Print

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

[Geoff Chown]

Spent a night with an Si Compact 24 last night, and while it sounded excellent, was very intuitive to operate (without a manual!) and provided ample facilities, I discovered several problems including what I consider a real deal-breaker.  The rectangular buttons can rather easily get pinched under the panel when pushed a little sideways.  They really need to be rounded off to avoid that because a lot of them perform different functions when held down.  The most frightening of which are the buttons to enable the EQ mode.  If they are held down, they set the EQ to BYPASS.  Literally a modest mis-touch and your EQ can go flat on FOH or even scarier a monitor mix.  EQ bypass should be put in a touchscreen menu, not assigned to a dedicated panel button!

Some other serious drawbacks:
- no subgroups? *
- there doesn't appear to be any means of saving/recalling individual channels, only full mixes
- the effects masters cannot be assigned to the main mix layer, so you're either changing pages at the end and start of each song, or what I did was assign a mute group to the effects masters, which resulted in reverb stopping and starting sharply
- same goes for bus masters, not assignable to main mix layer
- compressors are pre-EQ, so either you're losing the EQ to the monitors or you're compressing the monitors, both options lend themselves to feedback
- no dimmer function for the LED's, touchscreen, or BNC lamp, plus the whole surface of the upper section has a rough glaze to it that lends itself to glare, so as you light it up to get the printed labels as bright as the LED's, the hazier it gets, and it takes enough light that you stand out like a sore thumb in a dark room

* I assume they thought the post-fader buses would be suitable for subgroup functions, but their masters can't be assigned to the main mix layer faders, nor can you access bus assignments from the channel controls on the main mix layer, and worst of all they cannot be routed internally to the LR or mono mix bus.  The closest thing to a traditional subgroup is the mono mix bus, as there are buttons to enable/disable LR and Mono mix assignments in the upper section.  I used the mono mix to route lead vocals to a separate channel where compression was applied independent of the monitor sends and effects were applied post-comp.  This required physically patching the mono mix output to the mic input of the 'vocal master' channel (campy!), and also presented potential catastrophe if the vocal master was accidentally routed to the mono mix bus (was kinda curious to see what would happen, but didn't end up having time).  By comparison, the LS9 can be configured for post-EQ pre-comp pre-fader sends, making this type of subgrouping unnecessary.

I also think the EQ for the main LR mix is one stereo EQ, meaning you get the same EQ settings for left and right channels.  So if you're in an asymmetrical room and not running a system processor with independent EQ's, you're inserting a redundant outboard EQ.

I'm no Soundcraft hater, I think these problems are more an indication of how hard it is to 'reinvent the wheel'.  I suspect many of them can be fixed with software updates, but those sticky buttons are another animal.  Hopefully it's an easy retrofit, as I imagine they're pumping these out by the shipload at the moment for global distribution.

Soundcraft is very close to an industry-shifting product here.  However, the ultimate destination in the direction digital consoles are taking is to have all audio processing occur on stage in the 'snake box' and be interfaced to one or more touchscreen control terminals via CAT5 and/or wifi.  That will likely happen within the life cycle of an Si Compact, so even as economical as they are I'd still be a little concerned about resale value.  They could feasibly depreciate faster than comparable analog desks as the functionality gets outdone.

[Darren Scaresbrook]

Geoff Chown wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 10:18

*  Soundcraft is very close to an industry-shifting product here.  However, the ultimate destination in the direction digital consoles are taking is to have all audio processing occur on stage in the 'snake box' and be interfaced to one or more touchscreen control terminals via CAT5 and/or wifi.

It's already here. The iLive can do this now.
Darren

[Mac Kerr]

Darren Scaresbrook wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 03:49

Geoff Chown wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 10:18 *  Soundcraft is very close to an industry-shifting product here.  However, the ultimate destination in the direction digital consoles are taking is to have all audio processing occur on stage in the 'snake box' and be interfaced to one or more touchscreen control terminals via CAT5 and/or wifi. It's already here. The iLive can do this now. Darren

The PM1D did it in 1999.

Mac

[Bennett Prescott]

Mac Kerr wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 10:38

Darren Scaresbrook wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 03:49 Geoff Chown wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 10:18 *  Soundcraft is very close to an industry-shifting product here.  However, the ultimate destination in the direction digital consoles are taking is to have all audio processing occur on stage in the 'snake box' and be interfaced to one or more touchscreen control terminals via CAT5 and/or wifi. It's already here. The iLive can do this now. The PM1D did it in 1999.

So do the XL8 and Pro series from Midas

[Darren Scaresbrook]

I wasn't aware of this, that they will work with just the stage racks and a computer/touchscreen. I always thought the PM1d and Midas's needed the control surface connected to work?
Darren

[Vladimir Angelovski]

Bennett Prescott wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 19:09

Mac Kerr wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 10:38 Darren Scaresbrook wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 03:49 Geoff Chown wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 10:18 *  Soundcraft is very close to an industry-shifting product here.  However, the ultimate destination in the direction digital consoles are taking is to have all audio processing occur on stage in the 'snake box' and be interfaced to one or more touchscreen control terminals via CAT5 and/or wifi. It's already here. The iLive can do this now. The PM1D did it in 1999. So do the XL8 and Pro series from Midas

But compare the pricetags on them.

[Mac Kerr]

Vladimir Angelovski wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 21:06

Bennett Prescott wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 19:09 Mac Kerr wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 10:38 Darren Scaresbrook wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 03:49 It's already here. The iLive can do this now. The PM1D did it in 1999. So do the XL8 and Pro series from Midas But compare the pricetags on them.

The point was that the iLive having its DSP in with the stagebox is not groundbreaking. That ground was broken 12 years ago. In fact PM1D went a step farther. Not only does the DSP sit where ever you want it, the I/O doesn't have to be in the same place as the DSP.

Yes, these features are moving down market, but really, it's 12 years later, I hope there has been some advancement.

Mac

[Mac Kerr]

Darren Scaresbrook wrote on Mon, 21 February 2011 20:47

I wasn't aware of this, that they will work with just the stage racks and a computer/touchscreen. I always thought the PM1d and Midas's needed the control surface connected to work? Darren

Not only can the PM1D be run without the CS1D control surface from a laptop, but that laptop can interface with a small surface like a DM1000 or DM2000 to give you a smaller control surface.

Mac

[ProSoundWeb Community]