ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Where is this digital board?  (Read 9919 times)

Rob Spence

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2401
Re: Where is this digital board: DM-1000?
« Reply #20 on: May 27, 2006, 04:17:48 pm »

Well, my $.02.... I would like something like an ADA8000 with all the connectors on the rear for example.

I would also like to have all 16 mic preamps on the board so I don't have to split the fan at the mix position to hook it up. I don't have the 01v96 but the DDX3216 and can't reassign individual inputs so I get 1-12 on the first bank and 17-24 on second bank but can't get 1-16 in a row without using analog preamps into the line in 13-16.

Unless you rack thr ADA8000 below the desk and do a loom and multis, you have a cable kluge to wire up that is easly as messy as the traditional Mixwiz and a fx rack. Plus you have all these delicate fiber connects that some helpful sole will break off for you during strike.
Logged
Rob Spence
Lynx Audio Services
E-Mail Rob -at- LynxAudioServices -dot- com

Staying out of trouble
  Is easier than
Getting out of trouble

Your local Whirlwind Dealer

(Brian) Frost

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 348
Re: Where is this digital board: DM-1000?
« Reply #21 on: May 28, 2006, 03:30:31 am »

How do you like your DDX?  It seems like the design Im looking for but built by a company I have a hard time buying from.   Where is the a&h copy?  Mackie?  Still thinking the o1v96 is so close it could work.

Frost


Also, O2r doesnt fit in a rack
Logged
Frost

Owner, Narnia Productions

www.NarniaProductions.com

Chicago IL


Good is good but not as good as better

Chris Cowley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 644
    • http://www.humhead-digital.co.uk
Re: Where is this digital board: It existed and failed!
« Reply #22 on: May 28, 2006, 04:03:02 am »

I think this is fairly similar to the ROland VM7000 series - no-one bought it though
Logged
GO YOU BIG RED FIRE ENGINE!!!!!!!!!

Joe Breher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 255
    • http://q-music.com
Re: Where is this digital board: It lives on!
« Reply #23 on: May 29, 2006, 02:52:21 pm »

Chris Cowley wrote on Sun, 28 May 2006 02:03

I think this is fairly similar to the ROland VM7000 series - no-one bought it though


Well, I did. I bought my first VM-72 system when Roalnd introduced firesale prices. Bought a second about 8 months ago. I think the system still stacks up pretty nicely against current offerings such as a 02R, DM2000, TT24, etc. The two systems can be combined into a system that gives me both monitor beach and FOH consoles over 40 mic pres, another 6 analog ins, and 48 digital ins, with a nice light digital snake. And 48 digital outs to feed a multitrack right off the mic pres.

More info on it here:
http://q-music.com/html/roland_vm.html
Logged
Joe Breher
Liberty in my Lifetime!

http://q-music.com

Dan Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1450
    • http://www.reachcomm.net
Re: Where is this digital board: It lives on!
« Reply #24 on: May 29, 2006, 11:11:02 pm »

Joe Breher wrote on Mon, 29 May 2006 13:52

Chris Cowley wrote on Sun, 28 May 2006 02:03

I think this is fairly similar to the ROland VM7000 series - no-one bought it though


Well, I did. I bought my first VM-72 system when Roalnd introduced firesale prices. Bought a second about 8 months ago. I think the system still stacks up pretty nicely against current offerings such as a 02R, DM2000, TT24, etc. The two systems can be combined into a system that gives me both monitor beach and FOH consoles over 40 mic pres, another 6 analog ins, and 48 digital ins, with a nice light digital snake. And 48 digital outs to feed a multitrack right off the mic pres.

More info on it here:
http://q-music.com/html/roland_vm.html


Joe and Chris

The fact that you can't have more than one comp OR gate OR limit OR etc. at once on a channel just sucks.  Not only that but your eq is sacrificed by 1 less band if you decide to use any dynamics processing.  

I have been forced to use one for a event.  I had to learn everything by myself because the house person was upset because they were not going to mix for the artist! So anyway I had to learn the desk by myself.  It sucks to get around and really didn't sound all that great to me.  There is no way to insert at the desk if you are running the digital cables back to the brain, which in this case was on the stage.

IMO, the Roland suggestion is not one that others can use easily.  If you are used to it fine but otherwise it sucks.  Also the fact that you cannot have full dynamics and eq all at once basically makes it worthless to me.

sincerely,
db
Logged

Chris Cowley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 644
    • http://www.humhead-digital.co.uk
Re: Where is this digital board: It lives on!
« Reply #25 on: May 30, 2006, 09:46:11 am »

Dan Brown wrote on Tue, 30 May 2006 04:11

Joe Breher wrote on Mon, 29 May 2006 13:52

Chris Cowley wrote on Sun, 28 May 2006 02:03

I think this is fairly similar to the ROland VM7000 series - no-one bought it though


Well, I did. I bought my first VM-72 system when Roalnd introduced firesale prices. Bought a second about 8 months ago. I think the system still stacks up pretty nicely against current offerings such as a 02R, DM2000, TT24, etc. The two systems can be combined into a system that gives me both monitor beach and FOH consoles over 40 mic pres, another 6 analog ins, and 48 digital ins, with a nice light digital snake. And 48 digital outs to feed a multitrack right off the mic pres.

More info on it here:
http://q-music.com/html/roland_vm.html


Joe and Chris

The fact that you can't have more than one comp OR gate OR limit OR etc. at once on a channel just sucks.  Not only that but your eq is sacrificed by 1 less band if you decide to use any dynamics processing.  

I have been forced to use one for a event.  I had to learn everything by myself because the house person was upset because they were not going to mix for the artist! So anyway I had to learn the desk by myself.  It sucks to get around and really didn't sound all that great to me.  There is no way to insert at the desk if you are running the digital cables back to the brain, which in this case was on the stage.

IMO, the Roland suggestion is not one that others can use easily.  If you are used to it fine but otherwise it sucks.  Also the fact that you cannot have full dynamics and eq all at once basically makes it worthless to me.

sincerely,
db


I have only used it once - I do not own it, a friend of mine bought one. Now you mention it then yes there were significant problems with it, but it was generally a nice idea though - especially the tiny litle snake, and it was very expandable. I wonder if Roland were to build a new version with updated DSP then maybe it would be exactly what the OP wants.
Logged
GO YOU BIG RED FIRE ENGINE!!!!!!!!!

Joe Breher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 255
    • http://q-music.com
Re: Where is this digital board: It lives on!
« Reply #26 on: May 30, 2006, 09:27:27 pm »

Dan Brown wrote on Mon, 29 May 2006 21:11


The fact that you can't have more than one comp OR gate OR limit OR etc. at once on a channel just sucks.  Not only that but your eq is sacrificed by 1 less band if you decide to use any dynamics processing.  



Well yes, the board (as any) has its limitiaitons. However, your post seems to indicate an incomplete understanding of the system. There are several ways to get multiple dynamics processors on any channel. The tradeoff of 1 comp or gate per one band of eq is that using only the per-channel facilites.

Alternatively, you can also insert one of the up to 8(16) stereo or 16(32) mono general purpose FX onto whatever channel you desire. Several of the FX algorithms include full featured dynamics processors.

Frankly, I see the M7CL's apparent omission of per-channel delay* a more serious omission, but strokes for folks...

*only my inference from the published block diagram - I haven't driven it yet.

Suppose you want 16 different reverbs (!), so you don't want to use the multi-FX for dynamics processors. You could also route the channel out the digital IO, and wrap it back into the digital IO. Now you've doubled the resources assgined to each signal, by running it through a series of two channel strips. Gives you a comp and a gate and full eq on that signal. A bit convoluted, but it works, as long as you keep the latency tradeoffs in mind.

Point reduces to the fact that there are multiple ways of getting both expander/gate and comp/limiter on a signal, without giving up any of the eq resources.

Sure, it ain't a panacea (is anything?) I however stand by my statement that it still stacks up quite nicely against many of the current offerings of 'affordable' digital desks.
Logged
Joe Breher
Liberty in my Lifetime!

http://q-music.com

Joe Breher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 255
    • http://q-music.com
Re: Where is this digital board: It lives on!
« Reply #27 on: May 30, 2006, 09:52:59 pm »

Dan Brown wrote on Mon, 29 May 2006 21:11


I had to learn everything by myself ... So anyway I had to learn the desk by myself.  It sucks to get around ...


Well, that's a sad state. Always sucks when the house guy gets snippy, eh? But really, is there any digital board that you can throw someone onto without any prior study, and expect him to have a seamless transition?

I'm gonna guess that the system you were thrown upon did not include the VE-7000 Channel Edit Controller, which provides a dedicated knob for each of the most-used parameters of the currently selected channel, no? This admittedly extra-cost option makes a real difference in the system's ergonomics.

Dan Brown wrote on Mon, 29 May 2006 21:11


There is no way to insert at the desk if you are running the digital cables back to the brain, which in this case was on the stage.


That's a system setup issue, not an inherent flaw of the board. This limitation is shared with other boards that split the control surface and the mix engine. If the mix engine is on stage, that's where the IO is. That's what buys you the convinence of a 10 pound 200' 'snake'. If you feel you need an 1176 on something, and you need to twist the knobs of it on the fly, you'll need to get the line level send/return from/to the insert jack on stage to the mix position. Perhpas a small drive snake or something. Alternatively, you can put the 4U mix engine at FOH. The tradeoff is that you're back to a standard heavy analog multicore. You payz yer money and makez yer choice.

Logged
Joe Breher
Liberty in my Lifetime!

http://q-music.com

Dan Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1450
    • http://www.reachcomm.net
Re: Where is this digital board: It lives on!
« Reply #28 on: May 30, 2006, 11:56:06 pm »

Joe,

You obviously like the Roland system and I am not going to change your mind on that.  The digital snake thing is very nice.  I however would like to have full dynamics on every channel and at least a 4 band sweepable EQ.

I was only trying to point out the limitations that I saw in the roland unit. The insert solution of running a snake is not a good one as the inserts are unbalanced.  As far as a analog snake that would be the way but was not available or going to be used for me.

sincerely,
db
Logged

Jason Ellis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 320
Re: Where is this digital board: It lives on!
« Reply #29 on: May 31, 2006, 09:44:04 am »

Not entirely the case, there are many (A&H, Yamaha, Midas, Soundcraft) digital control surfaces that have at least 8 channels (if not more) of analog breakout at the surface for just this application (inserts, playback). Obviously not all allow this, but many systems that have remote mixing engines allow for these needs...
Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Where is this digital board: It lives on!
« Reply #29 on: May 31, 2006, 09:44:04 am »


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.026 seconds with 22 queries.