Behringer PMX2000 & PMH880S, 500 vs 800 watts

I am hoping to try these two PA heads real soon.

I can get the new PMH880S for about $70 more than the PMX2000.

Is having 800 watts over 500 watts worth it?

Anything else to consider?
http://www.behringer.com/PMH2000/index.cfm?lang=ENG

http://www.behringer.com/PMH880S/index.cfm?lang=ENG

Scott Langholff

Scott,
looking quickly at the two pics I noticed the newer 800 watt version has two extra knobs per channel. I can not tell what they are for but the old saying more is better would seem to apply when it comes to control at least.
For the difference (if you can cover it ok) I would definitely choose the 800 watt version.

------------------
The old Newb

I bought the PMX2000 for my church and it works great, I hve not seen or heard the PMH880S.



------------------
ViLo
HE'S COMING, MAKE MUSIC, GET READY!

Scott,

I've been using the PMX2000 for a year now.

I absolutely love it!!!

The main difference I can see from these two is that 8805 only has 2 stereo inputs as opposed to 3 on the pmx2000.

The 3 inputs for me was the deciding factor in purchase As I can use 2 keyboards and 1 rack module without any use of mixers or inserts.

The power and features along with the price is a can't lose on the 2000. I purchased my pmx2000 from 269 as a re-stock from Music123. These were cheaper new 299 when they were first released last year, but now I see they have been bumped up to 349.

Al

Hi ViLo & kbrkr

I take it that the 2000 has more volume than you need for your purposes.

I like the idea of only 20 lbs and the smaller dimensions for the 880S, but I also like the idea of having the 2000 sitting on its left side to my left of the keyboard.

I figure I could easily tweak the eq on the fly if I plugged into the last stereo channel on the right, where it doesn't look like I could manage that with the 880S.

Maybe tweaking on the fly is not that big of a deal, considering I have the built in mixer in my Tyros.

Scott

Scott,

I would absolutely go with the 880.

Although it has fewer channels (8 instead of 10), it is stereo, as opposed to 2000 which is mono. It also has two effect busses, over 1 on 2000 - those are the two extra knobs (channel pan and FX2).

I think that we have discussed extensively enough the value of having stereo amplification capability when playing arranger keyboards. To me this is a definite plus.

As far as power goes, I understand that it is always a good idea to have your power amp capable of supplying more power than the speakers can handle (otherwise you overdrive the amp's power output, and the harmonics can damage your speaker), although you have to be careful not to turn the master volume output too high. So if in addition to being stereo and having more flexible effect section I get more power for only $70 more, I will gladly take it.

On the other hand, what I would have really liked is having a third built-in amp, which I could use for monitoring myself. Unfortunately, only a much more expensive Mackie 808S has that feature.

Regards,
Alex

Alex,

You are wrong; the 2000 is STEREO.

Scott-

I've been using the PMX2000 for about 6 months now and am very, very happy with it. I'm running it into 2 EV I's with outstanding results.

Regardless if I'm working as a one man band or with my quartet, the PMX2000 gives me more power than I need...usually never setting the channel volumnes past 4 and the main past 3.5 ...In other words...that unit has lots more power than I can use...

The stereo channels are awesome as I routinely run my keys and vocals each in stereo.

Effects, IMO, are average to slightly above...

You can either run one main mix OR an independant main and monitor mix...The flexibility is nice...

I think you'd be pleased with this unit...

Bill in Dayton

These are some very good reports I'm hearing.

What if I decided to run one or two subwoofers along with the PR12's? Can this be done and how would one hook that up?

Scott

Perhaps, but how do you pan the mono channels? It is extremely important to be able to do that for your individual inputs, unless you are physically bunching up all the people using the microphones in the center of the stage.

From the pictures the 880 appears to have PAN pots, while the 2000 does not.

my older stereo powered mixer also has np pan control. What is expected is that one input the main volume is used and the other input of a stereo signal the monitor send is used thus wala, stereo. Not the best scenerio but it does work ok. You just can not control things such as hard right or hard left or soft right and left. Ya know?

Pan controls are much more functional but the main/monitor will work as stereo.

------------------
The old Newb

If you PAN your inputs, then you are trying to control the natural panning and stereo separation of the samples coming from the keyboard. If you PAN a Rhodes Piano sample, the impending bouncing of the sound from right to left and vica-versa will become un-natural. If you listen to some drum samples, the high hat will pan left, the toms will go from left to right like an acoustic kit. You'll go crazy trying to adjust stereo panning deflection to the crowd.

I use natural panning by positioning my speakers in the most appropriate location. I point the left speaker to the right, and the right speaker to the left. I always position myself in the middle of the two.

Also, with the PMX, each channel left and right has it's own dedicated Equalizer so you could tweak the sound that way if you so wish.

For the money, the PMX is an outstanding purchase for keyboard players.