SAC and Console 1

by **Dave Labrecque** » Tue Feb 16, 2021 3:46 pm

Strange that the Satellite would give you trouble like that. My UAD-2 cards work fine with SAW. I was hoping the new Satellite would do the same.

Is it just cuz, like the other fellow said, SAC wants to see zero-latency plugs and so shuts down the UAD stuff on you? Maybe you're asking SAC to do something it's designed not to do.

by **Larry Burger** » Tue Feb 16, 2021 12:12 pm

Dave,
Actually quite a few things.
You are correct the Names do not populate (bummer).
I was having trouble just using the UAD plugins no Apollo so no console.
Sounded great but it stole my mouse and keyboard where I couldn't do anything but ctrl+alt+delete but I found out if I shut off the satellite control came back just no UAD plugins.

Odd thing is the presonus faderport 16 worked and ran SAC fine while it was mouse keyboard broken....

So needless to say it has be fun................................

by **Dave Labrecque** » Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:45 am

Larry Burger wrote:Dave,
I have been using a USB Satellite with Sac.
Good and bad results.
It sounds great.
But it has been locking up SAC where I type in a channel name and it steals the mouse and keyboard.
I shut off the UAD and control comes back but I have lost the plugins, requiring a fresh startup of SAC.

I am waiting for new update, windows drivers and anything that may solve the issue because I really like the transient response and tone in SAC...

Some may have better results. . .

I presume you're using the Unison plugins for zero latency monitoring? Does SAC actually see zero latency for those UAD plugs?

That's a bummer that you have those challenges. That's one of the downsides of using an unsupported DAW.

I bought an X8P interface during their end-of-year promotion and just received the free promotional Satellite Octo Core a couple weeks ago. Haven't tried either, yet. I know it's probably not going to be smooth sailing with SAW (I don't have SAC) based on other reports around here, but I guess I should get on that. Was waiting for my new studio build, but it's going to be a few months, so I should fire these babies up and see what's what.

To be clear: are you talking about typing in the channel labels in SAC? Or in the UA Console interface?

Thanks for your report. Let's keep in touch on this stuff.

by **Larry Burger** » Tue Feb 16, 2021 11:23 am

Tomy,
Great point I didn't think about that.
That makes good locic...

I was able to get it to work with metaplug and Bidule but what an ugly way to go.

Thank you.

Larry...

by **TomyN** » Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:13 am

SAC will disable all plug-ins which report / create latency. I assume that this is the reason why it does not work as expected.

by **Larry Burger** » Tue Feb 16, 2021 5:49 am

I just wanted to use Console 1 and their plugins (channels strips) inside SAC and yes tactile control of their plugins.

I do not want to control and SAC features from the controller...

I am testing UAD plugins and would consider controlling the UAD console from C1 (which it will do in other platforms).

But when I attempted the process it just didn't work so possibly it is impossible.

Thank you the help. . . .

by **cgrafx** » Mon Feb 15, 2021 10:31 pm

Larry Burger wrote:I am close to sorry I started this thread. . . . . .
I usually find the forum helpful and just was looking for an answer if anyone had used Console 1 or might have a reason why it did not respond the way I had hoped.

I have used C1 in a Live Situation via other DAW's (I know they are not made for that and SAC is).

I used SAW Studio live before Bob designed SAC. . . .

I did not plan on just tweaking everything all the time.
If you have reached up and changed an eq on a channel to make it sound better, that is what I would do with Console 1 inside SAC.
But it would not work.

I assume some will use a different Reverb plugin inside SAC even though Bob has his own (which will give remote control).

That's is all I was trying to do since Console one is a VST plugin. . . . .

I don't want to start disputes just looking for help...

Thank you for the ideas and opinions. . . .

Larry...

Larry,

don't be sorry, and nobody is in a dispute.

in order to be helpful we need to know more information than you supplied.

Even if somebody else had tried C1 you didn't provide enough information about what didn't work so there would be no way to assess if they had the same problem or not.

What your describing about controlling EQ on a channel via C1 is not what is usually implied when talking about VST plugins as there is already a fully functional channel strip with gates, compressors, EQ etc.

Please don't read that as meaning your approach wouldn't work or be useful, but it does mean circumventing the core audio engine in order to have a control surface to tweak knobs.

As you've already determined in order to deal with the latency issue you also have to run the console at higher bit rates which means using a lot more of your CPU resources as well as more hardware to make that happen. Many interfaces will limit channel counts when you increase the clock rate.

So as a general approach C1 is going to be pretty inefficient.

I'm not making these statements to say don't do it, you just need to understand what the technical implications and limits are if your going to try to go down that path.

If the desire is to have a fully control surfaced mixing environment then SAW/SAC are not really going to be good solutions for that as they weren't designed with that goal in mind. (and force inserting another console strip into every channel is kind of defeating the whole purpose of SAW/SAC)

SAW/SAC do make very good hybrid solutions and both have good support for basic functionality most people are generally looking for.

Faders, solos, mutes, pans, record enable, transport controls.

If at some point in the future Bob releases an API for SAW/SAC then that would open the door for more customized solutions that could include control of the Gates, Compressor, EQ, phantom power, hardware channel gain, etc

There of coarse may be other work in the pipeline with Bobs more recent hardware alliance and maybe some of these types of issues will be alternatively addressed through that path instead.

by **Larry Burger** » Mon Feb 15, 2021 9:45 pm

I am close to sorry I started this thread. . . . . .
I usually find the forum helpful and just was looking for an answer if anyone had used Console 1 or might have a reason why it did not respond the way I had hoped.

I have used C1 in a Live Situation via other DAW's (I know they are not made for that and SAC is).

I used SAW Studio live before Bob designed SAC. . . .

I did not plan on just tweaking everything all the time.
If you have reached up and changed an eq on a channel to make it sound better, that is what I would do with Console 1 inside SAC.
But it would not work.

I assume some will use a different Reverb plugin inside SAC even though Bob has his own (which will give remote control).

That's is all I was trying to do since Console one is a VST plugin. . . . .

I don't want to start disputes just looking for help...

Thank you for the ideas and opinions. . . .

Larry...

by **Larry Burger** » Mon Feb 15, 2021 9:34 pm

Dave,
I have been using a USB Satellite with Sac.
Good and bad results.
It sounds great.
But it has been locking up SAC where I type in a channel name and it steals the mouse and keyboard.
I shut off the UAD and control comes back but I have lost the plugins, requiring a fresh startup of SAC.

I am waiting for new update, windows drivers and anything that may solve the issue because I really like the transient response and tone in SAC...

Some may have better results. . .

by **Dave Labrecque** » Mon Feb 15, 2021 6:00 pm

cgrafx wrote:Best practices are generally
- capture clean unaltered audio
- mix/master in post

FWIW, Universal Audio has been promoting all kinds of channel-strippy stuff live during tracking as a way to commit to a sound and not get too tweaky in post. You knowâ€”old school, before they had the options we have today. I find it an intriguing approach in the 21st century, having got a feel for a couple decades, now, of that million-options world that we have at our mixing fingertips these days.

Anyway, who knows if this is what the OP has in mind, but it does illustrate that there may be other "best practices" out there that could take advantage of, say, recording on an emulated SSL console with additional, printed UAD hardware emulationsâ€”controls for which being manipulated with knobs and faders.

by **Dave Labrecque** » Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:45 pm

cgrafx wrote:I'm not understanding what circumstance would have somebody furiously tweaking a plugin during a live show where they would need a physical knob to do that.

I'm not saying its not possible, its just not something most live sound engineers would find themselves doing.

This is also why I asked Larry the original question "What was he hoping to accomplish". Maybe he is one of the rare people/circumstances were this would be more efficient.

Yes, it would be great if we could get a feel for his thinking on this.

Furiously tweaking? Probably not more so than any other hardware-controlled parameter. I was thinking it was just the same ol' thing about preferring a physical fader or knob over the mousy approach. More intuitive and easier/quicker to manipulate so long as you know quickly what controls what. I wasn't thinking that the fact it's a plug-in would make a difference. Same attraction as with levels and pans. Just more of a good thing. If you like their plug-ins, of course. And if the plug-ins will even work live.

by **Reujonik** » Sat Feb 13, 2021 1:58 am

I,ve actually got a large screwdriver that works really well as a blunt instrument.

by **cgrafx** » Fri Feb 12, 2021 12:23 pm

Naturally Digital wrote:I refuse to engage in these debates. It's a time-suck and can get frustrating for anyone other than the ones 'who enjoy debating or arguing' which I do not.

One only needs to lurk here to know there are many different uses for SAC and some users use it in their studios every day. I don't try to second guess what uses one may have for these tools.

Regardless of anyone's 'opinions' about the OP's use case, I see no reason to shoot down the idea before the discussion even gets off the ground. It's a destructive or combative approach instead of a constructive approach. It really causes me to want to just stay lurking and not bother contributing. It feels too much like dealing with forum police and it's what's wrong with so many internet forums.

I mean this in the most helpful way, but this wasn't feeling like a discussion, it was feeling more like an inquisition.

If the discussion was allowed to unfold in a friendly, non-combative nature I'm sure the answers to these questions would eventually emerge. Perhaps the OP might realize this isn't a good combo etc. Arguing is just a waste of energy to me.

OK. I've said my piece. I'll be quiet now.

Nothing was shot down or combative. The original question stands, what problems did he encounter and what didn't work the way he expected.

Additionally what was the intended use of the tool. Console 1 is specifically designed for use in a DAW, using it in SAC would be outside the expected usage and by design likely prone to problems, so the question was asked and STILL has not been answered.

What did the original user hope to achieve using this specific product with SAC.

Its not so far removed from I had this large screwdriver with a big handle that seemed like I could also use it as a Hammer but it didn't work very well and was wondering if anybody else used this screwdriver as a hammer before and did you get better results.

Nobody is challenging the use of SAC in the studio. As a matter of fact you only have to review my posts to see that I am a big proponent of exactly that. I use SAC as the front end to SAW Studio and its an awesome combination, but it is STILL functionally a live sound application.

Adding Console 1 to SAC is putting it into the wrong end of the workflow.

SAC is not part of the the mix-down process. You do that in SAW.

Plugins are not generally used in SAC when your recording, other than sweetening the foldback for the talent or using a VST instrument. The plugins go into the mix in SAW and this is where C1 would get used.

I'm not saying you can't pre-load plugins/effects and print them to your recording, but there had better be a good reason to do that as it will severely limit what you can do with the recording in post.

Best practices are generally
- capture clean unaltered audio
- mix/master in post

by **Naturally Digital** » Fri Feb 12, 2021 12:08 pm

cgrafx wrote:If we change the discussion to SAW Studio, than that is a completely different application and the C1 may or may not be more useful, but it at least makes sense in that context where manipulating plugin settings may be a more prominent task.

I refuse to engage in these debates. It's a time-suck and can get frustrating for anyone other than the ones 'who enjoy debating or arguing' which I do not.

One only needs to lurk here to know there are many different uses for SAC and some users use it in their studios every day. I don't try to second guess what uses one may have for these tools.

Regardless of anyone's 'opinions' about the OP's use case, I see no reason to shoot down the idea before the discussion even gets off the ground. It's a destructive or combative approach instead of a constructive approach. It really causes me to want to just stay lurking and not bother contributing. It feels too much like dealing with forum police and it's what's wrong with so many internet forums.

I mean this in the most helpful way, but this wasn't feeling like a discussion, it was feeling more like an inquisition.

If the discussion was allowed to unfold in a friendly, non-combative nature I'm sure the answers to these questions would eventually emerge. Perhaps the OP might realize this isn't a good combo etc. Arguing is just a waste of energy to me.

OK. I've said my piece. I'll be quiet now.

by **cgrafx** » Fri Feb 12, 2021 9:21 am

Dave Labrecque wrote:Again, why the C1 vs. mouse approach? Why not enjoy the best of both?

Are you saying you simply don't see a scenario where the C1 would be at all useful live? What if there were specific Softube plugs that the user liked and was familiar with in terms of C1 control of them? Would not that be a viable scenario for it's use alongside a mouse?

I'm not understanding what circumstance would have somebody furiously tweaking a plugin during a live show where they would need a physical knob to do that.

I'm not saying its not possible, its just not something most live sound engineers would find themselves doing.

This is also why I asked Larry the original question "What was he hoping to accomplish". Maybe he is one of the rare people/circumstances were this would be more efficient.

by **Dave Labrecque** » Fri Feb 12, 2021 7:51 am

cgrafx wrote:No I'm suggesting that the C1 is at best a far 2nd to a mouse for live use. Again we are not talking about control surfaces in general, but specifically a control surface designed to control plugin settings. I use a fader pack with SAC (Fader, mute, solo, pan) because it provides a much better interface specifically where its needed (tactile control of stuff that matters when your driving a console live). But how much time is going to be spent tweaking plugin settings live, and how would a random set of knobs that are not consistent from plug-in to plug-in improve that situation.

We are also not talking about post mixing because you don't do that in SAC.

If we change the discussion to SAW Studio, than that is a completely different application and the C1 may or may not be more useful, but it at least makes sense in that context where manipulating plugin settings may be a more prominent task.

Again, why the C1 vs. mouse approach? Why not enjoy the best of both?

Are you saying you simply don't see a scenario where the C1 would be at all useful live? What if there were specific Softube plugs that the user liked and was familiar with in terms of C1 control of them? Would not that be a viable scenario for it's use alongside a mouse?

by **cgrafx** » Thu Feb 11, 2021 6:45 pm

Dave Labrecque wrote:More efficient than what? A mouse? Presumably whoever designs or buys controls surfaces think there's utility in their existence. I'm sure you can see that there is some operational overlap between live and post mixing workflows.

Presumably, said knobs would help in a live setting in the same way they help in the studio: by giving better/faster/more-intuitive manual control than a mouse. I'm sure you can imagine a setting/situation where the C1 would be more desirable than a mouse for certain tasks. That would be the answer to your question.

I'm certainly not saying it would always be superior to a mouse in live sound. But you seem to be saying a mouse would always be superior to the C1, which I'm not understanding. Seems like an odd generalization.

But the C1 doesn't even supplant a mouse. You can use both, right? You sound like you're suggesting an either/or paradigm.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding.

No I'm suggesting that the C1 is at best a far 2nd to a mouse for live use. Again we are not talking about control surfaces in general, but specifically a control surface designed to control plugin settings. I use a fader pack with SAC (Fader, mute, solo, pan) because it provides a much better interface specifically where its needed (tactile control of stuff that matters when your driving a console live). But how much time is going to be spent tweaking plugin settings live, and how would a random set of knobs that are not consistent from plug-in to plug-in improve that situation.

We are also not talking about post mixing because you don't do that in SAC.

If we change the discussion to SAW Studio, than that is a completely different application and the C1 may or may not be more useful, but it at least makes sense in that context where manipulating plugin settings may be a more prominent task.

by **Naturally Digital** » Thu Feb 11, 2021 6:28 pm

Larry Burger wrote:I was hoping to control their plugins with the Console 1 in addition to everything I do with SAC via controllers and mice.

I don't have a C1 so I have no experience to offer. This product is on my radar so I am curious if it works in SAW/SAC.

What happened when you tried your Console 1 inside SAC?

Do you have it working in SAWStudio?

Which audio applications are you used to using with your C1?

by **Dave Labrecque** » Thu Feb 11, 2021 6:21 pm

cgrafx wrote:in the context we are discussing here, how would a randomly changing set of knobs help or be more efficient when running a live mixing desk.

More efficient than what? A mouse? Presumably whoever designs or buys controls surfaces think there's utility in their existence. I'm sure you can see that there is some operational overlap between live and post mixing workflows.

Presumably, said knobs would help in a live setting in the same way they help in the studio: by giving better/faster/more-intuitive manual control than a mouse. I'm sure you can imagine a setting/situation where the C1 would be more desirable than a mouse for certain tasks. That would be the answer to your question.

I'm certainly not saying it would always be superior to a mouse in live sound. But you seem to be saying a mouse would always be superior to the C1, which I'm not understanding. Seems like an odd generalization.

But the C1 doesn't even supplant a mouse. You can use both, right? You sound like you're suggesting an either/or paradigm.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding.

by **cgrafx** » Thu Feb 11, 2021 5:10 pm

Dave Labrecque wrote:Sounds like you've answered your own question.

The whole control surface premise is that it's superior to using a mouse. Why else would anyone use a control surface? :confused:

Unless you mean to focus on the plug-ins themselves. In that case, it's in the ear of the beholder, of course.

actually no I havenâ€™t. A control surface is not always a better interface, and in the case of plugins which have completely different UIs, a physical control surface can be a detiment rather than an asset, as the knobs will most likely never be the same set or function.

physical control surfaces make a lot sense and are useful in places where there is a uniform/consistent pairing of form to function (i.e., faders, mutes, solos, pan, gain, transport controls, etc.,)

in the context we are discussing here, how would a randomly changing set of knobs help or be more efficient when running a live mixing desk. remember we are not talking about a DAW.

SAC and Console 1

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1

Re: SAC and Console 1