GLD/AR vs iliveT112/IDR48

[andylouderParticipant]

This has probably come up before , but I have missed it and trawling through the marketing info cant seem to find it.

As a long time user of iLive T112 and IDR48 what are the main differences with the GLD112 AR24/AR8.

Firmware and controls look very similar.

Why is the GLD half the price.

[andylouderParticipant]

Ok , I just read on another thread that on the GLD all the processing is on the surface and the AR and cat 5 is just a digital multi core , rather than on the ilive the rack does all the work and the surface is the controller.

[andylouderParticipant]

So the question now is , how does the processing on the GLD surface differ from the processing on the IDR rack ?

[cornelius78Participant]

A list off the top of my head: I’m sure there’s more.

More IO (64/32 vs 48/20)
Wider variety of FX
Can mix and match surface(s) and (modular) mixrack(s) to suit budget and application
Extra dynamics processor on each channel and each bus
IIRC more sidechaining options for dynamics
More remote control options (eg PL-Anet, control mixrack via PC with no surface on the network)
More dedicated controls on surface (except r72\t80)
Redundant PSU (some surfaces)
I have a feeling there’s some extra digital IO as standard on some surfaces too, but not sure

Whether these things are worth the extra $ for your application is an entirely different matter. Be aware that there are some things the GLD does that the ilive doesn’t, eg the USB 2-track playback.

HTH

[eotsskleetParticipant]

Especially on the T112 there are more dedicated knobs and buttons on the surface! Like the sidechain filters for gate and compressor, as well there is a de-esser/limiter on every inputchannel!
Means the GLD is a fix format console. However the software is simple to use, touchscreen is faster and the quality is really good of the GLD! Actually i would prefer the GLD if you don’t need a higher channel count and if you are ok with no further dedicated buttons/knobs!

[StixParticipant]

ilive can be expanded up to 128 channels in dual rack mode, has 32 busses, can be controlled without a surface connected, uses ACE connection which can tunnel midi and other network data to/from mixrack to surface and can connect to any iLive surface either modular or fixed format. This flexibility and expandability are its key advantages over GLD which is limited to 48ch max.

[pblosser03Participant]

I use both an ilive and a GLD and the GLD interface is a lot more user friendly and refined, which is cool, but like everyone mentioned above, less power under the hood. It’s a great desk for the price and if it fits your channel count go for it. It still takes all the same digital interface cards that ilive handles as well.

One major difference I found on the GLD is the lack of stereo inputs. The GLD has two stereo inputs 45/46 and 47/48 I think. You can gang inputs together, but not create a stereo channel under one fader. On the ilive you can configure a lot more stereo channels (not sure how many). So if you have to mix a lot of stereo keyboards or cd/dvd sources it can be a pain. It could still be added in a future firmware update.

[eotsskleetParticipant]

Stereo inputs are really rare on the GLD, altough you can use a stereo group with socket inputs for stereo.. But it eats up a mix-bus which are limited!

[Mark OakleyParticipant]

On the ilive you can configure a lot more stereo channels (not sure how many).

In fact; all 64 for 32 stereo channels.

-Mark

[andylouderParticipant]

thanks for all the replies , got my head round it now.

[Author]

Posts