Print

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

[David Junius]

Ok, so I’m a weekend warrior. I work with a few bands that hire me and I have one local agent that will occasionally need production and call me. Haven’t been working a ton lately, but I’ve been busy with my day job, so there’s that. Been watching a bunch of YouTube videos from touring folks walkthrough their gear and console layouts and whatnot and while that’s great, it’s not a level I’ll be at because I don’t want to leave my day job to go tour. I really don’t mix clubs and bars, just local cover bands for weddings and corporate events mostly.

I know there’s a completely different budget with touring shows, but at what point do you go from inputs mixed straight to mono or stereo, to discussing what plugins you’re using and calculating latency through the console because the artist wants their show to sound like their record?

I’m currently mixing on a Soundcraft expression, and feel I’m hitting the limitations of that board, not in channel count, but in features. Since I run monitors from FOH, I can only subgroup so many things and then it doesn’t have DCA’s, so it’s basically inputs mixed to L/R. The EQ section is a little limiting as well compared to say an X32, which I mix on for HOW stuff on Sunday’s. I also occasionally mix a more regional cover band with an M32, but their console is set up basically inputs to L/R as well however they do use the DCA’s.

So at what point do sound techs make the switch from inputs straight to L/R to what I’m calling all the fancy bells and whistles of stereo subgroups using parallel compression and dynamic EQ’s and comparing plugin chains similar to a recording studio?

David

[Helge A Bentsen]

Ok, so I’m a weekend warrior. I work with a few bands that hire me and I have one local agent that will occasionally need production and call me. Haven’t been working a ton lately, but I’ve been busy with my day job, so there’s that. Been watching a bunch of YouTube videos from touring folks walkthrough their gear and console layouts and whatnot and while that’s great, it’s not a level I’ll be at because I don’t want to leave my day job to go tour. I really don’t mix clubs and bars, just local cover bands for weddings and corporate events mostly.

I know there’s a completely different budget with touring shows, but at what point do you go from inputs mixed straight to mono or stereo, to discussing what plugins you’re using and calculating latency through the console because the artist wants their show to sound like their record?

I’m currently mixing on a Soundcraft expression, and feel I’m hitting the limitations of that board, not in channel count, but in features. Since I run monitors from FOH, I can only subgroup so many things and then it doesn’t have DCA’s, so it’s basically inputs mixed to L/R. The EQ section is a little limiting as well compared to say an X32, which I mix on for HOW stuff on Sunday’s. I also occasionally mix a more regional cover band with an M32, but their console is set up basically inputs to L/R as well however they do use the DCA’s.

So at what point do sound techs make the switch from inputs straight to L/R to what I’m calling all the fancy bells and whistles of stereo subgroups using parallel compression and dynamic EQ’s and comparing plugin chains similar to a recording studio?

David

It's not about when, it's about personal preference, musical style, skills, actual need and "hey, this console has a ton of features, let's use them all".
I haven met people who use ALL the features all the time and people who mix straight to L/R with the occasional VCA. There is no direct correlation between let's say ticket sales and the number of console features used.

[Gordon Brinton]

I believe that, just like with studio and audiophile gear, the law of diminishing returns tends to creep in. Some of those features are just conveniences or luxuries and shouldn't be considered until your budget can support it. If you can make the show sound great with what you have, then you are earning your pay.

Frankly, I have noticed greater improvement by upgrading my speakers rather than the desk. Things like pattern control, transient response, and coherent clarity are often ignored by small operators, but can make a noticeable difference in smaller venues. But I have digressed. That's not what you asked about.

Check out the Allen & Heath, SQ product line. It just might be a middle-of-the-road upgrade for the more serious weekend warrior.

[Scott Bolt]

As you already know, the X/M32 platform is much more flexible than the Expression (I personally wouldn't buy any board that didn't have DCA's). 

As others have said, it is more about how you work best and the workflow that works best in your situation.

I will say that I originally thought I would not use many of the features in the X32 and then as I worked with it over the years and encountered more and more non-standard situations (like a bar with a side room that needed a separate mix output as an example), I was super happy that I had the flexibility to make the situation work.

While I have never personally used group compression, I like the idea of being able to try it if I want to see if I like it.  With the scene control features in the X32, I can easily switch back and fourth between 2 different setups to audition it and see for myself.

If you are looking for a step up from the X/M32, then I agree, the SQ is the next level which seems to land in the middle  between X32 and something really pro level like DiGiCO.

[John Schalk]

So at what point do sound techs make the switch from inputs straight to L/R to what I’m calling all the fancy bells and whistles of stereo subgroups using parallel compression and dynamic EQ’s and comparing plugin chains similar to a recording studio?

David

I think to some extent this will depend on how often you work with a particular band.  If you become a band's go to sound provider then you will have a better opportunity to try out some of the "fancy bells and whistles".  I like to work outdoor shows in the summer that often have multiple bands in the lineup.  Keeping things simple seems to work best for me since the bands are usually only playing a 60 - 90 minute set.

As far as a console's capabilities are concerned, I agree that the Soundcraft Expression is pretty limited.  You can do most of the fancy stuff with an X/M 32 console including Waves.  If you want to use stereo groups, that can eat up your 16 busses pretty fast, but one solution to that is a monitor split.  The other option is a Wing.  It has 16 stereo buses and twice the Effect rack capabilities of the X/M 32.  Still waiting for more info on the Wing Rack!

[Jason Raboin]

I think the actual middle ground is somewhere between an Avantis and a DM7.  There's a whole works of 6 figure consoles pulling the middle up from an SQ. 

But for your use scenario, where you want to dig in and have all the features, you might consider an Avantis Solo.  Or maybe look at a Waves solution.  If your clients can't absorb the added cost then I agree with others that an SQ is a pretty full featured console that sounds very good and is fast to work on.

[Spenser Hamilton]

I think the actual middle ground is somewhere between an Avantis and a DM7.  There's a whole works of 6 figure consoles pulling the middle up from an SQ. 

But for your use scenario, where you want to dig in and have all the features, you might consider an Avantis Solo.  Or maybe look at a Waves solution.  If your clients can't absorb the added cost then I agree with others that an SQ is a pretty full featured console that sounds very good and is fast to work on.

I would agree, or maybe we call the SQ the lower-middle and Avantis the upper-middle.

I run Digico at work, but my personal desk is an SQ-6. I've got a really good set of show files for both FOH and Monitors on SD desks, and my SQ template is just a dumbed down version of that. The difference between consumer level and pro desks seems to be less in input count and more in the number of group and aux bus available, I've never ran out of inputs on the SQ but would never be able to do the bus and FX processing that I do on a Digico console.

I like that the SQ is still powerful and flexible enough to incorporate some external processing. I've grown tired of Waves so have moved on to incorporating some external gear (Neve PSE, SSL Bus Comps, etc) and UAD plug-ins for my use, in fact my outboard rack probably cost more than the console.

[Tim McCulloch]

Ok, so I’m a weekend warrior. I work with a few bands that hire me and I have one local agent that will occasionally need production and call me. Haven’t been working a ton lately, but I’ve been busy with my day job, so there’s that. Been watching a bunch of YouTube videos from touring folks walkthrough their gear and console layouts and whatnot and while that’s great, it’s not a level I’ll be at because I don’t want to leave my day job to go tour. I really don’t mix clubs and bars, just local cover bands for weddings and corporate events mostly.

I know there’s a completely different budget with touring shows, but at what point do you go from inputs mixed straight to mono or stereo, to discussing what plugins you’re using and calculating latency through the console because the artist wants their show to sound like their record?

If "sounding like their record" is a big deal for a wedding band, you're on a whole 'nuther level of weddings.

I’m currently mixing on a Soundcraft expression, and feel I’m hitting the limitations of that board, not in channel count, but in features. Since I run monitors from FOH, I can only subgroup so many things and then it doesn’t have DCA’s, so it’s basically inputs mixed to L/R. The EQ section is a little limiting as well compared to say an X32, which I mix on for HOW stuff on Sunday’s. I also occasionally mix a more regional cover band with an M32, but their console is set up basically inputs to L/R as well however they do use the DCA’s.

Sorry to hear you're on a Soundcraft.  The limited feature set and "creeping input death", along with them being basically out of steam to power the brand, should put any new purchase on the "nope, uh-uh, not even if..." list.  The X32 (as much a I dislike what Berry did/does with IP theft) spanks the Soundcraft in features and capability.

So at what point do sound techs make the switch from inputs straight to L/R to what I’m calling all the fancy bells and whistles of stereo subgroups using parallel compression and dynamic EQ’s and comparing plugin chains similar to a recording studio?

David

I mix most shows with stereo groups, into which I will insert compression or other dynamics, and maybe use additional EQ (often in theatre work) as well.

"Sounding like the record" usually means elimination of actual dynamic range in order to sound good on earbuds.  Almost no listening is done on quality loudspeakers in the home any more.  The best we can hope for is a quality high-def stream on a 'nicer' system in the automobile, so having a band wanting to sound like the record would make me ask if we're giving earbuds to the audience...

But when you start using these techniques is up to you, what you want to control in relation to other signals, and the sonic outcome you seek.  I mix with a combination of groups and DCAs, with subs on AUX, and L/R feeding the matrix for system outputs (L/R/Sub/Fills/Video/Hearing Assistance and utility feeds).  I've been mixing for almost 50 years so I've kind of tried almost everything at some point, and there is a lot of stuff that sounds good in studio mixing but simply doesn't make enough difference in most live situations to be worth the extra effort, gear, or time.

If you want to make a new sonic impression, buy new loudspeakers.  Seriously.

[Jeff M Hague]

Ok, so I’m a weekend warrior. I work with a few bands that hire me and I have one local agent that will occasionally need production and call me. Haven’t been working a ton lately, but I’ve been busy with my day job, so there’s that. Been watching a bunch of YouTube videos from touring folks walkthrough their gear and console layouts and whatnot and while that’s great, it’s not a level I’ll be at because I don’t want to leave my day job to go tour. I really don’t mix clubs and bars, just local cover bands for weddings and corporate events mostly.

I know there’s a completely different budget with touring shows, but at what point do you go from inputs mixed straight to mono or stereo, to discussing what plugins you’re using and calculating latency through the console because the artist wants their show to sound like their record?

I’m currently mixing on a Soundcraft expression, and feel I’m hitting the limitations of that board, not in channel count, but in features. Since I run monitors from FOH, I can only subgroup so many things and then it doesn’t have DCA’s, so it’s basically inputs mixed to L/R. The EQ section is a little limiting as well compared to say an X32, which I mix on for HOW stuff on Sunday’s. I also occasionally mix a more regional cover band with an M32, but their console is set up basically inputs to L/R as well however they do use the DCA’s.

So at what point do sound techs make the switch from inputs straight to L/R to what I’m calling all the fancy bells and whistles of stereo subgroups using parallel compression and dynamic EQ’s and comparing plugin chains similar to a recording studio?

David

Difficult to say. The X/M stuff has a few more features than the Expression, A&H SQ even more. Then Soundcraft Si or Midas Pro, etc. but the console itself isn't necessarily going to make you more money. I don't know about the Expression but you can run plug-ins on the other consoles although performance (latency) may be an issue.
If the lack of DCAs is your biggest concern,  look in to Mixing Station. You can create IDCAs in MS that work similarly to DCAs even if the console doesn't have them. I may be wrong about that but I think thats the case - I know that on X/M, with MS you can create more IDCAs than the 8 the console actually has.

[David Junius]

Ok, I guess most of this makes sense. The shows I mix aren’t one offs but kinda are. It’s the same couple of bands in different venues for different crowds. The bands do work with different systems and engineers when they perform in venues with provided equipment, which seems to be more prevalent lately. The touring shows have months of rehearsals and perform exactly the same show each night(within reason), so getting that perfect reverb on the vocal makes more sense. It just doesn’t make sense then to try to incorporate super advanced mix techniques that take hours to get right for a 3 hour performance that changes per show.  None of my bands I regularly mix have their own records, but one is trying to put together more of a regular show that has repeatable portions.

While I have never run out of inputs on my expression with 32 on the console and 32 on the stage box, I have hit the limits of its processing in the EQ section and number of busses and lack of DCA’s. With realizing that unfortunately Soundcraft has now become a dead brand, I will start looking around at upgrading my console in the next few years. I was happy with my analog Soundcraft board when I made the jump to digital, which is a main reason why I stayed with Soundcraft, but with newer stuff out from different brands now, the logical move will be something else.

Thanks for all the replies,
David

[ProSoundWeb Community]