Members Vito Corleone Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 I think it's a little funny that so many people are complaining about the lack of standardization with digital consoles all of a sudden. No one seemed to complain too much back in the analog days when things were either absent or in a different place. Sometime the aux section was above the EQ, mutes/on switches for channels and auxes or EQ, swept mids or swept everything or nothing variable at all, variable Q or not, no pad or polarity reverse, matrices, individual phantom etc. Every console was different. Not to mention the variety of outboard you'd run into, and differences between comps, gates, FX, and even EQ's between manufacturers or sometimes different product lines from the same manufacturer. Or the outboard racks to your left or right, behind you, or under the desk. Now all of a sudden, because it's digital and not a physical knob, people want it to have the layout standardized. That's way above my head. I'm still just trying to understand the differences between Input, Pad, Gain and Trim.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OneEng Posted October 24, 2014 Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 I think it's a little funny that so many people are complaining about the lack of standardization with digital consoles all of a sudden. No one seemed to complain too much back in the analog days when things were either absent or in a different place. Sometime the aux section was above the EQ, mutes/on switches for channels and auxes or EQ, swept mids or swept everything or nothing variable at all, variable Q or not, no pad or polarity reverse, matrices, individual phantom etc. Every console was different. Not to mention the variety of outboard you'd run into, and differences between comps, gates, FX, and even EQ's between manufacturers or sometimes different product lines from the same manufacturer. Or the outboard racks to your left or right, behind you, or under the desk. Now all of a sudden, because it's digital and not a physical knob, people want it to have the layout standardized. I guess I'm old school, even though I'm not that old. You have a piece of equipment, and you learn how to use it. If you have the status/money, you use only what you like, and if you can't you just deal with what you're given. There's no reason a manufacturer should have to make their interface exactly like another, and I can see distinct reasons for avoiding that sort of thing. What might be a selling point for one market segment might not be for another. You're not going to sell a Studiolive to U2, and you're not going to sell an XL8 to the garage band down the street. There's no reason they should look the same, and they're definitely not going to function the same. I use dozens of different consoles in any given year, and figuring out how to do what I need to do with them is just another part of my job. And it's definitely not the hardest or most time consuming part of my job. If you know what you need to do to get the sound you want, finding the tool to do it doesn't take too long. For the record, I hate the Studiolive too, but not necessarily because of the user interface or FAT channel or anything. They're simple to use though, I can't imagine anyone having a hard time getting around on it. The lack of moving faders is a dealbreaker for me, and I guess that's sort of lumped into the user interface category, but what I really hate about them is the sound. They're the worst of any digital mixer I've worked with. I agree with the standardization with respect to analog mixers. It isn't so much the mixer (although there were plenty of differences between mixers as well), but the outboard gear as you point out. What was even worse was that you couldn't see how things were routed like you can on a digital. You had to weed through where all the cables went to figure it out if you didn't set it up yourself. I also don't see consoles getting standardized either. The differences in workflow will likely cater to different use cases. For example, I can see a digital console specifically designed for theater having a very different workflow than one designed for a bar band venue. I don't care for the StudioLive either, but I have always thought the sound could be made acceptable. The vocal verbs weren't that great, and the HPF slope was really kind of poorly planned .... but it was easy to mix on. As you stated, the lack of motorized faders would be a no-go for me as would be the lack of recall-able gains. I kind of like the fat channel approach .... but I also like the mini full meter bridge on the X32 iPad app. I think we will see great advances in the tablet applications in the next few years. I am not so sure that we are going to be seeing the analog crowd start singing the praises of tablet based mixing no matter how good the app works. No matter what, you aren't going to get the physical feel on a tablet that you do on a console. I still hate typing on my iPhone and miss my blackberry keyboard Time moves on though. With gestures and auto complete/auto correct getting better and better, I will most surely reach a point that I will no longer miss the Blackberry physical keys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Unalaska Posted October 24, 2014 Author Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 I'm waiting for a digital console to have a clock and a way to "like" a mix on facebook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members StratGuy22 Posted October 24, 2014 Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 What mixes are trending these days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Axisplayer Posted October 24, 2014 Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 What mixes are trending these days? From what I have heard, generally bad ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dogoth Posted October 24, 2014 Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 On an analog console once you find something it stays there Ha! Ha! Ha! And coming from you. The owner of 01V's if I'm correct. I'm laughing with you and in full agreement. I'm a big fan of the digital mixing world and do think in many cases it's advantages outweigh it's disadvantages but there are certainly times when an analog console is a better choice. Great point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dogoth Posted October 24, 2014 Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 More thoughts on digital consoles Since it's all software driven, I wonder if someone could design a mixer with multiple GUI's. F.I. One for Broadway style production shows, One for Concert FOH, One for Concert monitors, One for Churches, One for Dummies etc..... Basically templates that put the most used functions as the most accessible and the least ones buried deeper down. I know with most consoles you can do some remapping and setup templates complete with libraries but why not take that to another level with not only pre-writen templates but a whole GUI to help assist in the workflow of any given show genera. If you find that your client advanced the show wrong and as it progresses the show type changes you could change GUI's with the same mix data, just presented (hopefully) more efficiently. This is of course the exact opposite of what Unalaska was talking about BUT one of the presets could be "Looks and acts like an analog console" - if you get into trouble, just push this button an it takes you back to the same front end. Why not allow other software writers to develop GUI's for you're board (would require an amount of open source code). This is already being done in a way with studios. Think of a computer and a set of converters. The software is your choice (Cubase, Protools, Logic, Garage band, what have you). The difference is they can't read each others mix/song files. The strange thing here is there are standardized protocols for hanging a hard control surface on to the front end of most of these programs (sort of backwards to what we're talking about here :-). The trick for SR of course would be integrity (does Joe Blo's GUI hang up every time a particular set of bells & whistles are called for? :-). I could see Yamaha, Presonus, Midas etc... becoming hardware vendors (like HP or Dell) and others writing the front end for their machines. Forget Apple's Xenophobic approach (notice they finally threw in the towel and went with an all software OS - it just made more sense - too bad they had to control the software side as well. It has made their products expensive and IMHO no more reliable than others). Anyway Just food for thought and the ramblings of a demented mind :-) Go ahead and blow holes in it, I already got holes in my head anyway :-). Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted October 24, 2014 Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 On an analog console once you find something it stays there Absolutely. Watched a guy mix on a new to him comsole the other day, he adjusted the wrongthing more than once because he was using a control that WAS what the thought it was right before he grabbed it. All this worrying about depth of features and where they are (or were) just takes away from the basic mixing experience IME. When I get into mix mode, I like to sit, relax and get into the music and the stage vibe rather than screw around with pages and things moving around on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted October 24, 2014 Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 First time I sat down at a PM3500 or PM4000, it was like familiarity. Everything was where I expected it, and each PM series model was identical in function and location and I didn't have to worry about which firmware version was being used and if there were compatability issues with my show files being written/saved on a different version, and what page something was buried on, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flanc Posted October 24, 2014 Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 More thoughts on digital consoles Since it's all software driven, I wonder if someone could design a mixer with multiple GUI's. .... Why not allow other software writers to develop GUI's for you're board (would require an amount of open source code). .... I believe the SAC (Software Audio Console) was attempting some of this. http://www.softwareaudioconsole.com/ I've been following them for a while but they never seemed to get the momentum they needed. This new influx of digital mixers with proprietary software has flooded the market at the right price points. Most are offering AVB, Dante and AES67 streams for some level of interplay. Perhaps some spin off company will concentrate on making a top-notch stage box with a published API...sort of how the the DAW market morphed. You can use Protools with lots of hardware now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted October 24, 2014 Members Share Posted October 24, 2014 With analog mixers, most manufacturers standardized on things that made it easier to transition between boards. The only thing to be aware of was the tip or ring send on the insert jacks, and most consoles were clearly marked. Otherwise, I could sit down at a Yamaha, Soundcraft, Allen & Heath etc. and be good to go in a couple of minutes. Wiring between drive, fx and dynamics racks was usually by multi-cable, I could wire my analog FOH with 8 gates and 8 comps in less time than it takes for some digital consoles just to boot up. I do agree about the size and weight however, and that feature may be good enough justification for some to choose digital over analog even if that's not the stated reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted October 25, 2014 Members Share Posted October 25, 2014 Just FYI the Behringer control protocol is "open" and it's my understanding that their "new" Android app was developed by a user who was selling it independently until Behringer bought it. So theoretically anyone can code an app to control the X32 series and have it all any way they want - a carp-load of work though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted October 25, 2014 Members Share Posted October 25, 2014 I do agree about the size and weight however' date=' and that feature may be good enough justification for some to choose digital over analog even if that's not the stated reason.[/quote']Absolutely #1 with me. Cost also - although those of us not starting from scratch have lost our shirts on all the analog gear we have unloaded (or still have it gathering dust rather than give it away). Anybody wanna buy some snakes? LOL Speaking of size, last night's gig was so packed that I had to move FOH in the middle of the first set to the next room. Try that with a conventional FOH and snake . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members StratGuy22 Posted October 25, 2014 Members Share Posted October 25, 2014 I like my 24.4.2. The nice thing is there is so much choice today. I'll be picking up an RM32AI in the new year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OneEng Posted October 26, 2014 Members Share Posted October 26, 2014 Just FYI the Behringer control protocol is "open" and it's my understanding that their "new" Android app was developed by a user who was selling it independently until Behringer bought it. So theoretically anyone can code an app to control the X32 series and have it all any way they want - a carp-load of work though! I seriously considered it myself .... just for fun, but sadly, my free time is much more limited these days. Would have been right up my alley 15-20 years ago ..... ahh, to be young, without obligations and free. Youth is truly wasted on the young Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dogoth Posted November 1, 2014 Members Share Posted November 1, 2014 I believe the SAC (Software Audio Console) was attempting some of this. http://www.softwareaudioconsole.com/ I've been following them for a while but they never seemed to get the momentum they needed. This new influx of digital mixers with proprietary software has flooded the market at the right price points. Most are offering AVB, Dante and AES67 streams for some level of interplay. Perhaps some spin off company will concentrate on making a top-notch stage box with a published API...sort of how the the DAW market morphed. You can use Protools with lots of hardware now. I've always thought that if I had a working band (with a budget - Ha! Ha! Ha!) that I'd consider all IEMs and an SAC system. They are super flexible and a HUGE step up from the Aviom type system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.