I think one of the biggest workflow things that I think needs tweaked is you almost work right to left instead of left to right. So you’re taking input sources (on the right) and applying them to the channels (on the left). I would rather take them from left to right and not right to left. I think those being flipped would make it so much easier visually to follow. Since we read left to right it just is the natural way for our eyes to flow. At least to me. Still super excited to get my compact. Had the full sized Wing and it was way too cumbersome to maneuver myself for gigs, and I so just wanted a more compact version. And here we are now lol
I am considering getting one of these for use in marching band, as our mixer has been problematic. The only issue I have with the WING is with total channel count. 48 channels is not enough for us, but since it does 48 channels of stereo, does that mean that I can route things like drumset overheads L/R and essentially have two mic inputs taking up one channel? They could share EQ/FX. I would like to do similar things for two synths and some sample pads that will all be in stereo. If this is possible, then the 48 channels would be enough for us. Right now, we use 54 channels of our 64-channel mixer, but 8 of those are extra channels for stereo, and we only actually use 46 faders.
@@felicianomontoya also each processing channel can accept one main input and one alternate input (aasignable), which if you have two inputs that does not need to be used simultaneously, and require similar processing, that channel can just switch between those two inputs without much hassle!
Is there a way to connect the P16 directly to the wing without using stage boxes? Can Behringer make that possible via any of the Ethernet ports at the back of the wing?
Would be great to mix with automation on source channel so us musicians can just feed audio from a daw and do all our mixing and mastering on the console with fx and also do not mind paying for the tc finaliser plug-in on the 2 track recorder to offer Ai mastering and referencing eq match. Live mixers do not need this but us musician producer need it.
This patching workflow is of course deeply flawed. Completely confusing and mixing terminologies and GUI elements across differing features that does not correlate. A channel input should of course NEVER be referred to as an output destination. And patching windows should always be from -> to from left to right. You are unnecessarily confusing users, and yourselves. Nothing wrong with the functionality, so we will let this one slide 😂
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
I think one of the biggest workflow things that I think needs tweaked is you almost work right to left instead of left to right. So you’re taking input sources (on the right) and applying them to the channels (on the left). I would rather take them from left to right and not right to left. I think those being flipped would make it so much easier visually to follow. Since we read left to right it just is the natural way for our eyes to flow. At least to me. Still super excited to get my compact. Had the full sized Wing and it was way too cumbersome to maneuver myself for gigs, and I so just wanted a more compact version. And here we are now lol
Agree. Complete design fail :)
We’ve been using the pro 6 , patching/routing is left to right. The corect way lol
I agree with you this is the most confusing part of this mixer if they flip that around it would be more intuitive.
Can you please do a video on how to connect two or more Behringer Wings together like in a FOH/Monitor/Broadcast environment?
inserting fx on busses instead of having fx returns makes a lot of sense..... we'll see if I can remember it though :)
I am considering getting one of these for use in marching band, as our mixer has been problematic. The only issue I have with the WING is with total channel count. 48 channels is not enough for us, but since it does 48 channels of stereo, does that mean that I can route things like drumset overheads L/R and essentially have two mic inputs taking up one channel? They could share EQ/FX. I would like to do similar things for two synths and some sample pads that will all be in stereo.
If this is possible, then the 48 channels would be enough for us. Right now, we use 54 channels of our 64-channel mixer, but 8 of those are extra channels for stereo, and we only actually use 46 faders.
Yep, it works exactly as you said!
@@morteensrock thanks!
@@felicianomontoya also each processing channel can accept one main input and one alternate input (aasignable), which if you have two inputs that does not need to be used simultaneously, and require similar processing, that channel can just switch between those two inputs without much hassle!
What about the dp48?
Is there a way to connect the P16 directly to the wing without using stage boxes? Can Behringer make that possible via any of the Ethernet ports at the back of the wing?
Slap a Midas label on it to make it rider friendly and you’ve got a sale! 💰
update to firmware 3.0 you get fx Spill,
Wow! How did you get version 3.0 I don’t see it on their website under the firmware updates
@@Pkay-xx7bf go to the new wing page
Would be great to mix with automation on source channel so us musicians can just feed audio from a daw and do all our mixing and mastering on the console with fx and also do not mind paying for the tc finaliser plug-in on the 2 track recorder to offer Ai mastering and referencing eq match. Live mixers do not need this but us musician producer need it.
This patching workflow is of course deeply flawed. Completely confusing and mixing terminologies and GUI elements across differing features that does not correlate. A channel input should of course NEVER be referred to as an output destination. And patching windows should always be from -> to from left to right. You are unnecessarily confusing users, and yourselves.
Nothing wrong with the functionality, so we will let this one slide 😂