Another noob question on number of outputs

[Doug_Danforth]

We hooked up our sac system last night for the first time in practice. I "thought" I had most of the basics figured out but I suspect that I might still be missing something fundamental.

Is it accurate to say that you can only control a maximum of 16 speakers with SAC, assuming none are daisy chained? That is, you have a total of 8 Master Stereo outs that can be connected to a maximum of 16 speakers. The other 16 outs (the pink ones) can not be connected to a physical device but can serve as subgroup controls etc?

Somehow this does not seem correct since I read posts about folks using sixtyeleven ADA8000's.

We finally managed to get sound out of the system and all in the band are excited to roll out SAC along with our new BFM speakers for our New Year's Eve gig, but I'm afraid I still have a long way to go before understanding the complexities of the system

Thanks,

Doug

[Yogi]

Doug,
Most times the FOH mix will only have 2 or 3 physical channels (depending on how you run your amps and crossovers). You may have a few more if you're sending the mix to a recorder of some type. With 24 monitor mixes you MAY have one or more speakers per mix. IF you have that many mixes you could easily use up 48 or more channels.

[905shmick]

You get 8 master outs per mixer.

Sounds like you might be trying to do monitor outs from the FOH mixer when you have 24 monitor mixers to choose from.

[Doug_Danforth]

You get 8 master outs per mixer.

Sounds like you might be trying to do monitor outs from the FOH mixer when you have 24 monitor mixers to choose from.

So the Red 1-8 Master outs on the FOH mixer are different than the Red 1-8 Master Outs on a monitor mix? That is I can control 16 speakers from each mixer? (Not that I want to do that - just trying to understand).

If so, that clears up my confusion.

Thanks!

Doug

[905shmick]

So the Red 1-8 Master outs on the FOH mixer are different than the Red 1-8 Master Outs on a monitor mix? That is I can control 16 speakers from each mixer? (Not that I want to do that - just trying to understand).

If so, that clears up my confusion.

Thanks!

Doug

Correct.

[ssrsound]

exactly.

[ssrsound]

And I should note that if you set up your monitor board post-fader, it's pretty much like adding another 16 to the FOH, since you'll get the same mix. not that I can ever imagine doing that... but its possible.

[905shmick]

Rather than retyping this, I'll just paste it :)


To clarify, the system is designed to allow a new approach to monitor mixing by giving every mix its OWN fully featured console. The software currently supports 72 discrete physical inputs and 72 discrete physical outputs if your interface provides them...if your CPU can keep up, you can use them all for anything.

There is a FOH console, and 24 monitor consoles. They are completely discrete and contain the same features.
EACH of these consoles has 72 channels, 6 auxiliaries & returns, 8 master and 16 group outputs...as well as it's own EQ & dynamics for every channel.

Every input on every monitor console can be split from a choice of many places in the signal chain, including most commonly: 'source split' and 'post fader mon' (which allows monitor console 1 to act as a monitor master console for any other monitor consoles on a per channel choice basis)
Every channel and aux return can be assigned to any combination of master & subgroup outputs on it's console.
Every master output can be assigned to any physical output, even those also assigned elsewhere.

With this approach, auxes on every console no longer need to be used for monitor feeds at all, instead they allow additional routing & FX processing seperately for each mix. And for the first time in pro audio history the answer to performer questions like: 'Can I get less high end on only my guitar in just my wedge' is YES!

Of course, you could still configure any (or all) consoles to provide up to 6 monitor mixes from auxes if you remain married to that way of working...but you won't want to once you get the hang of this, nobody here uses it that way that I know of unless they need more than 23 monitor mixes. By doing that though, you could theoretically squeeze 68 mono monitor mixes out of it while STILL providing stereo FOH and one stereo headphone buss...which you could also sacrifice for 4 more mono mixes if you were truly insane.

You can make and save scenes which control only the collections of parameters and consoles you want changed when you call them.
The whole set-up (including those scenes) saves to a tiny mix session file so you can create an entirely different audio system for a different performer if you should want to...with everything different. Really everything.

The system is so comprehensive, and so flexible, that I have yet to come up with a signal routing scenario that can't be solved.

PS: anywhere I said mono above, you can get exactly half that many full stereo 'whatevers'...mix & match as needed ;)

[Yogi]

Each "mixer" is sort of it's own entity. So in effect you have 25 independent mixers, FOH + 24 monitor mixes.

[Doug_Danforth]

Doug,
Most times the FOH mix will only have 2 or 3 physical channels (depending on how you run your amps and crossovers). You may have a few more if you're sending the mix to a recorder of some type. With 24 monitor mixes you MAY have one or more speakers per mix. IF you have that many mixes you could easily use up 48 or more channels.

I think I understand the FOH mix and I have it set up so that SAC Output 1 is assigned to outputs 1 and 2 on the Behringer to control my mains - left and right. I have SAC Output 2 assigned to output 3 on the Behringer and that will run the subs. Will either run that as mono or pan hard left.

The remaining behringer outputs (I have 2 ADA8000's) will run monitors. For now they will be wedges. We are transitioning to in-ears.

Doug

[sjpaul]

I think I understand the FOH mix and I have it set up so that SAC Output 1 is assigned to outputs 1 and 2 on the Behringer to control my mains - left and right. I have SAC Output 2 assigned to output 3 on the Behringer and that will run the subs. Will either run that as mono or pan hard left.

The remaining behringer outputs (I have 2 ADA8000's) will run monitors. For now they will be wedges. We are transitioning to in-ears.

Doug


Sounds like you have the idea...
Depending on the number of channels of power amps / or powered individual wedges, will give you X number of separate monitor mixes available, and for each monitor mixer you also have 8 physical hardware stereo outputs available (should you need them!!)

If you step up to larger systems, the ouputs could be for FOH:
Outputs 1 subs
Output 2 kick bins
Outputs 3 low mids
Output 4 high mids
Output 5 Comp drivers

etc., etc....

That's the great thing about SAC - its' superb routing flexibility.

[Brent Evans]

If you step up to larger systems, the ouputs could be for FOH:
Outputs 1 subs
Output 2 kick bins
Outputs 3 low mids
Output 4 high mids
Output 5 Comp drivers


People still do that? I though most of the major tours were using line arrays now. 3 way crossover at most. :D

Also, don't forget that each of the Aux sends can be assigned to outputs as well, so (technically) you get 8x2 plus 6x2 (or 16+12=28) physical outputs per mixer.

The most I use on any mixer is 4 master outs: Tops, Subs, and 2 fill zones. On monitor mixers, there is only ever 1 or 2 (I have one mixer that does a wedge mix and an IEM mix that are always identical).

[gdougherty]

People still do that? I though most of the major tours were using line arrays now. 3 way crossover at most. :D

Also, don't forget that each of the Aux sends can be assigned to outputs as well, so (technically) you get 8x2 plus 6x2 (or 16+12=28) physical outputs per mixer.

The most I use on any mixer is 4 master outs: Tops, Subs, and 2 fill zones. On monitor mixers, there is only ever 1 or 2 (I have one mixer that does a wedge mix and an IEM mix that are always identical).

Many of the large scale touring arrays are at least 4-way with 3-way mains. vDOSC rigs are something like 12"LF, crossfiring 8" mids and a HF section. Subs fill in everything beneath that.

[sjpaul]

People still do that? I though most of the major tours were using line arrays now. 3 way crossover at most. :D


It was a hypothetical scenario and a bit oldskool....:)

My own mains run 3 way or is that 3.5 way since hi mid and CD's have an internal passive X-O?

[airickess]

Many of the large scale touring arrays are at least 4-way with 3-way mains. vDOSC rigs are something like 12"LF, crossfiring 8" mids and a HF section. Subs fill in everything beneath that.That doesn't mean they are burning an output for each set of drivers. They are adjusting the driver feeds at the processor, not at the console. Typically the FOH console is set up for a simple L/R for the L/R arrays. Depending on the venue, there are Front Fills, Subwoofers, Sidefills and sometimes Delay speakers to consider, and each of those will most likely eat up an output (or two) at the console, depending on the content sent to each zone.
In the case of large powered rigs such as Meyer Audio speakers, the crossovers are in the speaker and cannot be changed.

[RBIngraham]

Many of the large scale touring arrays are at least 4-way with 3-way mains. vDOSC rigs are something like 12"LF, crossfiring 8" mids and a HF section. Subs fill in everything beneath that.

Yes, but most Line Arrays are either self powered, ala Meyer, or they have dedicated processors, like vDosc, or Nexo, or d&b, etc...

You can either feed the subs separately or the processor will handle that as well. So in most rigs like that, from a SAC point of view, you would just give it a stereo feed and let the dedicated processors do all that work. Or at most you're doing a stereo feed with a dedicated sub out feed.

This is assuming you're working in stereo of course. If it's L-C-R then you're doing 3 channels plus sub, etc, etc, etc..

Makes me wonder how many feeds and zones the mix was broken down into for U2 with that "claw" stage thing... :D

[RBIngraham]

That doesn't mean they are burning an output for each set of drivers. They are adjusting the driver feeds at the processor, not at the console. Typically the FOH console is set up for a simple L/R for the L/R arrays. Depending on the venue, there are Front Fills, Subwoofers, Sidefills and sometimes Delay speakers to consider, and each of those will most likely eat up an output (or two) at the console, depending on the content sent to each zone.
In the case of large powered rigs such as Meyer Audio speakers, the crossovers are in the speaker and cannot be changed.


Oppss.. Sorry! Didn't read down far enough before I responded. :)

[RBIngraham]

We hooked up our sac system last night for the first time in practice. I "thought" I had most of the basics figured out but I suspect that I might still be missing something fundamental.

Is it accurate to say that you can only control a maximum of 16 speakers with SAC, assuming none are daisy chained? That is, you have a total of 8 Master Stereo outs that can be connected to a maximum of 16 speakers. The other 16 outs (the pink ones) can not be connected to a physical device but can serve as subgroup controls etc?

Somehow this does not seem correct since I read posts about folks using sixtyeleven ADA8000's.

We finally managed to get sound out of the system and all in the band are excited to roll out SAC along with our new BFM speakers for our New Year's Eve gig, but I'm afraid I still have a long way to go before understanding the complexities of the system

Thanks,

Doug

This line diagram may or may not help you. But here it is anyway.

http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/images/SAC/Visio-SAC_Block%20Diagram%201_2.pdf

[Carl G.]

This line diagram may or may not help you. But here it is anyway.

http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/images/SAC/Visio-SAC_Block***37;20Diagram%201_2.pdf

Very nice block Diagram.
You might want to add some important things, like:
1. Mono summing for Input channels and Aux Return channels
2. The various L/R selectivity inside each Mono Sum button for Inputs, Aux Returns, and Output channels
(there is currently mono sum shown on Outs - but no L/R selectivity routine shown on those)

[RBIngraham]

Very nice block Diagram.
You might want to add some important things, like:
1. Mono summing for Input channels and Aux Return channels
2. The various L/R selectivity inside each Mono Sum button for Inputs, Aux Returns, and Output channels
(there is currently mono sum shown on Outs - but no L/R selectivity routine shown on those)

Thanks.

1. Mono Sum is shown on the Inputs, it's in the same "box" with Phase and L/R channel swap. It is shown at the point in the signal chain that happens at. At least as far as I understand.

If I am drawing it incorrectly, then it got past Bob as well, since I had him double check it for me a while back. :p

2. I'm not quite sure I understand this comment. You select a mono output in SAC by summing to Mono and then using the Pan pot to only send to one side of a stereo pair of outputs. That is all shown in the drawing currently. I guess maybe a note might be handy to try and make it clear how you create a mono output, but I'm not sure I have any good ideas of how and where I could squeeze that into the drawing.

I did think about trying to show the stereo signal path on the drawing back when I first drafted this. But when I tired that, it became very sloppy and I thought it would just add more confusion. But I guess if enough people thought that was important I could try to show that. But it would require almost a complete redraft of the diagram I suspect, in order to keep it uniform throughout the drawing. That is why I just put a note that each output is a stereo bus, then showed where the mono sums come into play and then left it up to other documentation to show how you use those mono sums to make mono outputs.

My thought was that it would be better to show end users how to do that kind of stuff with screen shots and/or more tutorial like documentation.

So that was my thinking. Let me know what you think about all this.

Thanks,

[Carl G.]

Thanks.

1. Mono Sum is shown on the Inputs, it's in the same "box" with Phase and L/R channel swap. It is shown at the point in the signal chain that happens at. At least as far as I understand.

Super! There it is!



2. I did think about trying to show the stereo signal path on the drawing back when I first drafted this. But when I tired that, it became very sloppy and I thought it would just add more confusion.

Very good point.
No need to show the stereo path.
But for new comers using SAC in the studio (which often will have stereo inputs), referencing the various options of Mono Sum could point out important flexible needs in stereo production operation.

I'd suggest a small asterisk next to each "Mono Sum" with one small notation at the end of the PDF to show the Mono Sum Options:
(end page sample)
* Mono Sum Options:
L Plus R (-6db)
L Plus R
L Only
R Only
L - R (-6db)
L - R
(I've already changed it on my copy, if you want to see it)

Richard, I noticed that you linked to 1-2, instead of 1-3 (which has different tap points). Is 1-2 the more correct?

[RBIngraham]

a small asterisk next to each "Mono Sum" with one small notation at the end of the PDF to show the Mono Sum Options:
(end page sample)
* Mono Sum Options:
L Plus R (-6db)
L Plus R
L Only
R Only
L - R (-6db)
L - R
(I've already changed it on my copy, if you want to see it)

Richard, I noticed that you linked to 1-2, instead of 1-3 (which has different tap points). Is 1-2 the more correct?

OK, now I understand what you are talking about. My brain was stuck on looking at the signal path and not what happens in each block.

I'll see if I can figure out a nice way to notate that on the drawing when time allows.

At some point I want to do something similar for SAW, but just haven't had time to even think about it much yet.

[Carl G.]

At some point I want to do something similar for SAW, but just haven't had time to even think about it much yet.
That would be a pretty good help for some people who are searching for the 'magnitude at a glance' of what SAW does.
Nice job on SAC

You maybe didn't get the end of my edited last post --
You posted version 1-2 showing a date of 6/10..... yet version 1-3 from 5/9 seems more complete.
Confused.

[RBIngraham]

That would be a pretty good help for some people who are searching for the 'magnitude at a glance' of what SAW does.
Nice job on SAC

You maybe didn't get the end of my edited last post --
You posted version 1-2 showing a date of 6/10..... yet version 1-3 from 5/9 seems more complete.
Confused.

1-3 is the most recent. It shows tap points that were not around in SAC when I did the first drawing.

Look at the date of that post, it's from last Dec. :D

I have since just linked to the page above the diagram, in my posts. That way it will always go to the most current version of the drawing.