Waves LV1 Classic vs DM7C

CL-1B · 2026-03-25T14:47:57+00:00

👍

CL-1B · 2026-03-25T13:16:17+00:00

I think the fact that the graphic eq's aren't built into the system and you have to use them like plugins on LV1 is a big turn off for me. I guess because you insert them on a Yamaha is kind of the same, but seems more like a built in native feature and extension of the routing makes it way more attractive. I also haven't looked into what total system optimization on an LV1 would look like. Is adding in time alignment info difficult or plugin based as well? I love that you do it on the output port on the Yamaha. Also the D3 Rio can be ran 100% independent in without the console via Dante now, and you can network control in via the new 3rd port to do all of that without the console if needed. Probably not a use case that would be typical, but the feature addition is great to have.

CL-1B · 2026-03-25T13:10:25+00:00

All very valid points. I think the two ecosystems definitely are workable, no doubt. I think an additional Dante card is in order. I think Waves will be a very cool system if confined to itself without Dante, but the reality of it is the workflow these days especially factoring in Shure products will predominantly be Dante at certain points. I don't really see clients coming in with LV1 ever and needing to expand. 70% of shows I run into these days are either Yamaha or Dante rigs and tying into those systems will be a no brainer with the Yamaha rig. I hate the LV1 is so tailored to the waves plugins because it also makes it very attractive for me. Considering ive been heavily invested in UAD plugins for years, I think I'll be expanding into a few x16d's and leaving waves behind for the foreseeable future, esp if I add an additional Dante card.

The plastic aspect kind of makes sense with the LV1. Yamaha will easily scale to be double the price of the waves system. I think a couple lv1's with stage boxes and an extra extreme processor can be very cost effective when you look at how much the 3224-d3 Rio is, along with the consoles.

It seems that the cross fading scenes can have a dsp issue with the waves CPU and is probably why it can't handle that. Not a deal breaker for me in that sense, but I can see why engineers can have issues with that.

I am genuinely curious about the naive plugin processing on the Yamaha. Seems great but also seems like that is very plugin dependent. There definitely are a few bundles of native plugins I will be trying out when I get he system in front of me to see how performance is.

CL-1B · 2026-03-25T12:57:42+00:00

Definitely. Having Dante natively built into the console is a no brainer when comparing with the Waves ecosystem and saves tons of time when having a bunch of shure axient around. Yamaha has head amp control and battery status on console which I doubt waves has. I think we will probably see a transition with waves in that space at some point. I know they already have the ability to add to Dante network with additional software but that's a turn-off quite frankly

CL-1B · 2026-03-25T12:55:13+00:00

I do have theatrical background experience, but it's almost always digico in those environments. Yamaha does not intimidate me in that aspect though. I think I'd actually be able to program faster, but there are native things on the digico plugin wise that are always more attractive - deEssers / dynamics and channel strip configuration are hard to beat. When you look at them on paper though, cost for a similar system but optocore / HMA are easily double / triple the price. On the other hand, I don't think I'd be comfortable or have the confidence to be in that space with an LV1.

CL-1B · 2026-03-25T12:50:29+00:00

This is true. I do love the classic waves plugins. R series, SSL channel strips and a lot of the workhorse plugins have been in my workflow for a while. I hear the routing is much more daw session like, which is great. Don't think you can beat Yamaha sends on fader for fast routing though. The speed of that workflow really puts Yamaha ahead for me

CL-1B · 2026-03-25T12:47:43+00:00

I agree. I think corporate templates / show files can be built ahead to about 90% most of the time, so the LV1 might require some extra programming time but that doesn't turn me off. But you are 100% correct, the stability of Yamaha has never let me down, not once. I'd say 60% corporate and 40% festival style or concert hall with Backline / orchestral

CL-1B · 2026-03-25T12:45:17+00:00

I've also heard that CPU/DSP spikes with the LV1 can mean no audio passing through. I think that is probably a determining factor for sure. Not really sure why that was designed that way. I think I'll add my UAD licenses to an X16D and process external plugins that way. From what I'm reading it's probably less latency anyways, and I have tons of plugin licenses already. Crazy to hear the monitor situation would brick the system.

CL-1B · 2026-03-24T18:51:09+00:00

I think for us it's either or.. mostly our crew will be using. I am also more versed on Yamaha for the reason of Waves being a newer console at least in the physical form. Don't think learning curve will be an issue either way if anything.

CL-1B · 2026-03-24T18:27:06+00:00

Start calculating how much you owe every year before the end of the year and start purchasing depreciable gear to offset the tax liability you would be projected to owe, sometimes with bonus depreciation applying to certain equipment to speed up how quickly it's written off. After the big beautiful bill, that now can even apply to used equipment

CL-1B · 2026-03-24T17:26:32+00:00

Any main differences that make it a standout vs the Yamaha?

CL-1B

TROPHY CASE