of X32s with all the IO attached to the individual desks as opposing to patch them all virtually. More expense - but gives you more channels to play with obviously.

Anyway, I digress - your split approach is doing it right and (I can't remember if you can pass through EQ to auxes off the main as it's been a while since I've used an X32) but will give you the ability to EQ your instrument independently from your FOH for your monitor mix... instead of being limited to the one global EQ for your monitor aux.

Edited March 18, 2021 by EBS_freak

[Phil Starr]

I dither too much but I'd decided on the M18 (it's the solution for my current needs and i can sell it if I want more functionality) When I went to order it was out of stock at Andertons. One of the alternatives I hadn't looked at in this price bracket is the Soundcraft Ui16. Having a look at the software it looks to have more functionality and more mic channels and a nice intuitive feel, though more complex than the M18. A minor attraction is that it will operate with Windows so I won't need to acquire another tablet.

 

Has anyone used/had a look at one of these?  

[EBS_freak]

The UI16 is the result of a buy out of SM Pro - you may have seen the uMix mixers. I think Soundcraft needed a mixer to fill the digital market quick and that was their way of doing it - buy it rather than develop it.

As a mixer, the HTML interface is appealing as it's then platform agnostic as far as controllers are confirmed. You could run it from a browser running on a  Raspberry Pi for example... but apart from that, I've never really warmed to it as a unit. If you are looking for simplicity and function, it's probably not a bad bet though.

[BCH]

I have tried both, its Ok but the router is poor but you can easily a good quality external router. IMO the M18 is superior quality, UI, WiFi, preamps, FX & guitar & bass patches...see previous posts above...I have used 2 M18's since launch

If you need more inputs/ outputs & EQ & dynamic functionality go for the RCF M20...which is what we are using for gigs...if you decide on the M18 but cant get one I have 2 spare, one will be going on sale....Gear4Music has one in stock

I checked with a mate who still uses the UI16 (the one we tried) he needed more inputs (drums) uses a good router but he has been to one of our gigs & concedes the M18 is easier to get a better sound ...good luck

[Phil Starr]

Thank you both, it confirms a lot of what I was thinking. I was blown away by the phone app for the Ui with the 'more me' facility and the ability to restrict access  which was really very neat. I think I'll go back to the M18 for now and run it for a year or two, if I change bands and need more channels I won't lose too much and I'll have had use of it for hopefully a lot of gigs. In the meantime I'll have learned what I really need and how to get the best out of it.

[BCH]

I have added a RCF M18 on BC Marketplace effects for sale....B

 

 

Edited June 10, 2021 by BCH
Forgot link

[Phil Starr]

I thought I'd just do an update with a bit of a review. I've had a couple of months with the M18 and I'm really happy with it so far. The first thing to say is that the sound is superb, the mic pre's work really well. We are using decent mics Sennheiser 935's and Shure Beta 58's plus a £200ish EV and the quality shouts out at this level. The learning curve is really short, we had a mix up inside an hour and a day later I had set up a mix for my second band based on what I'd learned from the first and at rehearsal it worked first time, I barely had to touch levels and didn't need to touch anything else. The phone app for mixing your own monitor mix is faultless and it's all just so easy. Some nice bass sounds using the supplied emulators too but I'll stick to using my Zoom for the time being. No dropouts at all with the built in router and I can still mix two rooms away way, better connectivity than anything else in this 400 year old house. I've yet to report any niggles so far. I haven't had a chance to use it at a gig, we've either had hired PA or been cancelled at the last minute but I'll report back when I have.

[Heat]

Hi, 

 

our band have just bought the M18 and we played our first two gigs with it, and it’s going well. A few issues, but we’ve managed to resolve the majority, apart from one.

 

We can’t get a reverb mix in our floor monitors, we have it in our front of house mix, but the vocals are just flat in our 3 monitors. Can anybody help us resolve this please, we’re all used to having reverb in our vocals and it’s really bugging us.

 

Appreciate any help or advice.

 

Thanks

 

Marty 😊🎹🎶

[EBS_freak]

Generally you won't want reverb in your monitor mixes, especially when singers are involved as it can throw off the ability to pitch. Anyway, what you'll need to do is put the fx return into your aux mix.