Print

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

[Mac Kerr]

Here is a short video of Dan showing off the new Dugan-MY16 card for Yamaha digital consoles. It is a pretty clear illustration of how smoothly the mixer works.

LINK HERE

Mac

[James A. Griffin]

Shazaam!  Kinda pricey, but much cooler than an SCM800   ;-)

[TomBoisseau]

Here is a short video of Dan showing off the new Dugan-MY16 card for Yamaha digital consoles. It is a pretty clear illustration of how smoothly the mixer works.

LINK HERE

Mac

I can't wait to get one of these for my LS9.  As much as I like them, I'm ready to retire my SCM810's.

tom

[Keith Broughton]

Very nice!!
MSRP $2700...ouch

[Jim Wilkens]

That's less that the price of one 8 channel Dugan E-1. Sweet!

Very nice!!
MSRP $2700...ouch

[Tim McCulloch]

Very nice!!
MSRP $2700...ouch

That's a bargain.  If our corporate biz picks back up, the Dugan MY card is on my short list of new products to buy.

And Dan is one of those "national treasure" people who is not only a clever designer but also an incredible person, too.

[Mac Kerr]

Very nice!!
MSRP $2700...ouch

Keep in mind that it nearly replaces 2 $12,000 Dugan D2 automixers, and more than replaces 2 $3200 Dugan E1 automixers. At $2700 it is a bargain.

Mac

[Ade Stuart]

I can't wait to get one of these for my LS9.  As much as I like them, I'm ready to retire my SCM810's.

tom

Me too but I wonder if Yamaha will update the LS9 firmware to give us post fade inserts?

[Mac Kerr]

Me too but I wonder if Yamaha will update the LS9 firmware to give us post fade inserts?

While it is easier to operate the Dugan with a post fader insert, it has been done with pre fade inserts for many years.

One of the advantages that the MY card version has on the model E1, and model D, is the capability to have up to 3 separate automix setups on one system (like the model D2 and D3). Previously with pre fade inserts it was critical to bypass the automixer on those channels that are not active on stage. This keeps them from effecting the mix. With the Dugan-MY16 you can qutomix up to 16 channels broken up into 3 different mixers that do not interact. Post fader is better because you won't have to worry about which channels are active in the automixer, but the capability for 3 mixes can go a long way to making that easier.

Mac

[Keith Broughton]

Keep in mind that it nearly replaces 2 $12,000 Dugan D2 automixers, and more than replaces 2 $3200 Dugan E1 automixers. At $2700 it is a bargain.

Mac

Good point.
 I didn't realize how expensive the stand alone units were.

[TomBoisseau]

I can't wait to get one of these for my LS9.  As much as I like them, I'm ready to retire my SCM810's.

tom

Me too but I wonder if Yamaha will update the LS9 firmware to give us post fade inserts?

YES PLEASE!  That AND I want to see Post Fade Direct Outs!   Come on Yamaha.  I'm getting pretty tired of waiting for firmware upgrades that actually add something rather that just fixing mistakes.  Sometime I "almost" regret not buying the Roland instead.

Tom

[kristianjohnsen]

Here is a short video of Dan showing off the new Dugan-MY16 card for Yamaha digital consoles. It is a pretty clear illustration of how smoothly the mixer works.

LINK HERE

Mac

What is the typical setting where these products are used?

[Mac Kerr]

What is the typical setting where these products are used?

The typical setting would be a conference with panel discussions where you might have anywhere from a couple to a dozen active lavs on stage at once. The Dugan lets you keep them all open so no one gets upcut by a slow fader move, and the soundman gets to relax a little. They also minimize the background noise and gain before feedback with that many open mics. I have also seen them used in a situation where there were 50 handheld mics on 50 tables in the audience that had to be live all the time for live discussion by the 50 state governors of the US at a conference.

The more expensive models D2 and D3 also have the Dugan music system, which involves a sensing mic on stage which I think moves the automix threshold so it is not fooled by ambient stage noise. I only know of one person who uses this system regularly.

These are also used in live TV to manage audience reaction mics. A show like "Late Night with David Letterman" has many distributed audience mics, and they are all controlled by Dugan automatic mixers to avoid the pumping of someone bringing them in and out of the mix, but reducing their impact on BG noise when the audience is quiet.

Mac

[Jim Wilkens]

Mac, there was an article somewhere, I think on Dugan's website that discussed the specifics of that Letterman system. I recently had no luck trying to find that article. I wonder if anyone can provide a link to it?

The typical setting would be a conference with panel discussions where you might have anywhere from a couple to a dozen active lavs on stage at once. The Dugan lets you keep them all open so no one gets upcut by a slow fader move, and the soundman gets to relax a little. They also minimize the background noise and gain before feedback with that many open mics. I have also seen them used in a situation where there were 50 handheld mics on 50 tables in the audience that had to be live all the time for live discussion by the 50 state governors of the US at a conference.

The more expensive models D2 and D3 also have the Dugan music system, which involves a sensing mic on stage which I think moves the automix threshold so it is not fooled by ambient stage noise. I only know of one person who uses this system regularly.

These are also used in live TV to manage audience reaction mics. A show like "Late Night with David Letterman" has many distributed audience mics, and they are all controlled by Dugan automatic mixers to avoid the pumping of someone bringing them in and out of the mix, but reducing their impact on BG noise when the audience is quiet.

Mac

[kristianjohnsen]

What is the typical setting where these products are used?

The typical setting would be a conference with panel discussions where you might have anywhere from a couple to a dozen active lavs on stage at once. The Dugan lets you keep them all open so no one gets upcut by a slow fader move, and the soundman gets to relax a little. They also minimize the background noise and gain before feedback with that many open mics. I have also seen them used in a situation where there were 50 handheld mics on 50 tables in the audience that had to be live all the time for live discussion by the 50 state governors of the US at a conference.

The more expensive models D2 and D3 also have the Dugan music system, which involves a sensing mic on stage which I think moves the automix threshold so it is not fooled by ambient stage noise. I only know of one person who uses this system regularly.

These are also used in live TV to manage audience reaction mics. A show like "Late Night with David Letterman" has many distributed audience mics, and they are all controlled by Dugan automatic mixers to avoid the pumping of someone bringing them in and out of the mix, but reducing their impact on BG noise when the audience is quiet.

Mac

Thank you for the very good explanation!

Do you see a way something remotely similar could be cludged together using the gates/compressors on a digital mixer along with key inputs?

[John Roberts {JR}]

I think there's some freeware kicking around that generated gain trims from reading the meter levels to make a crude NOM algorithm. The main problem with using (rectified and filtered) meter data instead of a proper sum of all channels, is it can't discriminate between single coherent sources hitting multiple mic inputs, and multiple incoherent sources (a 3dB error between optimal gain sharing for those two cases). You could probably split the difference between the two making a worst case +/- 1.5 dB error from ideal (I don't know what the freeware does, not that bad of a choice to just assume incoherent sources).

The basic gain sharing algorithm could be coded correctly inside a digital mixer with access to unfiltered data pretty easily, but Dan has decades of experience and many improvements that he is also selling in his product. I still have a hard time thinking of this as inexpensive, but compared to his previous product it surely is. I wish him much success, he deserves it for his contributions in this area.

JR

[ProSoundWeb Community]