I have a vision of the future.... modularity!
If a universal protocol could be developed, then the 3 main components of a digital console (surface, engine and AD/DA) could be separated. Some of you have already written about controlling your digital consoles via laptop over ethernet, and of course we already have ADAT lightpipes and larger digital multicores, so we're not that far off. The DJ world is already there to a certain extent, with control surfaces ('decks') available for PC software like TraktorDJ.
Engineer X is happy to set up a mix and pretty much leave it with the odd mute/unmute/FX tweak here and there, so he turns up with nothing but a USB memory stick, quite happy to use the cheap USB mouse & 7" SVGA interface provided by the sound company. He adjusts the house EQ, assigns the correct channel numbers and all he has to do is hit the mouse button between songs (the band have no idea that he spends most of the gig on the phone to his accountant).
Engineer Y wants a heavily customised control layout with instant access to DCA groups, the 31 band FOH EQ and a spectrum analyzer, and also wants to mix whilst wandering the room, so she bring a
Logged
« Reply #75 on: June 12, 2008, 10:59:31 AM »
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 10:40 |
PS: In my slightly more distant future, the processing will be distributed with some built into the wireless mics or instrument pickups, and the rest placed inside the powered speaker boxes. Communication between all the parts will be over a high bandwidth wireless network. Control surfaces (as long as still used or needed?) will talk over this same wireless network.
|
Hmmm, I wonder. With lower frequency, propagation friendly and relatively limited channel bandwidth RF spectrum being reallocated for many co-located services, and higher frequency (>3GHz), very wide channel bandwidth spectrum, which I believe is what would be necessary to handle JR's communications needs, suffering from limited propagation characteristics, there's going to have to be a trade off between latency and the amount of data transfer (bandwidth).
Logged
Henry Cohen
Production Radio Rentals
----------------------------------
"Every new radio emitter since Marconi’s 2nd transmitter has caused interference to other systems!" - Michael Marcus, Oct '07
« Reply #76 on: June 12, 2008, 11:18:18 AM »
| Henry Cohen wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 09:59 |
Hmmm, I wonder. With lower frequency, propagation friendly and relatively limited channel bandwidth RF spectrum being reallocated for many co-located services, and higher frequency (>3GHz), very wide channel bandwidth spectrum, which I believe is what would be necessary to handle JR's communications needs, suffering from limited propagation characteristics, there's going to have to be a trade off between latency and the amount of data transfer (bandwidth).
|
Current wireless radio would choke if there are too many unique sources and destinations. Control information would require reasonable bandwidth. I suspect bandwidth is a little like energy... we may not have as much as we want right now, but a lot of folks are working on it, because so many more want it. I wouldn't underestimate the ability of a free market to deliver if there is enough demand and people willing to pay. I see wireless bandwidth driven by the consumer market. JR Note: doesn't have to be RF but that seems to be current direction.
Logged
« Reply #77 on: June 12, 2008, 12:37:51 PM »
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 15:40 |
Control input and indicator feedback is reasonably low bandwidth. Engine to I/O A/D/A will require gobs of bandwidth.
Logically the I/O and engine should be collocated to simplify this communication. The processing engine will be modest in size compared to other parts so it likely will be rolled into the mic preamps and converter box.
|
Yes, the engine and AD/DA will always be wired if not collocated, at least in our lifetimes. In fact what you're describing is pretty much like the A&H iLive system that I got to use when Joe Bonamassa last came here - collocated stagebox and engine, the 'multicore' being a couple of XLR cables running to the desk. (I only got four channels to play with for the support - gtr, vox, rvb, dly - but the BE who brought it in was friendly and helpful and I was reasonably comfortable with the desk by the time doors opened. Nice logical layout, most of the control surface is a giant channel strip running from left to right, more impressive than most I've used. Still wouldn't ever be entirely happy to be thrown on one of them cold without a S/C!)
Logged
« Reply #78 on: June 12, 2008, 04:45:08 PM »
| David A. Parker wrote on Thu, 12 June 2008 03:39 |
for the knobs to have recall, they would all have to have motors, and that would get ridiculously expensive.
|
Rotary encoders don't need motors, as they're typically continous (no end point, they keep spinnin'). That's what the whole "V-pot" thing is all about, with the ring of LEDs around the knob to give you an indication of where it's actually "pointing." -a
Logged
"This isn't some upside down inverted Socratic method where you throw out your best guess answers and I correct your work." -- JR
"On the Internet, nobody can hear you mix a band."
« Reply #79 on: June 12, 2008, 04:54:09 PM »
Regarding the control surface:
While it'd need some fairly hefty logic to handle scanning 2,000 knobs, switches and faders, it seems to me that the communication channel between the surface and the "brain" can be fairly low tech.
The MIDI model makes a lot of sense here. First, you only send control changes, and only when those control changes occur. Again we assume human operators (two hands, two feet, ten fingers) and even if there are four people behind the surface mixing, that's not a lot of bandwidth required for control changes.
Then you need a handful of digitized audio channels for talkback, cuing, whatnot.
The control changes and the audio can be muxed onto the same fibre.
The only thing really missing is the will of the various vendors to do what MIDI did for the synth people.
-a
Logged
"This isn't some upside down inverted Socratic method where you throw out your best guess answers and I correct your work." -- JR
"On the Internet, nobody can hear you mix a band."
|
