Discuss the new Studio 192 and Studio 192 Mobile here
8 posts
Page 1 of 1
Hello,
I'm a long time user of Presonus product and I was waiting for the release of Studio 192, I've already sold my VSL1818, I'm about to sell the Motu AVB I've bought recently and really WANT to get an interface made for S1 V3 that I purchased the day it was released. I'm now wondering if I can wait until the post dated release of the Studio 192 or if I buy now an RM16AI for studio use. What will be the advantages or inconvenients between the 2 solutions?

Thx in advance for a reply from a Presonus sale or technical expert for example.
User avatar
by matthewgorman on Wed Aug 19, 2015 6:31 am
If you have never used a mixer as a studio interface, there is a bit of a learning curve related to routing, but nothing major. I currently use an RM16 in the studio, and also for very light live use.

If you need line inputs, then the 192 is the way to go. Cost may relatively be the same for the same number of inputs, but also remember that the new adat pre may not see retail until the holidays this year.

As far as control goes, the units should be similar. Both are slated to have preamp control, etc from within S1. They both will be working on the same UC Surface/UCNET protocol, so integration should be similar. Its not implemented yet, so details on the mechanics of it are light.

If you are looking strictly for studio use, I would go with the 192. On top of the line ins, ability for more analog inputs via adat and spdif, there is also monitor selection and control for control room functions. So you get functionality similar to a monitor station, in the same box. And for utilizing talkback, you don't lose an input for that. The RM needs a physical mic, so you lose an analog input. The 192 has a small condenser built into the front of the unit.

Matt

Lenovo ThinkServer TS140 Win 10 64bit, 8GB RAM, Intel Xeon
Lenovo Thinkpad E520, Windows 7 64bit, 8 GB RAM, Intel i5 Processor

S1Pro V5
User avatar
by viktorkestral on Thu Aug 20, 2015 6:34 am
Thanks Matthew, is there any latency issues due to the default FW interface on the RM16AI comparing to Studio 192 USB 3.0 interface?
User avatar
by matthewgorman on Thu Aug 20, 2015 7:29 am
None that I have experienced on the RM. Can't say on the 192 since it isn't out yet.

Any latency studio wise would probably present itself when overdudding. As far as initial tracking, its a mixer so I run everything through that, and just use the daw as a tape deck. My machine handles a pretty small buffer with no real effort, so I don't have issue there.

One more thing to note. The 192 and RM have the same/similar effects engines, but the 192 is limited (I think, could be wrong) to effects on the 192 inputs, not any adat inputs. Compare that to the RM which has effects on all channels. I don't feel that is a big deal for what I do, but it may affect you.

Matt

Lenovo ThinkServer TS140 Win 10 64bit, 8GB RAM, Intel Xeon
Lenovo Thinkpad E520, Windows 7 64bit, 8 GB RAM, Intel i5 Processor

S1Pro V5
User avatar
by dr.noetigenfallz on Fri Sep 18, 2015 10:55 pm
Is there any difference soundwise between those two? (Except the 192 kHz)
User avatar
by matthewgorman on Sat Sep 19, 2015 8:44 am
dr.noetigenfallz wroteIs there any difference soundwise between those two? (Except the 192 kHz)


Can't answer that until the 192 hits the street, unfortunately. Mic pres are same/similar. The 192 uses different converters. Not sure how that will all pan out.

Matt

Lenovo ThinkServer TS140 Win 10 64bit, 8GB RAM, Intel Xeon
Lenovo Thinkpad E520, Windows 7 64bit, 8 GB RAM, Intel i5 Processor

S1Pro V5
User avatar
by wesley on Thu Sep 24, 2015 8:52 am
The Studio 192 solely a studio piece, so the THD+N and crosstalk specs are better than the RM mixers. Also, because it's a studio piece, the outputs are scaled to +18 dBu to align better with studio gear. The RM mixers have much hotter outputs (+24 dBu) which is great for live, but not always so great in the studio. Overall, the outputs are cleaner and more conducive to critical studio listening at 192 kHz.

I do want to correct something said earlier though. The Studio 192 uses the same 118 dB dynamic range converters that our StudioLive mixers use. We're just not able to run them at 192 kHz in the mixers because of DSP limitations.
User avatar
by viktorkestral on Sat Sep 26, 2015 4:29 am
Well, I was waiting for the Studio 192 but finally bought the RM. Unfortunately, I really couldn't integrate it with full features and S1 V3. It's not's not even proposed as a preset in the config. Why while the 16.4.2.... are all proposed, even the Studio 192 and I have real difficulties with routing the outputs. I try to insert an Eventide hardware as an effect into studio One and it's really not an easy way. Even opened the user's guide of the RM which is more an unuseful guide to sound reinforcement than a way to manage the sub mixes and so on... Not a word on it. S1 V3 recognized the RM as my old Firestudio... Is this normal? When could we expect a new update to S1 which takes care of this RM unit.? I'm a long time customer of Presonus products and softwares, but at this point, I must admit that my XR-18 is by far much easier to use in live conditions (I'm not discussing anything else than ergonomy)... even in studio. I hope I won't regret my purchase.

8 posts
Page 1 of 1

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests