Is the Game Over?

[RBIngraham]

Yes over FW,
but the plugs I use are must there's no compromise... and that can't offer any console out there, right now.
Also I hope that before we move to any other system, Bob will do some programming and upgrade SAC for multicore use, plus do some support for some of the products out there to ease up our pain over converters and preamps.

Also...As I know musicians, they don't bother mixing their own monitors,they just want to come and play.I'm talking here about musicians that play in front of 10.000 - 100.000 people. They pay us to deliver the mix.And if the mix is done / assuming the band is using only IEM / there will be no changes throughout the tour.Or if they need some fixing ,we can always take the recorded concert / mix up in the hotel room and set up a 2.1 sys and listen back the concert, tweek some things and do some polishing with the monitoring.

My costumers and the 90% of the world work in DAW's They or somebody else create's their music in ProTools,Nuendo,Logic.... and they wan't the sound to be as close as possible the music on the CD.Beside arenas,they also play large fancy expensive clubs and they want the sound to be as processed as the music that the DJ plays in between the sets.They want it to be like a mastered CD.You have no headroom here to play with...not even a half of a dB...
So,If you tell me that you can pull this off with a single x32,Soundcraft,or any other board out there I'll b..w you

As I can see, you are doing theatrical act's and not live concerts - bands, right? For your needs the x32,or whatever other console can do the job and u will eventually be happy with it, not having to think about the load or the drop outs.But for my kind of a job, beside SAC, I can't find any other system that can offer this much as SAC does.Not under 100.000eur and a bunch of racks,cables and sh...

So,for now, I just wish Bob would talk to Matthias and do some more programming, so that we could all even more enjoy in his fabulous SAC

Where did I say that I think you should ditch SAC and get one of these instead? I didn't. Nor did I say I was going to run out and get one either. No I don't think "the game", whatever the hell that is? is Over.

Take a chill pill man... I was just pointing out a fact.

As for not being able to serve up the needs of your clients with anything other than SAC, sorry I have to cry BS on that one. It might be easier, you may prefer SAC. Nothing wrong with that! You might not be able to afford the other options but they are out there. A Digidesign desk might be an option. I don't know. I don't really care to be honest. I'll trust you can do your own homework and pick what console is right for you. If SAC is it... awesome!

As for emulating what the albums sound like, I'm pretty sure big acts have done this for years even before we had many digital mixing consoles in sound reinforcement, long before we even had plug-ins. I'm sure there are plenty of folk out there with various options from Waves and others that can host plug ins that you just insert into the console of your choice. Run any plug-in you like... on any desk you like... Magic!

As for "Bob's fabulous SAC"... sorry bad choice of words for a gutter mind like mine. Like Bob's software, he can keep his SAC to himself... thanks..

[Mattseymour]

I've just chosen sac over the x32 for many reasons. These new offerings wouldn't have changed that decision for reasons of flexibility, but an sac system vs soundcraft is a very different proposition from Behringer.

[airickess]

My costumers and the 90% of the world work in DAW's They or somebody else create's their music in ProTools,Nuendo,Logic.... and they wan't the sound to be as close as possible the music on the CD.Beside arenas,they also play large fancy expensive clubs and they want the sound to be as processed as the music that the DJ plays in between the sets.They want it to be like a mastered CD.You have no headroom here to play with...not even a half of a dB...

You have no idea what you are talking about.

[Audio_Labs]

I think u should buy it and have fun,stop using SAC cause it's GAME OVER for you

I think you should not think to tell me what to do, ever!
Then... I just want to tell this forum that some manifacturers are going to sell more powerful, little, light and without phisical controls mixers.
These remind me the lovely Sac philosophy. If this market factor is a fortune for general customers, it will demonstrate the right Sac vision from the past, too.
The problem: how to defend Sac vision from other brands? Bob?

[operationwhat]

Where did I say that I think you should ditch SAC and get one of these instead? I didn't. Nor did I say I was going to run out and get one either. No I don't think "the game", whatever the hell that is? is Over.

Take a chill pill man... I was just pointing out a fact.

As for not being able to serve up the needs of your clients with anything other than SAC, sorry I have to cry BS on that one. It might be easier, you may prefer SAC. Nothing wrong with that! You might not be able to afford the other options but they are out there. A Digidesign desk might be an option. I don't know. I don't really care to be honest. I'll trust you can do your own homework and pick what console is right for you. If SAC is it... awesome!

As for emulating what the albums sound like, I'm pretty sure big acts have done this for years even before we had many digital mixing consoles in sound reinforcement, long before we even had plug-ins. I'm sure there are plenty of folk out there with various options from Waves and others that can host plug ins that you just insert into the console of your choice. Run any plug-in you like... on any desk you like... Magic!

As for "Bob's fabulous SAC"... sorry bad choice of words for a gutter mind like mine. Like Bob's software, he can keep his SAC to himself... thanks..

Hahaha....come on... don't get so pissed off....

Anyway, no Digidesign could fit in there where I was mixing this show.In this club we had only 1x1m space to squeez in the mixer. So we did used SAC and it was fun!Also, the company's, that we work with.... well, they have 2 Digidesign Profile's, Midas Legend 3000, Midas XL4 that was last used for Garry Moore , Midas Verona, Digico DS00, 2x Yamaha PM5D's , Yamaha PM4000, Soundcraft Vi6 and a Macky TT24 .So, we cold have picked any of thsese consoles to mix the show but, where would you put them?

[RandyHyde]

The problem: how to defend Sac vision from other brands? Bob?

Very easy.
1) Make sure SAC *AND THE SYSTEM IT RUNS ON* is robust. People are afraid of running their live audio on a PC. Whether or not this fear is justified, the fear exists. Need some way of counteracting this fear (perhaps education? I don't know).
2) Six words: control surfaces, control surfaces, control surfaces. The SAC Religious may think that virtual mixing is the "cat's meow" and might delude themselves into thinking this is the wave of the future; it's not. Until SAC has viable control surface support (comparable to decent boards in the price range Bob always compares SAC against), there won't be a whole lot of sound engineers out there that will ever consider SAC. Yes, DAWs went virtual; but you don't need real-time response in your workflow for DAWs as much as you need this for LAWs. Physical control surfaces (not touchscreens, multitouch or otherwise) are essential to defend SAC from these $2,000-$10,000 "brands" that are now appearing.

SAC does some really neat things. I'd miss a boatload of features if I had to give up SAC tomorrow and go with something like an X32, GLD, Si Expression, iLive, or Midas Pro. However, once we're talking about 48 channels under $10,000 with a decent control surface, I'd seriously considering giving up SAC or delegating it to monitor world.
Cheers,
Randy Hyde

[Bob L]

Old habits die hard huh....

Once you let go of the desire and physchological crutch of thinking you need a control surface... virtual mixing becomes a reality... the tool has been given to you... you just need to embrace it.

And... as soon as the rest of the industry starts enjoying their little ipad apps with every other console these days... it won't be too long before they all wonder exactly why it is they are still humping that big control surface in and out of each venue.

Then, perhaps when they get done playing with their toy ipad app, they will begin to embrace a real virtual mixing interface designed to work as the main mixing interface instead of as an add-on to a physical one.

It is quite funny to watch from this side of the fence.

Bob L

[operationwhat]

Hi Bob,yeah...it is really funny
I know that we don't really need the control surface, but the guys who have got used to faders and knobs just cant figure out the way to run shows fast enough, that I understand and I feel for them.I would feel the same if I'd never worked in the studio before?

My only complain is the multi-touch support for other devices than 3M
Please, can this be done, so we could use any MT monitor out there and finally get rid of controllers ?

[PhaseShifter]

Old habits die hard huh....

Once you let go of the desire and physchological crutch of thinking you need a control surface... virtual mixing becomes a reality... the tool has been given to you... you just need to embrace it.

And... as soon as the rest of the industry starts enjoying their little ipad apps with every other console these days... it won't be too long before they all wonder exactly why it is they are still humping that big control surface in and out of each venue.

Then, perhaps when they get done playing with their toy ipad app, they will begin to embrace a real virtual mixing interface designed to work as the main mixing interface instead of as an add-on to a physical one.

It is quite funny to watch from this side of the fence.

Bob L

One major difference though. The iPad is a true multi touch device and every mfgr with an ipad app for their console provides multi touch control and an optimized interface designed for the iPad. SAC Remote running on a tablet is not really up to the task in comparison.

I don't quite think you have it right with your "they're all doing it wrong, wait till they see what I'm doing is the right way" point of view.

[PhaseShifter]

Hi Bob,yeah...it is really funny
I know that we don't really need the control surface, but the guys who have got used to faders and knobs just cant figure out the way to run shows fast enough, that I understand and I feel for them.I would feel the same if I'd never worked in the studio before?

My only complain is the multi-touch support for other devices than 3M
Please, can this be done, so we could use any MT monitor out there and finally get rid of controllers ?

You feel for people who are used to controlling multiple things at once by using both of their thanks to mix, that are now limited to using just one?

[Bob L]

The multi-touch thing is way overrated... after studying other engineers doing really good mixing it became obvious that they are generally very relaxed adjusting basically one thing at a time... a mix where the operator is all over the place like an octopus is generally not properly trimmed and setup in my observation...

The ipad apps that you claim are so perfectly setup are very toyish to me... in reality they appear as a fad... I doubt you will find many attempting to leave their control surface backstage and run the entire FOH using one of those apps.... SAC on the other hand is designed to specifically do so with the remote because the remote is the full interface... and this is being done right now in more SAC installations than not.

Is there room for improvement... certainly... but at least the current idea is more on the money than what I see elsewhere.

The real funny thing is that those that argue against the idea are so obsessed with telling me how wrong it all is and what will be needed to ever have the idea catch on.... when in reality... the idea is already catching on... and those of us who are embracing it are having a blast breaking new ground that has never before existed... and the fact remains that I am only proposing a new alternative method of mixing for those that are open to the concept and not taking anything away from those that aren't... you will still have your faders for a long time to come, most likely... so... all the arguing is quite amusing from this side of the fence... when really... you either like the idea and jump onboard, or you don't like the idea and you should just leave it alone and use one of the standard console designs... it really is that simple.

All the drama trauma about it is just a waste of time and energy.

Bob L

[Mattseymour]

One major difference though. The iPad is a true multi touch device and every mfgr with an ipad app for their console provides multi touch control and an optimized interface designed for the iPad. SAC Remote running on a tablet is not really up to the task in comparison.

I'd second this. I keep seeing folk here referring to the iPad as a "toy" (although in fairness Bob did say the app was a toy but perhaps that's splitting hairs). I don't agree with this. As a form factor it's vastly superior to a Netbook or larger laptop, simply because of weight and battery life... A Netbook doesn't really cut it to be honest. Screen res too low, unit too awkward to operate.

As I said before, I think it will be very interesting to see how many people end up using their consoles as ipad controlled mix engines. Very happy to believe it will be a lot and that Bob's virtual mixing approach will become the norm... But of course there you'd have the choice

Personally I'm happy working this way, with a 8 fader pack when I need it, but I think dismissing the ipad, and android tablets, is a mistake. With so many other manufacturers building tablet interfaces there's an increasing amount to learn from, what works well and what doesn't. I'm sure some of these apps will be toys, they'll be the 'me too' offerings manufacturers are pressured to provide. Would be great to see SAC building on being the first virtual mixing environment and doing this really well.

[martiaudio]

The topic was really interesting and apart from Bob'd comments, it is immediately high jacked by the same people, you know who you are I think..

Anyway.. I think SAC needs something else than a Forum for support and real constructive idea free box..

Having to read pages and pages again of none sense before finding a little link that is sometime the precious tech support that all of us need to share. GGGRRR

For the rest with smart i/o's and smart controller, There is still no competition to SAC to my views, yet I am always the first to point out there are affordable solution out there all in one box: Who wants diyed one with lots of bits.. so there is for and against.

What interests me is that multitouch if at all touch screen isn't that natural after all to work with. and a real thing is more appropriate.
SAC does need to be for diyers and integrated in all in one hardware as well, as a choice I think that is understood..I hope the latter ever comes alive.

The piece from Behringer is good and useless at the same time..
Permanent venues use Crestron and obscure i/o in the install world, and commission Sound companies after, even for a speed because after millions of investment in VC and automations, they realised they can't do One Mic at all and they don't have access to decent form of EQ!! I see that times and times again..

But this X32 in 1U rack what can it be used for otherwise??

In the purpose of the SAC subject: LYNX card AES50 S16 or MIDAS DL251.. so far nothing else.
The Hope to to get a NO card at all, like DANTE or a SAC protocol dedicated,
and linkable i/o to it and that is it really!

[Jeff Scott]

Bob: Sac and SAW have been 2 revolutionary products in my professional and musical career. They have allowed me to go places and do things that were not possible in my budget range.

I use (2) BCF2000's for 16 channels of fader control/ I'm going to be purchasing another very soon as 24 channels would feel more comfortable. As try as i might...it's not possible for me to mix shows one fader at a time with a mouse. I usually have one hand / 4 or 5 fingers on 3 or 4 vocal channels and are blending them nonstop through out the show. The other hand is constantly blending guitars/ bass / keys. The only static sub mix is usually the drums. I could not do this with a mouse. I've tried for years but I cannot match the speed of 4 fingers manipulating 4 channels at once

But with the BCF's iIve got that covered. I've demo'd SAC for the largest sound provider in my city. They "got" the concept. They actually liked what it could do. A few very minor things but they were comparing it to the big touring consoles they rent out and operate every day. Those things were not deal breakers....more or less just work flow / comfort level issues.

There was ONE thing that was a deal breaker though...and it has been the one constant observation by that sound company , and every visiting Sound Tech that has used my SAC system.

And sadly..after using SAC for 3 years...and fighting with this every time I use it, I have to agree. It is this...I / They / the Sound Provider all want to see a minimum of 1 channels worth of Input Att. / Dynamics / EQ and Aux control.

If that ONE thing was provided...there would be virtually no complaints from them.

Now...I have understood your philosophy on this matter. The technology and hardware changes etc. happen so fast that the effort you put in today will be wasted tomorrow. I hear you you and agree with you if we are talking about a dedicated manufacturer's unit.

However...many , many people have asked or volunteered to take this on. I don't pretend to understand the particulars of a release of an API or other issues surrounding the code and what it involves to do this. But if such a thing were made available I would damn well figure out and learn how to do it myself . I feel that strongly about it and my need to have 1 channels worth of control surface is that great. There are many people on the forum that are ready and willing to do this for us..take it out of your hands. There are many places we can buy or assemble the hardware boards and configure them into our own steel desktop boxes. I can immagine someone will get themselves a little sideline going providing SAC users with such a piece of hardware.

Again...I've been told straight by several dozen pro's in my area...they love SAC, they get it, they see the advantages of it over the other "pro" boards they use...but lack of faders and/or Rotary knob controls for a min. of 1 Channel is the deal breaker.

It's not that they REFUSE to adapt...it's that you cannot physically do the same things on SAC IN IT'S PRESENT STATE that they can on their touring boards. They are not talking about workflow, routing the 25 monitor mixes, the ability to Record via SAC/ SAW link. They are talking about being able to mix with 4 to 8 fingers at once and to access all of the Tone / Aux / Input attenuation etc. at once.

With respect and admiration for you and your product...Jeff Scott

[operationwhat]

You feel for people who are used to controlling multiple things at once by using both of their thanks to mix, that are now limited to using just one?

Yes my friend,and I was not sarcastic about it.I do get complains over this and I wrote to Bob about the existing problem and I figured that maybe somebody should build a controller for SAC and that Bob could the include the support in the next SAC version.

[PhaseShifter]

Yes my friend,and I was not sarcastic about it.I do get complains over this and I wrote to Bob about the existing problem and I figured that maybe somebody should build a controller for SAC and that Bob could the include the support in the next SAC version.

Yes, I can see this happening ASAP.

[dasbin]

... after studying other engineers doing really good mixing it became obvious that they are generally very relaxed adjusting basically one thing at a time... a mix where the operator is all over the place like an octopus is generally not properly trimmed and setup in my observation...

For rock shows I 100% agree. On such shows, I spend careful time setting up the mix but once the show starts, it's usually just 3-4 VCA's I'm slowly riding in the neighbourhood of 1-3db each. That and FX changes and occasional solo bumps. In reality, in such a situation, if the mix is set really well, I could walk away for the entire show and the audience wouldn't notice the difference. I'm mostly just resting my hand on faders to justify getting paid for the time


I know this has been beat to death but theatre is a whole different animal. Vocal levels on many wireless mics (often 12+ onstage at once) must constantly be adjusted to the tune of 10+db per syllable, per channel. Adept individual finger movements becomes a performance in itself, and is crucial to the show. There is no replacement for a bank of faders in such a situation, and multitouch is really just as useless because you need tactile feedback to mentally track all the fader positions. So I actually agree with your assesment of multitouch control, but for different reasons: it basically negates the one advantage of fader banks in the first place - the tactile feedback of not having to look at what you're doing on mutiple fingers simultaneously.
I know that "don't use SAC for theatre, then" might be an approriate response, but in actuality, SAC is perfect for theatre in so many other ways, and its flexibility / programability outshines many digital consoles (at least for the price) in theatre, which is why you see a few of us here using it on some mid-budget professional productions even when other (more expensive) options are available.

[Bob L]

Well... we are not disagreeing Dasbin... in reality, for theater you can use an 8 or 16 chan fader unit... problem has already been solved... but all this concern over the need for knobs and switches for eq and compression etc... is simply not meaningful at all... you have all the control and more than is ever needed right on the screen with a mouse or trackball.

And all the comotion over multi-touch... sorry, but after designing and attempting to use the 3M full multi-touch in the field... without tactile feedback, its no where near the same as physical faders... and an ipad will not change that fact at all.

And the need for more than 16 faders is again simply someone's idea of how it has to be done because they are used to it that way... and as I mentioned in another thread, you are starting to see the control surfaces get smaller and smaller... the Midas Pro 6 having only 12 input faders... so I really do not understand the arguments about SAC missing a control surface making it not acceptable.

And if someone completely disagrees with my observations and beliefs then they should simply use a physical console that is to their liking and leave SAC alone.

Bob L

[Mattseymour]

Well then don't use sac for... Oh I see.

Anyway... I don't do proper theatre productions, but the bits and pieces I have done are zero rehearsal and very high pressure. I've only once found a single bcf2000 to be limiting... So I used two.

It strikes me that the custom mixer view, that has been talked about and may or may not be on its way in the relatively near future, would help here. Particularly if what appeared in that mixer were changeable by scenes.

[Bob L]

You can create a custom mixer view right now with scenes by altering the chan re-order on one or more mixers... a controller used on that mixer would also instantly re-arrange the signals that it controls.

Bob L