What's in this thing?

The channel input jack is a Neutrik Combo which accepts XLR or 1/4" phone plugs. It is perfectly happy with either balanced or unbalanced sources. In the MIC version, the XLR has the appropriate 2400 ohm impedance and switches to 68K for the 1/4" plugs. There are balanced direct outputs on every channel post fade and pre cut for multi-track recording.

Each channel uses the best sounding chips we know of (Burr Brown INA103, OPA2604, Linear Technology LT1010) in Hutch's circuits with exceptional headroom and very low noise, real pro level input and output levels, and bulletproof Manley quality throughout. Spec-wise know of no mixer ever with better headroom or higher output levels and, well, this mixer's subterranean noise floor and crosstalk figures are simply quite amazing. The signal path has just 3 superb polystyrene caps from input to output. No carbon resistors, just 1/2 watt metal film, Bourns conductive plastic pots, Grayhill stepped attenuators, etc. All the good stuff.

Sorry we didn't make this thing all-tube for "ad appeal" and sales hype. We certainly could have, but this puppy would have grown into the size of a small house, and needed an accompanying 5-Ton AC unit. However, the tube mix amps/line drivers are right at the end and impart that "Manley Sound" to your final outputs with all the richness, loudness and BIG sound you expect from us. Built like a tank and easy to service.

Mutes and Solos use superior relay switching techniques not crummy FETs or CMOS switching. Please! The Solo is of the "mute everything else" type. The buttons are EAO Series 19 and light up to indicate Mute and Solo. Insert and Phase Reverse also use high quality relays and both functions have tiny switches and red LED's to clearly indicate when they're selected.

The master section provides mixdown to 2 channels achieved with similar tube circuits as used in the Massive Passive, featuring two each 12AT7 NOS Phillips & 6414 NOS GE or Raytheon dual triodes. External inputs allow two or more mixers to be combined for 32 or more channels with a mini-banana post linking the Solo functions. There are both transformer balanced and transformerless unbalanced (+4dBm) outputs with tons of headroom, +36dBu, about 10dB better than million-dollar consoles. The master section has an aux mix gain (master effects send) in the LINE version and an Ext input gain in the MIC version. There are two sets of monitor outputs, MAIN and MINI, so you can feed two different sets of power amps or powered speakers. We included MUTE and DIM buttons plus a rotary switch to monitor the main mix, the mono mix, 2 track tape playback (more balanced inputs), the Ext inputs (for linked consoles or effects returns), and the aux mix (only on LINE version).

The dedicated power supply unit cranking out all the necessary filtered and regulated DC voltages to power up this beast is external further reducing noise and heat.

Below the optional Rack Mount Faceplate for any of our mixers is shown.

16x2 LINE Version Pictured Below

Manley Tube Mixer FAQ's

Each channel uses the best sounding chips we know of and circuits with exceptional headroom and very low noise, relay switching rather than FETs or CMOS, real pro level input / output levels and Manley quality throughout. Spec-wise know of no mixer ever with better headroom and output levels and the noise floor is quite respectable (but not the absolute lowest we have ever seen) but it does seem to have the lowest crosstalk and leakage we know of. It has just 3 superb polystyrene caps from input to output. No carbon resistors, just 1/2 watt metal film, conductive plastic pots, stepped attenuators etc.

And what about the vacuum tubes?

We don't put in a tube per input channel as might be expected for 'ad appeal' and sales hype. We certainly could, but a proper and effective circuit would require at least two tubes per channel (like our other products) which begins to look like 36 tubes total. Of course this approach would be way hotter (temperature not sound), way bigger and would require a rather huge power supply to light up the 34 glowing tube filaments and it would be a little noisy for 24 bit digital besides being rather expensive. However, the stereo mix amps / line drivers are standard Manley tube circuits, with high quality pro input and output transformers and it certainly provides that 'Manley Sound' with all the richness, loudness and, dare we say, "warmth" you expect from us.

Why did you build it?

The 16/2 Mixer is intended for a variety of applications that require more focus on sound quality than less expensive "knobs and features per dollar" alternatives or larger and far more expensive desks. It simply answers the questions of " how to get real professional results without mortgaging the house or resorting to hobbyist gear and/or questionable sounding DSP mixers". Good old Analog Mixing plus the benefits of Manley tube circuits.

What do I use it for?

It seems there are plenty of different applications. Some use it as a great keyboard mixer for recording, thus avoiding wrecking the quality of $20K worth of keys with a sub $1K mixer and/or avoiding latency or sonic issues of mixing in DAWs. Some use it for mixing DAW tracks through multiple DACs for the sonic benefits of analog mixing without the cost of major control rooms. Of course, a good mixer is key. Some are using it for semi-portable or location recording where the end product needs to be better than "hobbyist" quality. Others use it for a broadcast console for WWW radio stations. And others need a high quality monitor console to be confident of their work and what they are listening to or through. They find that they need less processing when they hear the pure tracks and spend less time fixing non-issues caused by monitor electronics. Funny, the same holds true for using good mics at the opposite end of the chain. I've got a ProTools rig. Do I need the Manley 16x2 line mixer?

Unless you need Mic Preamps, the 16x2 Line Version will be the best choice. You can use the +4 XLR outputs from the 888 directly into the mixer, or through a patchbay, if inserts and effects are an issue.

Apparently, this set-up has a startling improvement in audible clarity, air, resolution and, in general terms, sounds musical rather than digital. ProTools has one of the strongest individual channel processing capabilities with all the TDM plugs available, plus automation and its own mix busses. Many users report significant sonic benefits by using multiple DACS to feed a good analog mixer. They mix and automate to sub-groups or stems and for the most part, the analog mixer controls may not even be used except to set basic sub-group levels. And, yes, some have asked for a no-knob version but the cost difference is not worth getting excited about. Apparently these engineers report greatly increased "air" resolution and solid imaging.

We expect similar reports from guys who move a similar number of channels from some digital desks to analog. There has been some speculation why this seems to be advantageous, including technical issues with older DAW software & hardware, resolution improvements of one DAC versus many, analog characteristics of low level distortions, or clipping, or iron saturation, but whatever the reason, it seems to help a lot, and worth a try if you can do it.

Certainly some DACs tend to clip early, some tend to smear in the time domain, and some are jitter sensitive and we can expect some improvements as these issues are improved or multiple DACs are used to "average out" the problems. We can tell you that we hear analog quality not as a simplistic matter of adding some distortion or removing some measurable distortion, but like most musical qualities, is more a matter of how much, when and where but more importantly, how little, when not, and where not. For example we aim for +30 dBu through the mixer, which shows what we think of clipping in general and particularly when its not asked for. "Taste" may be difficult to quantise in numbers or for that matter digits.

One client told us, that combo very much impressed Michael Jackson's engineer and that it kills much more mix pricey alternatives , and it is a 50/50 choice whether to use vintage Neve modules/console or the 16x2. Gotta like that comment.

We can make anything you want but the catch is, you gotta pay the Research and Development and test time for the engineering staff for a custom built unit. The unaffordable other brand mixers you mention are at least built with some form of mass appeal and these costs are spread amongst the first few hundred customers. We could build a mixer as you describe but it would be way easier to just add the auxes to an existing design, and for you to use your existing Stereo Pultec or get another or a Massivo. This way we don't have to design another chassis, power supply and redesign the tube mix amps for the EQ. And by easier, translate that to "less costly". This would be a single 10U chassis with micro toggles to select the 3 auxes. We even have a few chassis made.

We are building a number of custom mixers and even the basic mixer design started off as a custom order. There is 32x8(+1 aux), 16x4(+1 aux), on top of a confusing array of standard variations we planned for, and detailed on this website. Seems, everybody wants something a bit different. All it takes is money and patience, from them, and a lot of effort and thought toward details from us. We would probably modify another guy's custom job (for a 32x8 mixer), change some engraving and use the extra busses for auxes. Not sure whether we would have to design new daughter boards or could modify some existing ones. - EveAnna can give you the exact price once that is decided, but it will be at least $22K as described (without the EQ), maybe $26K including an external Massivo (package price), and at least $30K for the Pultecs built in - see what happens when we factor in design time - costs more than the individual pieces. Hopefully it does more, but not much in this case. BTW, separate external EQ at least allows you to patch the EQ as needed rather than have it permanently across the buss - which may be just a funny passing fad, of the last 3 years. Some rather sweet reviews of the 16x2 will be appearing in the trades in the next few months - good reading.

Custom units tend to take 4 to 5 months from when we get a 50% deposit to when they are delivered. They are typically significantly more costly than off-the-shelf products. The reason people order them is that nothing similar actually exists and they need it for the type of work they do, which is typically unique or rarified enough that, generally, factories have not aimed products to them, like mastering or audiophilia recording. We like helping those artists, but the gov't won't let us do it as a charity deduction. Wanna buy a $60K surround mastering console?

We get this request all the time to do an 8x2. We make 16+channel mixers. The metalwork is set up for 4 banks of 4. The mainframe is set up to occupy 5RU. We know you guys really just want 8 channels for less than half the price of 16. Ain't gonna happen.

We can provide a Manley 16x2 with 8 of the channels (two banks of 4) loaded with blank inserts. This would only bring the retail price down to somewhere around $7K for the line version. For that expense plus $2K more, you might as well get all 16 channels. At this stage we cannot re-design this product to be a 3RU 8x2. Maybe someday we will get to that, and we kinda plan to, but for now, re-laying up all the boards and all the metalwork is not something we have time or resources available to do, right now.

Well, you should run them into the 1/4" jack which is meant for LINE signals. On the XLR inputs - I hope you are aware that most mics pretty much are designed for low impedance loads like 2400 ohms, and most line inputs are 20,000 ohms or higher. This is why we used a "combo jack" so that the difference in impedances can be optimum for both mics and line signals. To make a long story short, if you want, we can set the XLR impedance for 80K too, but don't bitch if some mics sound wierd. This is fine if you just intend the mixer for line inputs. The "mod" is the deletion of 1 resistor. On the other hand most pro gear (effects) will have no problem driving 2400 ohms (except some might be loaded by less than a dB) so, if it were me, I would stay standard there and if I ran into a loading problem just use the 1/4" jacks. Up to you.

Also, we assume that you are aware that there is very little difference in circuits between the mic and line version. We add a stepped resistor switch to control the gain of the SAME input stage, and we add a relay and chip that allows Inserts.

No because there's nowhere we can insert into in that part of the circuit, but here is your work-around:

Run a set of the Main Mix outputs of the mixer into your compressor and then run the output of the compressor into two places at once with a Y-Cord or splitter: Run it back into the mixer via the EXT (external) inputs so you can monitor off that. Use the other output off your Y-Cord to drive your recorder. Alternatively you can monitor off the recorder instead of in the mixer. The only bad thing about doing it this way is that when you use the master fader to fade down, the compressor isn't following the fade.

Now regarding balanced and unbalanced outputs. All the main outputs whether they are XLR or 1/4" TRS are 3 connector jacks and are +4dBu and will drive balanced or unbalanced lines the same because we "balance" the output impedances. The two true balanced floating outputs are achieved with transformers. I hope you not thinking that unbalanced is:1) a lower level like -10 dBv for hi-fi, consumer or semi-pro, 2) Can't drive into balanced inputs, 3) might require some tricky cables to drive balanced inputs. Many people are confused now that the semi-pro gear is so common and most of it "equates" unbalanced with lower consumer standard levels. A lot of unbalanced inputs and outputs on semi-pro gear is -10 dBv, but unbalanced really refers to is wires and has nothing to do with levels. Manley uses full +4 dBu levels on its outputs whether they are balanced or unbalanced and the unbalanced outputs have balanced impedances which means "no hum or RF compromises".

So we can wire the MAIN 1/4" jack to be parallel with the XLR easily but you lose the ability to bypass the transformer, which in some situations where you are looking for a more audiophile sound, might be a good thing. We can't wire the monitor outputs to be balanced BUT as stated above, they are designed to fully drive balanced inputs, long cables and will even drive 50 ohm headphones. If you really NEED true balanced outputs on the monitor jacks, expect to add another $1500 to the price, but methinks it would be a waste of money.

Hope this helps.

It depends on how you define 5.1 mixing and depends on the customer's requirements & expectations......

We developed a 6 way buss pair of cards for the 32/8. We could use them but these are solid state. There is no room to do 6 mix buss amps with tubes. This would be fairly easy and very similar in price. There is no monitoring function on those cards and it would have to be dome externally (including solo). The 32/8 also has the tube boards for stereo monitoring functions.

The other big consideration is channel panning. We have ONE stereo pan pot and possibilities for a 3 way switch for buss assign.

At AES somebody suggested another approach. Just build the mixer with 8 channels and use ProTools own 5.1 automated panning. This opens the bottom section up spacewise for buss amps or auxes. This is interesting and possible but then requires design time and a good number of months to get built especially when there is so much else on our plates right now. There is simply no way to give it priority treatment at the moment. This would also be costly in terms of engineering time, and certainly have to be charged at 'custom rates'. This is kind of a bad time to be asking us for 'custom' when we have 8 new products announced to be designed and delivered in 2004. We are turning away almost all such projects mostly by quoting a price based on what we expect to lose by taking them on. We are not a big operation with many engineers, and this approach could take up to 2 months of my time. In previous years this was easier to do.

Not that this helps, but we did hope to design a surround version of the 16/2 but we have only had a few requests so it seemed unwarranted. Where we have seen enough requests, we tried to design solutions. This one is rare.

--Hutch

Ramiro building 16x2 Mixers 2/15/2001