Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nick Perry]

Two types of people.  One, like myself, wants to turn on a product and use it.  No drama.  The other wants to save and pinch every penny possible, and is willing to constantly "tinker".  A SAC style approach doesn't fit me, but that doesn't mean others won't benefit.

The trick is having scalable/flexible without needing to "tinker".

 I agree totally.

The real value of having central DSP would be having 3 or 4 virtual consoles inside it. With the DSP available today this is possible. Add as much DSP or I/O as you want. Add a second core brain if you want redundancy.

As for a control surface use a physical surface, iPad or touchscreen. This opens up lots of possibilities for personal monitor mixing also. Some musicans can get 6 to 8 stems while others get 20-30 if required. This really would change the way we do things and simplify setup.

As Mac said also, I/O can be onstage as required instead of running 100 foot multicores around the stage etc...less to setup, short cables and overall happiness. We are starting to see this today to some effect, but overall pricing and simple connectivity needs to be worked on to make this standard

[Frank DeWitt]

Two types of people.  One, like myself, wants to turn on a product and use it.  No drama.  The other wants to save and pinch every penny possible, and is willing to constantly "tinker".  A SAC style approach doesn't fit me, but that doesn't mean others won't benefit.

The trick is having scalable/flexible without needing to "tinker".

There are probably those who constantly tinker with SAC and it has enough features and "ways in" that they can.  They are like the person who constantly tinkers with a home theater system and rarely watches a full movie on it. I am a third type of person. I turn on SAC and use it.  No drama.  There was drama at the beginning as I built it and learned it. If it had continued I would be using a different mixer now.

[Per Sovik]

iLive to me is very close in concept already, the theme just needs some slight expansion. A system that allows a fairly unlimited number of rack-modules to be connected together and interfaced via a high speed bus interface, and be controlled by any number of surfaces, virtual or other, similar to what A&H is already offering. Adding a large touch-screen virtual surface will be no risk at all, the ones that don't want it can still have the option of real faders.

[Peter Morris]

iLive to me is very close in concept already, the theme just needs some slight expansion. A system that allows a fairly unlimited number of rack-modules to be connected together and interfaced via a high speed bus interface, and be controlled by any number of surfaces, virtual or other, similar to what A&H is already offering. Adding a large touch-screen virtual surface will be no risk at all, the ones that don't want it can still have the option of real faders.

+1 … exactly what I was thinking.

I have 144 and 80 surfaces, but I have used a 25 inch touch screen computer as the control surface. Worked quite well, and I suspect it will be even better on Windows 8, but I think I will always prefer a dedicated surface.

[Jim McKeveny]

One thing for sure: We will drop the "digital" ahead of "console" as it becomes an unnecessary vestige....

[Bob Cap]

I have been in this business full time since 1971.

I remember when monitor consoles were very uncommon.

The fun part is watching the tech changes over the years.

I have an 8 year old grandson. Very into computers, games etc.

He just about has the presonus 16 we have in control... Then we move him up to the 24 and then up to the LS9's.

I know he'll take over some day.

I think as we see the "younger" generation comming into our business we will see more "kids" with much better computer skills than we have. For them to get around on a mixer that is only a touch screen is a piece of cake.

He already can do almost anything on the IPad. He loves watching the faders on the LS9 move when he moves them on the IPad.

I really think faders will go the way of many other pieces of gear we now consider essential.

Move over dinosaures...man is on the way:) Or is he already here?

Bob Cap
AAI
Gilbert, MN

[Chris Eddison]

We're seeing more and more distributed intelligence in systems, particularly those that are safety and business critical. "Cloud computing" seems to be becoming more and more accepted. Why not extend that to a closed live sound network? Stageboxes connected by ethernet or maybe even wifi, each doing their own bit of processing.
I think the big thing we'll start to see though is the integration of currently seperate systems. We're seeing amp and system control via ethernet. Could this start to be integrated into the Dante (or whatever) network and maybe run on the console? Soundcraft already allow monitoring of certain radio mics from the channel strip of their digital consoles. Imagine setting your amp gains, setting your radio mic frequencies, carrying out system allignment and Smaart-style analysis, then playing back your show content from the console itself.

In terms of the surface itself, i've watched with interest as the lighting folk have started heading towards PC wings. I think the crux of all the arguments above is that people want different things - some want touch screens, some want a fader per channel, some just want their DCA's and a few channel faders. Why not then build a completely modular system that allows you to buy just what you want? You could have the surface processor - need only be a small pc as the DSP is done elsewhere or in the cloud. May as well have a touch screen as it's probably the easiest way of configuring and setting the thing up, but it could also have mouse and keyboard connections. Then you add your fader wings via USB. They need be no bigger than a computer keyboard - just look at the Korg nanopad units available. You can arrange them in banks of faders if you like your M7CL's, or just have one and lots of layers if you're a Midas fan. If you get really fancy you could arrange them in a curve around you. Maybe protocals like OSC could be used, then third party interfaces could be built for specific industries, with a common language behind them.
The point is, there's actually no need to decide which way to do things on behalf of all the console's users - they can all pick and lay their desk out exactly how they want.

[Greg_Cameron]

What I'd really like to see is virtual outboard gear in the form of lightweight rack mountable touch screens with rotary encoders. One of the biggest shortcomings of the move to digital consoles which get more and more compact every year is that it's impossible to see everything that's going on at once with not just all your channels on the surface, but all of your processing like gates, comps, and FX. In that sense, it's been a huge step backward in my opinion. I do like working on my Venue, but you can't quickly manipulate multiple effect plugins on the fly without digging through screens. It's bullshit. Sure, if I was a touring ME with the same act every night, I could do up a scene for every tune and have all my effects, compressors, etc, all preprogrammed and dialed up. But that's impossible for the rest of us. I want the same ease of use where I had a rack with my verbs and delays where I can just reach for a knob and dial up an effect or quickly switch a parameter on a gate or compressor.

IMO, it will be a big coup for the first manufacture who comes up with relatively inexpensive virtual outboard that can be configured to have whatever "rack gear" you want. You should be able to hook up as many of these units as you want with simple cable like ethernet which can be daisy chained. They should come in varying sizes of 1,2 or 3RU. Maybe even really large units that can have muitiple virtual processors on one screen so long as the rotary encoders can be laid out logically. They should be able to be assignable as any channel or group processing you wish to have full time access too. And of course, they should also be able to change what piece of processing they are via scene recall too. Maybe I'm crazy, but this seems like functionality that should have been implemented long ago and I find it shocking that it hasn't. The lack of this type of functionality is a major step backward.

For my workflow right now, I'd like to have all my group processing show up full time in these racks along with my verbs and delays. I can live without my channel inserts in the virtual racks, but even some of those would be nice to have full time access to as well.

[John Roberts {JR}]

What I'd really like to see is virtual outboard gear in the form of lightweight rack mountable touch screens with rotary encoders. One of the biggest shortcomings of the move to digital consoles which get more and more compact every year is that it's impossible to see everything that's going on at once with not just all your channels on the surface, but all of your processing like gates, comps, and FX. In that sense, it's been a huge step backward in my opinion. I do like working on my Venue, but you can't quickly manipulate multiple effect plugins on the fly without digging through screens. It's bullshit. Sure, if I was a touring ME with the same act every night, I could do up a scene for every tune and have all my effects, compressors, etc, all preprogrammed and dialed up. But that's impossible for the rest of us. I want the same ease of use where I had a rack with my verbs and delays where I can just reach for a knob and dial up an effect or quickly switch a parameter on a gate or compressor.

IMO, it will be a big coup for the first manufacture who comes up with relatively inexpensive virtual outboard that can be configured to have whatever "rack gear" you want. You should be able to hook up as many of these units as you want with simple cable like ethernet which can be daisy chained. They should come in varying sizes of 1,2 or 3RU. Maybe even really large units that can have muitiple virtual processors on one screen so long as the rotary encoders can be laid out logically. They should be able to be assignable as any channel or group processing you wish to have full time access too. And of course, they should also be able to change what piece of processing they are via scene recall too. Maybe I'm crazy, but this seems like functionality that should have been implemented long ago and I find it shocking that it hasn't. The lack of this type of functionality is a major step backward.

For my workflow right now, I'd like to have all my group processing show up full time in these racks along with my verbs and delays. I can live without my channel inserts in the virtual racks, but even some of those would be nice to have full time access to as well.

Interesting.. you want to break out more real-time control, while my crystal ball predicts a future with less hands-on tweaking. 

The technology to accomplish what you ask for is no big deal, but finding a large enough market to justify making one is another story.

JR

[Greg_Cameron]

Interesting.. you want to break out more real-time control, while my crystal ball predicts a future with less hands-on tweaking. 

The technology to accomplish what you ask for is no big deal, but finding a large enough market to justify making one is another story.

Well JR, until they invent the brain implant to control the console, we still have to use our fingers and eyes This is where I think digital has missed the boat. Aside from the usual complaints of having to navigate layers on the surface and learning the workflow for different brands, lack of easy instant control of the outboard is the number 1 complaint I hear from every visiting BE that comes to use our Venue desk. Yet it's rarely talked about on forums. Good friend and mentor Dave Rat wrote an article about it last year and it's the major reason why he still won't switch to digital desks now that the sonic issues seem to be worked out. I think there is a market for it and it should be an option with the more pricey desks.

[ProSoundWeb Community]