Got to check out an SAC mixer

[agedhorse]

 

I remember that console, mainly because I bought one and still use use it on a regular basis. I've never had any of the problems that seemed to crop up so I must be lucky. It is a truely fanstasic console for the price, for me the touchscreen was king, don't get that untill you get into M7 price range. I am looking to upgrade, but only because it's unsupported by mackie now, I have more money and lack of cross hire possibilites Dave

 

 

Yes, you are one of the lucky ones. The mixer was revolutionary at the price point, and had it been reliable and free from the Mackie marketing stigma, it might have had a different outcome.

[fdew]

 

eh. I still like it and am still thinking about going with it. Of course, I would purpose build the computer for it and only use it for that purpose. Just like now, I don't use my presonus mixer or the recording computer to surf the web. Shouldn't be a big deal.

 

 

I use a SAC system regularly. You have hit on one of the keys. You build the computer for SAC. Install the OS Then strip the OS down to just what is needed, then install SAC. Then stop thinking of it as a computer. It is part of your mixer. It never sees the web. It never gets on a network except it's own. On these terms it is a reliable system.

 

A laptop can be used as a remote. No audio passes through the laptop at any time. If you drop it or crash it, you lost your remote, not your mixer. some people use a remote as the only control surface (example outdoor events where getting cords to the desk is difficult,) but it is not recommended.

 

Most installations have the control surfaces at the FOH connected to the main computer. The computer may or may not be at FOH

 

In our installation all the equipment is at FOH

 

One advantage of the modular approach used in the SAC system is that it is easy to have spares. Our main system is 40 ch in and out. (soon to expand to 48.) Our portable system for use in other parts of the facility is 16 ch but each and every piece can be pressed into service as a stand in for the main. including the computer.

 

BTW In our HOW setup failure is not OK. Before we had the SAC system we had a plan for restoring audio in case of any failure in the system including the board. We still do. I have been in the back room throwing patches 10 min before a service because the main amp died.

 

Frank

[Dogoth]

 

IMO, it would be less reliable if only for the simple reason that the Yamaha is a closed architecture system menaing that the operating system is closed from the outside world and that everything was designed to work together without any POTENTIAL for conflicts. It's not that a laptop (or desktop) is less reliable as much as it has many opportunities to become less reliable and in practice seems to be. Too many little glitches that may not be a big issue when you are using only 1% of the resources but if you are using 50% or more then things that were previously not obvious will become painfully so. Something like the SAC could become a useful tool if the outside workd was removed from the equation. Especially if a reasonable user interface was part of the package.

 

 

Woah! it's been a couple of days since I checked in to HC. It looks like I got some response.

 

I would have to agree with agedhorse on this one. The whole achitecture of a stand alone digital board is built for a single purpose only (to process audio). the only changes possible from the outside world are firmware updates (this is more like updating an eprom than some data on a hard disk).

 

A friend who owns a computer store had a very insightful view of computers. He said "industrial & business computers are far less likely to fail because they only run a few programs throughout their life, whereas a home computer is asked to do everything from wordprocessing, to video editing, to playing games."

 

Supposidly if you buy a turn key system, it has been optimized to primarily run this program (SAC) but the architecture of the computer and the OS are still made to cover a broad range of applications. I think in my original post I mentioned waiting a couple of years for this system to prove it's integrity (only time can really do that).

 

I'd agree I would be hesitant to buy one of these for a high end - can't fail application * but the concept IS the wave of the future and it's interesting to watch it being built from the ground up :-)

 

* I seem to remember that the "fly by wire" computer(s) employed in most modern fighter planes, are a very simple, low instruction set slow processer (something like an old 8088 or 8086) but have TONS of redundancy & error correction written into the HARDWARE. When Pro audio computers approach this level if integrity, I'll buy :-)

 

Cheers

[agedhorse]

 

* I seem to remember that the "fly by wire" computer(s) employed in most modern fighter planes, are a very simple, low instruction set slow processer (something like an old 8088 or 8086) but have TONS of redundancy & error correction written into the HARDWARE. When Pro audio computers approach this level if integrity, I'll buy :-) Cheers

 

 

Lots of error checking, data validity, redundant hardware and software, verification done independant of the actuating mechanisms and processing etc. Also, a large budget, no access to the outside world, world class manufacturing techniques, etc.

[fdew]

 

Woah! it's been a couple of days since I checked in to HC. It looks like I got some response. I would have to agree with agedhorse on this one. The whole achitecture of a stand alone digital board is built for a single purpose only (to process audio). the only changes possible from the outside world are firmware updates (this is more like updating an eprom than some data on a hard disk). A friend who owns a computer store had a very insightful view of computers. He said "industrial & business computers are far less likely to fail because they only run a few programs throughout their life, whereas a home computer is asked to do everything from wordprocessing, to video editing, to playing games." Supposidly if you buy a turn key system, it has been optimized to primarily run this program (SAC) but the architecture of the computer and the OS are still made to cover a broad range of applications. I think in my original post I mentioned waiting a couple of years for this system to prove it's integrity (only time can really do that). I'd agree I would be hesitant to buy one of these for a high end - can't fail application * but the concept IS the wave of the future and it's interesting to watch it being built from the ground up :-) * I seem to remember that the "fly by wire" computer(s) employed in most modern fighter planes, are a very simple, low instruction set slow processer (something like an old 8088 or 8086) but have TONS of redundancy & error correction written into the HARDWARE. When Pro audio computers approach this level if integrity, I'll buy :-) Cheers

 

 

 

The SAC system was first demoed at the 1992 AES show. It has had a couple of years.

http://www.rmllabs.com/SAC.htm

 

A couple of standalone digital boards to look into. The SC48, Venue, and Profile, all running on windows XP embedded.

 

Frank

[agedhorse]

embedded is the key word here. There's "protection" from the real world and no mysterious junk installed.

 

I also suspect that the OS has been stripped down of many non-productive features that slow it down. The key to all of this is the purpose built and configured closed system that's been verified with and designed in conjunction with the hardware being controlled. I can't emphesize this enough. It's not just an off the shelf box with off the shelf software.

[fdew]

 

embedded is the key word here. There's "protection" from the real world and no mysterious junk installed. I also suspect that the OS has been stripped down of many non-productive features that slow it down. The key to all of this is the purpose built and configured closed system that's been verified with and designed in conjunction with the hardware being controlled. I can't emphesize this enough. It's not just an off the shelf box with off the shelf software.

 

 

Complete agreement. A good SAC system starts with a carefully chosen computer with a good track record running SAC. Then a clean install of Windows NT Then a systematic removal of a long list of extras that come with windows. (I use Nlite on another computer to prepare a CD to do this.) When complete, the new computer has no browser, no email no search function, it never checks for a CD etc. The sound card software is installed, and SAC is installed. SAC is set to real time priority and nothing else is in there or added. It is a closed system by the decision of the owner. Bottom line, It works. It works every time just like any other board. Some people are using Solid state hard drives for even more reliability.

 

Frank

[Special J]

 

Complete agreement. A good SAC system starts with a carefully chosen computer with a good track record running SAC. Then a clean install of Windows NT Then a systematic removal of a long list of extras that come with windows. (I use Nlite on another computer to prepare a CD to do this.) When complete, the new computer has no browser, no email no search function, it never checks for a CD etc. The sound card software is installed, and SAC is installed. SAC is set to real time priority and nothing else is in there or added. It is a closed system by the decision of the owner. Bottom line, It works. It works every time just like any other board. Some people are using Solid state hard drives for even more reliability. Frank

 

 

What are you using as a control surface? What is a typical show like in your venue?

[agedhorse]

 

What are you using as a control surface? What is a typical show like in your venue?

 

 

and this is the other part of the "system" equation...

[agedhorse]

 

Complete agreement. A good SAC system starts with a carefully chosen computer with a good track record running SAC. Then a clean install of Windows NT Then a systematic removal of a long list of extras that come with windows. (I use Nlite on another computer to prepare a CD to do this.) When complete, the new computer has no browser, no email no search function, it never checks for a CD etc. The sound card software is installed, and SAC is installed. SAC is set to real time priority and nothing else is in there or added. It is a closed system by the decision of the owner. Bottom line, It works. It works every time just like any other board. Some people are using Solid state hard drives for even more reliability. Frank

 

 

What about automatic updates from MicroSoft? If it can't check in with the mothership, does it generate conflicts?

[IsildursBane]

 

What about automatic updates from MicroSoft? If it can't check in with the mothership, does it generate conflicts?

 

 

You can turn that off for good, if you know what you're doing. However, I really question if Windows NT is the best choice of an OS, considering its age and the potential lack of driver compatibility.

 

SAC strikes me as a system geared towards people who have more time than money. There's nothing wrong with that, but it is what it is and I get the feeling that some of the fanboys see it in the same way that Bose markets the L1: that it can do more than it really can.

 

That said, I know of one particular A-level engineer looking into SAC or a similar system so he can bring all of his fancy studio gear with him on the road.

 

-Dan.

[fdew]

 

What are you using as a control surface? What is a typical show like in your venue?

 

 

Control surface is a ongoing discussion in the SAC community. Many are supported from mouse and arrow keys to the new 3M multi touch screen to conventional faders. I like faders. I chose the CM Labs MotorMixer. I have two of them for a total of 16 faders. I chose to set it up with the first fader always the main output. 2-15 change with my scenes. I often use a laptop for setup and line checks. I do use the mouse or arrow keys to make a quick adjustment to a ch that is not mapped to my faders right now. (Example, Pull down the fouyer speaker output)

 

Our venue varies The location is a church and K-12 school. The most often used Venue is Sunday morning service. This involves a worship team (Drums, Base, Piano, electric guitars, and 3 or 4 singers. also, choir, often with a CD accompaniment, soloist, groups of 3 to 6 singers, and of course a pastors sermon. (all of the above doesn't happen every Sunday. I make extensive use of scenes. I don't use them in order like a play because our service changes so much. I have them setup by what is happening (similar to what you see above) and I have a Logitech G13 button box programed with most of my scenes so I can jump to them.

 

The school has a weekly chapel service. They mix with a laptop down on the floor. BTW A example of the versatility of the system is that when used from FOH solo is mapped to a conventional output with a headphone amp. When the school logs in solo is mapped to our hearing assist system and the school sound guy takes a receiver and a headset for wireless solo. On Sunday, the hearing assist has it's own aux mix, for hard of hearing.

 

We also use a laptop for simple things like a meeting or a funeral.

 

Other uses can be plays, Graduations, and many others. BTW I Will not mix a pre school graduation without real faders.

 

As for OS updates. Because the system never communicates with the outside world it is not introduced to new things so it doesn't need updates. I am sure that some day a new version of SAC will come along, or I will chose a different sound input card and it will need a upgrade. At that point I would do it manually with a USB drive.

 

 

Frank

[fdew]

 

What about automatic updates from MicroSoft? If it can't check in with the mothership, does it generate conflicts?

 

 

I didn't understand this question until I saw the answer. Yes. Checking for updates is one of the many functions that must be turned off to run live sound. Interrupts are a potential clicking sound. Setting priority helps but turning off things like checking for a CD in the drive, or for a wireless source all should be turned off.

[Dogoth]

 

What about automatic updates from MicroSoft? If it can't check in with the mothership, does it generate conflicts?

 

 

FWIW My studio machine is XP pro based (Steinberg still doesn't have a 64 bit Nuendo and most of the VST & VSTi plugins are still 32 bit as well so there's no reason to move to windows 7 yet). I think I'm still running on SP2 and have uninstalled many of the original windows components and disabled tons of services as they are not needed (automatic updates included). Microsoft's updates are mostly security patches anyway and with an isolated machine, I don't need them.

 

This machine NEVER goes on the net. It's network adapter is instaled but usualy disabled. If I need something from the internet (a client sends me audio via Email or FTP, or a .NET framwork patch), I use another machine, scan it for bugs, and put it into a proprietary shared folder. Then I enable the network adapter and import it to the studio machine and immediatly disable the network again.

 

So far it has been running perfectly for about 4 years as is (not one single failure). I will probably software rebuild it this winter between projects, just to clean up the registry etc...

 

You are correct in your thinking though that this machine still has a lot running in the background (using rescorces) that aren't needed. If there was a problem, recording can (usualy) be redone, live can't. As reliable as it has been, I still would hesitate to use it for a major act in a live capacity (my studio clients are all local small accounts).

 

At it's price point though, I would think that SAC would be a Kick A** club mixer for the right band of techno geeks (myself included).

[agedhorse]

 

I didn't understand this question until I saw the answer. Yes. Checking for updates is one of the many functions that must be turned off to run live sound. Interrupts are a potential clicking sound. Setting priority helps but turning off things like checking for a CD in the drive, or for a wireless source all should be turned off.

 

 

I have experienced the trying to check for updates or checking in with the mother ship even though the functions were disabled... might be Microsoft keeping tabs on it's spawn out in the field or who the hell really knows. There's way too much stuff going on behind the scenes that is undocumented for even a relatively advanced user that I have a difficult time accepting that any non-embedded machine (with non-embedded software/firmware) can really be as stable as one would be led to believe. It's one thing for one machine to work trouble-free but a larger sample of DIFFERENT machies is unlikely at best. This is a huge issue with the computer industry, and is probably responsible for a large percentage of IT labor hours.

 

I am working an an audio/video transport project right now and even Cisco, over their own network with their own propriatary products at both ends and with their own A-tier engineers is facing serious difficulties getting this project up and running with any reliability. All I am hearing is their frustration with gremlins within their secure environment. These are some really sharp guys and almost unlimited budgets too. Yikes.

[sailorman]

It's one thing for one machine to work trouble-free but a larger sample of DIFFERENT machies is unlikely at best. This is a huge issue with the computer industry, and is probably responsible for a large percentage of IT labor hours.

 

I was in IT for a mid-sized business. About 1500 employees needing desktop PCs. I remember a rollout of several hundred identical new machines, all ordered/delivered at the same time on the same truck. Each had an identical software image installed by the desktop IT folks. And bingo, about 10% of them would have major problems. Turned out that there were 'minor' component substitutions in these 'identical' computers. Enough to consume considerable budget debugging and correcting the issues.

 

A sincere effort had been made to guarantee hardware consistency, but that turned out to be difficult to achieve.

 

One reason I still look back fondly at my days on mainframes....