It seems that instead of coming out with new digital mixers, they just made the current mixers more powerful. Now the 01V96, DM 1000, 02R96, and DM 2000 have a VCM added to it's name. The improved effects that were limited on the original now seem to be more plentiful on the newer units.

To be honest with you, I think it's smart that Yamaha keep the mixer format bascially the same. They are already very good digital mixers. By putting more horsepower in them, they are able to give you more of the better effects. I wish the 01V96 VCM had touch sensitive faders like the rest of the group. If I were going to digital mixer route, the DM 1000 VCM would be it for me. The improved effects over the standard ones are quite impressive. Now they have reverb, EQ's and compressors that are up there with Waves, and UAD. Not the same, but up there with them. Here is where Yamaha talks about some of the updates.

--------------------
revelationsoundstudio.com

Edited by Glenn Bucci (25/04/08 03:06 AM)

Just wondering what the point of touch sensitive faders is without the automix?

--------------------
Cubase, guitars.

Quote Lime ZRX:

---

Just wondering what the point of touch sensitive faders is without the automix?

---

You may be using it as a control surface, or recording your fader moves to a sequencer (same principle). It's not very different from recording your fader moves internally. If a fader is not touch sensitive and is currently receiving automation playback data, when you try to move it, you "fight" the movements that result from the existing data. If it is touch sensitive, as soon as you touch it it can start recording your movements instead of responding to what's already there. Some systems also disengage recording as soon as you stop touching the fader, switching back to existing automation data.

--------------------
There is a subtle difference between "having no form" and having "no form": the first is ignorance, the second, transcendance.

Thanks TP.

For many years I used a an 02R which did have automix but not touch sens faders. When we needed to change a mix we had to hit the "SEL" button for that fader before changing it. It was OK, but a pain if you were trying to catch a fast moving fader.
Having used the new 02R96 and it's big brother the DM2000, I wouldn't really want to go back!

Didn't think about using the touch sens when using the mixer as a remote surface for a DAW. But for the reason you state, it makes good sense for it to work!

Cheers.

--------------------
Cubase, guitars.

Quote TP.:

---

You may be using it as a control surface, or recording your fader moves to a sequencer (same principle). It's not very different from recording your fader moves internally.

---

I get what you're saying for use as a control surface.

But here, I use an original 01V as an actual mixer. I record fader moves as midi into a sequencer, which works OK. I don't see how I could get any benefit from touch-sensitive faders, as the sequencer doesn't have any "understanding" of the midi data it's handling. So touch-sensitive faders would seem a waste, in this scenario.

But yes, as a DAW control surface, one would hope the DAW would use the "touch" info constructively.

Quote Chris Edwards:

---

Quote TP.:

---

You may be using it as a control surface, or recording your fader moves to a sequencer (same principle). It's not very different from recording your fader moves internally.

---

I get what you're saying for use as a control surface.

But here, I use an original 01V as an actual mixer. I record fader moves as midi into a sequencer, which works OK. I don't see how I could get any benefit from touch-sensitive faders, as the sequencer doesn't have any "understanding" of the midi data it's handling. So touch-sensitive faders would seem a waste, in this scenario.

---

Indeed it's more limited when recording to a sequencer.

Still, the faders could stop responding to automation data sent by your sequencer the moment you touch them. So no need to select a fader.

If your sequencer can switch automatically to record mode the instant it starts receiving data, and replacing data from that point on, there would be some benefit.

It leaves the end of recording to take care of manually. (e.g. transport buttons on the console).

--------------------
There is a subtle difference between "having no form" and having "no form": the first is ignorance, the second, transcendance.

Quote TP.:

---

Still, the faders could stop responding to automation data sent by your sequencer the moment you touch them. So no need to select a fader.

---

Ah yes - see what you mean - thanks!