Yamaha DM3-D 22-channel digital small format mixer with Dante

[LoganSound]

Does anyone else think this would be a killer cart mixer?

22 mixable channels at 96kHz (16 pre-amps, 8 outs)

18 x 18 USB interface

16 x 16 Dante interface

2 x 2 recording directly to a USB drive

A DAW remote mode with transport control and custom control via OSC, USB-MIDI

https://www.sweetwater.com/insync/yamaha-dm3s-22-channel-digital-mixer-overview/

[Philip Perkins]

If you test drive one please report back.  The form factor is very sexy.

[Dalton Patterson]

No, I don’t think a $1k hybrid digital mixer is a cart killer. Idk, I’d just get a QL1 and call it a day, QL1 is a cart killer. I think Yamaha is jealous of the x32 and wants some of that lower budget market.

After mixing on dozens of these types of things, AH, Behringer, Midas, QSC, mackie, they all have flaws. They also each have their own names for the exact same thing which is annoying.     

[Philip Perkins]

1 hour ago, Dalton Patterson said:

No, I don’t think a $1k hybrid digital mixer is a cart killer. Idk, I’d just get a QL1 and call it a day, QL1 is a cart killer. I think Yamaha is jealous of the x32 and wants some of that lower budget market.

After mixing on dozens of these types of things, AH, Behringer, Midas, QSC, mackie, they all have flaws. They also each have their own names for the exact same thing which is annoying.     

Same as DAWs--there is always the "vocabulary problem" on moving from one platform to another.  LMK if you find one for $1k.

 

[Patrick Farrell]

It is DC powered (although 24V) which is a step in the right direction. If it had some dedicated knobs for gain it just might find its home on a cart. Although these days I think most people want more than 8 faders.

[Jim Feeley]

The Dante version is US$2,000 (a bit less without Dante). There's a touchscreen and touch-and-turn knob that *might* make quick gain adjustments fairly quick, and there's a button to switch input/fader banks from 1-8, to 9-16. No idea how quickly all that could be handled in the field, but it's interesting to me. 

 

And now that A&H, SSL, and SD (and others) are under the same corporate roof, maybe we'll see something from one of them that's even more interesting. 

 

But along Dalton's lines, the "all things to all people" positioning is kinda limiting...

[OB1]

Single-button bank/input switching on these DAWs is very quick with no latency. It wouldn't take long at all once the user masters the workflow. 99% of the time everything is dialed in for the specific use case so it's a matter of troubleshooting any unplanned problems. Just like we all know how to get through our own mixer menus, this is no different - just a different layout and form factor.

[The Documentary Sound Guy]

I'm struggling to see what Jim is seeing here.  Without internal recording for isos, you'd have to flow dante to external recorder(s), so I don't see that it saves much money.  Which really just makes it a large, heavy control surface, with the accoutrements of a digtial effects rack.  Is it the effects and "live" workflow that makes this attractive?

[codyman]

I wonder why no one has thought to incorporate timecode into one of these mixers?  I know a lot of them can record multitrack to USB but no one ever thinks about adding timecode.  Would be great if this could record + timecode + metadata for track names etc as then it could be a perfect small cart companion to Dante wireless receivers.

[Philip Perkins]

Not only no TC but most all of them have internal clocks much inferior to what we're used to, so they need to get WC from an external source, preferably one that is also making the TC for the whole system (and camera boxes).  Most low budg digital mixers (incl. this one) do not have external WC inputs, which makes them kind of useless for movie sound no matter how great the rest of it is. 

[Patrick Farrell]

15 hours ago, Philip Perkins said:

Not only no TC but most all of them have internal clocks much inferior to what we're used to, so they need to get WC from an external source, preferably one that is also making the TC for the whole system (and camera boxes).  Most low budg digital mixers (incl. this one) do not have external WC inputs, which makes them kind of useless for movie sound no matter how great the rest of it is. 

In our business, you'd most likely be feeding your recorder over dante. Set your recorder as the master clock on the dante network and clock the board from that. Works great for this type of scenario.

[Wandering Ear]

One thing about motorized faders, and especially in these range of mixers, is they make noise when switching banks.  On a lot of sets that wouldn't matter, but if you are setup in the same room on a quiet stage it could easily be picked up on mic.

I do love the look and size of this unit, and DC powered on a 4 Pin XLR is killer. 

Still having to pair this with something like a Scorpio or Deva, I don't see much advantage over a CL-16 / Mix16.

[codyman]

4 minutes ago, Wandering Ear said:

Still having to pair this with something like a Scorpio or Deva, I don't see much advantage over a CL-16 / Mix16.

It's a shame Sound Devices ditched the 970 as this would pair nicely on a cart.

[Jim Feeley]

18 minutes ago, Wandering Ear said:

I don't see much advantage over a CL-16 / Mix16.

 

It's about $3500US to $4,000US cheaper. So there's that. But how much nice integration do you give up? No idea.

 

[I will now randomly think & type out loud]

 

For me, something like the DM3 would be first for live streaming and FOH, then maybe as a front & controller to a DAW, then maybe for production sound (I don't really do big cart work...beyond sticking my back on a cart and twisting pots).

 

But how much of a pain the theDM3  touchscreen? On some other cheap digital mixers (eg.- A&H Qu and SQ, Behringer X which I use but don't own), I press a button to select a channel, and then (usually) turn a pot...and don't always need to go to a touch screen). On the DM3 it looks like I'll maybe have to press a button to select a bank, then use the touchscreen to select the channel and function, then turn that one lone physical pot... How quickly/smoothly/etc while in a hurry will that all be? Probably not bad, but I'd want to spend some time with it. 

 

Weight seems OK; At 14ish lbs / 6.5kg that's a few pounds / couple of kilos heavier than the MIX-16 and CL-16. But a lot less than the 16+ mixers I come across (though a lot more than control surfaces than a CL-9, Aria-8, iCon thing, etc).

 

The DM3 is narrower than the MIX-16, CL-16, and most mixers. Duh; there are only nine faders, not 16+. But how do those faders feel? That's what pushed me away from some cheaper controllers such as the iCon M+ (ya, plenty of people are using those without complaining too much)... And how are the pre-amps (remember my multi-use dreams)? Did they use the money they saved in faders to make the preamps decent? 

 

And then there's all the limitations people have already mentioned. So me, I'll try to get my hands on one and see what I think. But then probably just use those thoughts to inform what I want to see come out next. As I've already said, Audiotonix seems really well positioned to come out with something dandy.

[Philip Perkins]

5 hours ago, Patrick Farrell said:

In our business, you'd most likely be feeding your recorder over dante. Set your recorder as the master clock on the dante network and clock the board from that. Works great for this type of scenario.

That doesn't describe how I or many others work--I need whatever the ADC is to be clockable directly, not via Dante etc. 

[tourtelot]

On 7/11/2023 at 3:43 PM, The Documentary Sound Guy said:

I'm struggling to see what Jim is seeing here.  Without internal recording for isos, you'd have to flow dante to external recorder(s), so I don't see that it saves much money.  Which really just makes it a large, heavy control surface, with the accoutrements of a digtial effects rack.  Is it the effects and "live" workflow that makes this attractive?

This!

 

D,

[ramallo]

I bought one with Dante, it's very small, IMMO is a great companion for Boom Recorder, it has six aux sends plus two matrices, a low latency USB, it can be synced externally with Dante, anyway is a good sounding mixer. The operating system is like a Central Logic, in a few minutes, if you know how to operate a CL and QL, you own this mixer. 
It has an external power supply (24V/48W XLR4 input), ideal for battery operation (But is a bit power hungry). 

 

This new DM3 and DM7 line will probably be the replacements for all the low and medium series (TF, QL and CL). 

 

In my opinion Yamaha has hit the nail on the head 

[Philip Perkins]

CLs and QLs are much more expensive than DMs, even used.   I don't think it will replace them, but will for sure replace TFs, at least among FOH folks.

I'd be interested to know what is clocking the Dante feed for this mixer when it is using Dante for inputs.  Is it something that is generating TC?  How are you feeding the computer running BR?  Dante?  USB?

[ramallo]

11 hours ago, Philip Perkins said:

CLs and QLs are much more expensive than DMs, even used.   I don't think it will replace them, but will for sure replace TFs, at least among FOH folks.

I'd be interested to know what is clocking the Dante feed for this mixer when it is using Dante for inputs.  Is it something that is generating TC?  How are you feeding the computer running BR?  Dante?  USB?

IMMO the DM7 is the replacement for CL and QL, the DM3 for TF, for high end the Rivage series. The CL/QL are more expensive and older (This tiny desk will go to 96kHz and have better touch screen than CL or QL), like the PM1D was more expensive than a new PM10. 

 

You can feed the computer or by USB or Dante. Dante in this mixer could be "Preferred leader" or not, the mixer chase the Dante election (Like CL or QL) if you synchronized by Dante. Is only 48kHz and 96kHz of fs.

 

There is no TC generator, the mixer can only read the DAW TC, but in IMMO, who cares in a mixer? (My Audio Developments mixer does not have TC), I suppose the TC must be in the recorder, the Boom Recorder for example can receive TC on any channel, I suppose you could send that TC by midi or OSC to see it on the mixer display (Such as the DAW controller mode).

 

The SD Pix970 would be a nice addition to this desk

 

My complain of this desk is the lack of insertion points (Channel or Bus) or the lack of Dugan automix 

 

Best

 

 

 

 

[Philip Perkins]

So in this system what is the word clock master?  What drives the TC generator (making TC for BR)?

[Philip Perkins]

A brief call to Yamaha support answered a few questions mentioned above.  They do not view the DM series as replacements to the CL+QL or even the TF mixers and are still making all those.  The DM3 is a different beast than a DM7, not just in # of inputs--they viewed the TFs as the next step up (in inputs etc) from the DM3.   I asked for clarification on the number of channels to mix on the DM3, and they said that while you can mix and match input sources, 16+2 channels to mix is all you get, period.

[ramallo]

On 10/19/2023 at 7:44 PM, Philip Perkins said:

A brief call to Yamaha support answered a few questions mentioned above.  They do not view the DM series as replacements to the CL+QL or even the TF mixers and are still making all those.  The DM3 is a different beast than a DM7, not just in # of inputs--they viewed the TFs as the next step up (in inputs etc) from the DM3.   I asked for clarification on the number of channels to mix on the DM3, and they said that while you can mix and match input sources, 16+2 channels to mix is all you get, period.

Hi Philip,

 

This is not my information here 

 

The DM3 are more limited than his big brother the DM7, for example, the DM3 haven't insertion points, and much more limited mixer and inputs. I don't think that the TF is a upgrade, IMMO is a downgrade (horrid OS)

 

Best

Suso

[Philip Perkins]

My FOH friends agree, in that they all hate the TF mixers, and find the DM3 stage interesting.  I looked long and hard at it and decided it was not enough of what I need (inputs, faders, recording, timecode) and a lot of what I don't need (most of the FX etc).  That it has Dante from the get go is very cool.  But it is not any sort of DM7, which is reflected in the price.  Maybe a future firmware upgrade will allow the DM3 to accept more inputs to mix (via Dante), that would be great.

[ramallo]

On 10/27/2023 at 10:25 PM, Philip Perkins said:

My FOH friends agree, in that they all hate the TF mixers, and find the DM3 stage interesting.  I looked long and hard at it and decided it was not enough of what I need (inputs, faders, recording, timecode) and a lot of what I don't need (most of the FX etc).  That it has Dante from the get go is very cool.  But it is not any sort of DM7, which is reflected in the price.  Maybe a future firmware upgrade will allow the DM3 to accept more inputs to mix (via Dante), that would be great.

 

Just to feed my curiosity, why do you want TC on the mixer?

 

Best

Suso

[IronFilm]

3 hours ago, ramallo said:

Just to feed my curiosity, why do you want TC on the mixer?

 

Am not Philip, but my guess and my reasons why are: a lot of these mixing boards also allow basic recording functionality as well (might not be all the full tracks, might be just the stereo mix) and it would be nice to have these with TC as an emergency backup recording to your main recorder (say with BoomRecorder).