Considering SAC for church use. Looking for other church users

[lorenjz]

Hello,

I am interested in getting input from church users who have installed SAC in place of their FOH console. Specifically users who have volunteer (non professional) operators. I'm curious what obstacles have been encountered and advice that current users have for considering such a system.

If there is anyone who has a church install in the greater DC area that I could take a peek/listen to that would be great.

Thanks,

Loren

[Yogi]

We've been running SAC for over 2 years now. There are quite a few here who are using it for FOH in churches. Nothing comes close to it. The learning curve is directly proportional to the complexity of the system. We have 32 channels both directions, 6 main feeds (main cluster, bi amped mains, sub, assisted listening, and recording), 9 in ear monitoring feeds, and one stage monitor feed that piggy backs off the main feeds. All feeds are stereo except the sub feed. The learning curve for all that is somewhat complex but our operators worked for about 6 weeks before flying solo. YMMV. The up side is the quality of the sound can't be touched by anything out there and the total cost for implementation is far and away less than anything else for the bells and whistles.

[jlklein]

I am interested in getting input from church users who have installed SAC in place of their FOH console. Specifically users who have volunteer (non professional) operators. I'm curious what obstacles have been encountered and advice that current users have for considering such a system.

If there is anyone who has a church install in the greater DC area that I could take a peek/listen to that would be great.

Hi Loren,
We're assembling one now just south of Baltimore. We have a portable SAC system we've been using but that's mostly me alone. It's been shared between the church and my church member vocal group that I run sound for (7th Voice) while we evaluate it for the church FOH and portable system, kind of a shared experimental system. We like it enough that I got the go-ahead to put together a 56 channel system for the Sanctuary FOH system, which is currently a Mackie 32x8 with a 10 channel submixer.

We are all volunteer on my team and while we are all technical to some degree or another, I am by far the biggest audio geek and the driving force behind adopting SAC. The team and I have been discussing adopting SAC at length and while they understand there will be a training and adjustment period, they are excited about the possibilities. Even if they only push faders, the ability to save scenes and mixes will greatly help us out, and the sound quality improvement with our prototype portable system has been noticeable.

You definitely need someone that is audio-geeky and computer savvy enough to build and troubleshoot a SAC system, but once everything is put together and stable it is just another digital mixer that just takes some getting used to. Some people look at my analog board with all its knobs and are scared away. But the same people would see a computer screen GUI and say, "Hey that looks neat, I'd like to learn that."

It's going to be a month or so before we get the basics put together, but if you like I will let you know when it's operation and if your close by you can check it out. We're planning on having a couple pairs of CM Motormixes for FOH and Recording/Monitors and will be running monitor wedges or Aviom fed from SAC, depending on if it's the blended or contemporary service.

Jeff

[JeremyJo]

We just passed our first SACiversary :)

I put our system together around October or November 2010 and used it for a Christmas Production. Then we left it in place for our main console and monitors since then.

I had previously built a firewire based SAC system for a small, outdoor event at a local park. Then I used that system with the direct outs of our existing monitor console to play with the system while I had a band in place.

After I was satisfied it would work for our needs I sold our monitor console (a Soundcraft GB8 32) and removed the Soundcraft K2 house console and we've been all SAC for about a year now.

I have about six volunteers who rotate in for house and monitor duties. I have two separate positions; the Host computer is at the monitor position, and FOH is a wired remote.

There has been a learning curve to be sure, but I think it's worth it and I can recommend SAC to any church who is willing to learn and invest in their audio tech.

You NEED a tech-savvy person to be a "guru" as it were, but the operators can come up to speed at a slower rate. I DON'T think it's wise to have only one person who really knows their way around SAC; I think anyone who operates it ought to be on the grow; learning and knowing what SAC is and does.

It's not for weenies :)

I DO think it represents a good value in mixing audio; particularly for churches where dollars are tight and expectations are very high.

Investigate fully. Get ready for a ride, but don't dismiss it if it just makes you uncomfortable; learn the quirks and the idiosyncratic development and USE IT!

Jeremy Johnston
Technical Ministries Director
Christian Center, Kalispell

[DavidDempseyFOH]

Im using my sac system for all 6 of our christmas services! with a Danley Sound Labs Rig.

[Frank DeWitt]

A satisfied user of SAC in a church / K-12 school setting.

It requires one geek two are better, to really understand it and tweak it. The other volunteers will learn what they need to know to mix in less time then an analog mixer. Yes, I said less. I found that the shear size and number of knobs on a analog mixer intimidated new volunteers and it took a while to get them over it. No one is afraid of a computer any more. I have competent volunteers from 14 to 66 and no issues.

One thing, As you build the system, do it with quality gear. Used is OK, low quality isn't. That means no Behringer preamps. I spent the churches money on them and then had to sell them at a loss when they went noisy on me.

"Good tools are expensive. Cheap tools are VERY expensive."

[RBIngraham]

Hello,

I am interested in getting input from church users who have installed SAC in place of their FOH console. Specifically users who have volunteer (non professional) operators. I'm curious what obstacles have been encountered and advice that current users have for considering such a system.

If there is anyone who has a church install in the greater DC area that I could take a peek/listen to that would be great.

Thanks,

Loren

You're in the right spot, probably 1/3 to 1/2 of the users here fit this description. :)

[tomcat]

Hello,

I am interested in getting input from church users who have installed SAC in place of their FOH console. Specifically users who have volunteer (non professional) operators. I'm curious what obstacles have been encountered and advice that current users have for considering such a system.

If there is anyone who has a church install in the greater DC area that I could take a peek/listen to that would be great.

Thanks,

Loren
Love our system! Haven't heard anything that even comes close to it. Learning curve for running SAC is no problem. I have trained several people on the use of this system and have never had a problem. Here is the link that shows pics of our system.
http://www.sawstudiouser.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13608

Any questions, feel free to ask! That's how I got this far. Bob and the guys on this forum are awesome.

[Brent Evans]

Overall, the response I have gotten from my volunteers upon the introuduction to SAC lesson is... "Oh... so it's just like the old one, except on the computer."

On off, up down... pretty simple concepts. Most "volunteer" types are going to be doing good to set up a mix and adjust it occasionally.

[lorenjz]

Ok so I am a "sound guy" by trade and love working with the folks at church. My Dad was a computer programmer from the time I was 10 or 11. So I think I have the one computer geek/sound guy lined up. I've got a computer with a RME Sound card at work that I can use to demo as well as a laptop to try out the remote functionality. It would seem to me that if the volunteers could get used to running it fairly easily, would the computer setup be the next hardest part?

Thanks again,

Loren

[Frank DeWitt]

Ok so I am a "sound guy" by trade and love working with the folks at church. My Dad was a computer programmer from the time I was 10 or 11. So I think I have the one computer geek/sound guy lined up. I've got a computer with a RME Sound card at work that I can use to demo as well as a laptop to try out the remote functionality. It would seem to me that if the volunteers could get used to running it fairly easily, would the computer setup be the next hardest part?

Thanks again,

Loren

Actually none of it is hard, It's just different. You have never done it before.

You are putting together USB and Ethernet, AND optical, and TRS and XLR, and a few other things, and them mapping everything.

Ok so output 11 is where? It's on the second Preamp. But the preamps are inputs, yes, and outputs to except the 3rd preamp is only inputs, but no problem, if you use MOTU then you have one set of 8 Line inputs but not preamps, and 8 Line outputs on the MOTU as well as support for two preamps with or without outputs, or you can support 3 sets of preamps but you lose the on board ins and outs, Output 11 is on preamp 2 ch 3 and it is mapped to output 7 from the FOH. Output 7 of course is your choir monitors, right?

So that means that the CD player on input 13 and 14 has it's outputs on 1 and 2 for the house and output 7 for tracks for the choir. Makes sense, right?

Well, It will make sense.

Frank

[905shmick]

Well, It will make sense.

Frank

This is why we do up a weekly "patch list" spreadsheet every week. Not sure who should be on what input or output, check the spreadsheet!

[Butch Bos]

Installed a system at a local church replacing a Mackie analogue board
They have NO trained sound people only confused fadder pushers
I now don't get calls on Sunday morning
They now how to turn on a computer but not adjust an analogue board

Butch

[SCF Sound Guy]

Loren,

We switched to SAC about a month and a half ago.
I had been researching for about eight months before beginning the build.
I would have to say nothing compares with SAC.
Every single tech at my church noticed the increased sound quality over our analog board (SoundCraft K2).
I think one of the biggest challenges is getting a solid working system.
Getting Hardware that works together, doing the system tweaks, adjusting the buffer settings can all be overwhelming.
It took us A few weeks to get our system working without any slipped buffers. Myself and another tech put the system together.
Now that we have our system working pretty well, we are feeling really good.
If your volunteers are familiar with a PC, I think they well adapt.

I purchased A four channel mixer for emergency purposes but have yet to connect it.

SAC is working great for us!

[Yogi]

I would say an implementation plan is the hardest part. I just started setting things up from what I knew of the system and the way physical mixers work. Along the way I discovered that I needed to "redo" layouts and monitors and feeds and such. There is a lot to be said for making sure monitor 1 isn't used as a monitor but as a basis for all other monitors. It took me a while to recover from that. All told I've probably redone the system at least 3 times just from things I learned along the way and a better way to do them. The SAC paradigm allows for so many things you can't do on any other physical mixer and as you implement you find better ways to do things.

[Luke Taylor]

I'll weigh in as another satisfied customer. I made the switch to SAC/SAW in September of 2010, and I've been very happy. We're about to fire up our 2011 Christmas show, and I'm glad I have SAC. I have 37 input channels from the stage, including strings, horns, a full rock band, backup singers, etc. Also back here in the booth I've got another six channels of wireless inputs as well as computer and cd inputs. Outputs go to mains, 5 wedge mixes, sixteen channels of aviom, and a rough and dirty live derivative mix for the video guys to have something to sync up audio to video on the tape.

I'm relying heavily on the scene functionality to manage my mutes/unmutes/resetting gain and eq for different performers using the same mic.

Week in-week out we're generally reliant on a volunteer tech team, I have about five guys who are trained in operating the system. Granted, our usual Sunday services are pretty similar week-to-week, so running on a Sunday is generally a "fire unmute cues, do some light monitor mixing, then babysit" sort of affair for most of them. I do a decent amount of work during rehearsals and the rest of the week to ensure smooth operation.

We're also multitracking to SAW, which is really helpful, since we'll be putting out a video of the Christmas show, and I can provide the video editors with a high quality mixed down version of the audio, instead of relying on cameras or some sort of live derivative mix.

[NoFear13X]

Not quite DC, but we're up in Southern NJ if you're ever up for a drive or are in the area. I should probably make a Sig, but we have a custom computer with 3x TubeOpto8's, around 20-something channels with a bunch of wireless mics, a drum breakout snake and a few more instruments plugged in. Add some speakers and a wireless router and our system is about done.

About 2 years ago, I bought an Allen&Heath ZED428 to replace a painful 6-channel powered mixer--- thing. It was a massive bump in quality and capability, and our church was very happy with the investment. 4 months later, when I unplugged the system and plugged in a mess of wires including my desktop computer, 2 ada8000's hooked to an RME card and wires all over the place, my pastor's comment was "I don't care what it does, we just bought that board, and I want to use that board. Get this thing out of here." Not one to listen (I repented), I rebuilt the system a number of times, and it's to a point now that when guest preachers and such come to our church, he rants and raves about how cool the system is and what it does, and our asst pastor and drummer quickly chimes in and talks about his headphone mix and the capabilities of the system. I'm pretty sure if I went back to any type of analog system, more than one person would be up in arms.

I'm now revamping things again -- a direct result of cold feet and a very slowly increasing budget (I've purchased and own ALL of the equipment myself, not including the instruments). We're expanding our wireless mics and how the system will lay out on stage and things like that, but now the only conversations are how we're going to use SAC and take the most advantage of it. The idea of getting rid of it is not even an option.

So how do my volunteers like it? Well, truth is, no one uses it. With compressors and gates and such all over the place, the system runs itself. They know how to power it on and off, and they have a basic understanding of the faders. With the AC-7 Core app, my pastor can control a few key faders from his iPad to kill the background CD as service starts or make volume adjustments on a DVD for mid-week studies, but other than that, it just works.

If you have any other specific questions, I'd me happy to answer them in this thread, or you can call me if you want to spitball a few quick ideas. I'm happy to see more churches benefitting from the versatility of SAC on a similar budget as a much smaller digital console, so however I can help you make you decision, by all means...

[Mattseymour]

I've been using SAC for any big events we've been doing, including many things in the cathedral next door, but I've yet to pull it together in our church building.

Any time I have done some testing with SAC in church the musicians have loved the sound of their monitors. More than once I've had a sound guy from a visiting theatre production in the congregation head up to say how great it all sounds.

Volunteers are the biggest concern for me. I have no doubt that they can do it, but I have a few that fear change and tend not to listen to anything I say :rolleyes:

If I can make it work in the budget I'd like to move to SAC this year.

Matt
St Michael le Belfrey, York, UK

[garth.bowman]

With the AC-7 Core app, my pastor can control a few key faders from his iPad to kill the background CD as service starts or make volume adjustments on a DVD for mid-week studies, but other than that, it just works.

Can you give more details on how AC-7 works and the setup of it?

[NoFear13X]

I'm driving, so I'll keep my explanation brief. The app emulates a control service, similar to the mackie hui. It connects via wifi over the network To a nother small program running on the pc **** that then converts that signal back to a virtual midi port. Connect the virtual midi port in sac and Activate the midi control, and now you have a control surface wirelessly talking to the sac software.

Advantages? 8 touch sensitive On screen faders with bank left and right controls, as well as f keys. Each of the 8 faders also have a full vu meter, as well as the labels so you know which channel you are on. I believe a recent revision in 2.9 also allows the ninth master fader to always control output one on the back console. Setup is relatively painless, and the website does a great job of getting you started.

Disadvantages? You are working on the same instance of SAC that is running on the PC, meaning, if I change monitor consoles, so does the iPad. If he thinks he's controlling his wedges and I switch to FOH, He may crank himself in the house trying to get more monitor. It is NOT a separate instance, like sacremote. I believe there is a workaround for this, but I haven't tried it yet, so I won't comment about it yet.

Any more questions, let me know, and I can gladly give you more details when I'm not flying down the highway =)

[Craig Allen]

Glad I'm not on the same road...:o

[RBIngraham]

I'm driving, so I'll keep my explanation brief. The app emulates a control service, similar to the mackie hui. It connects via wifi over the network To a nother small program running on the pc **** that then converts that signal back to a virtual midi port. Connect the virtual midi port in sac and Activate the midi control, and now you have a control surface wirelessly talking to the sac software.

Advantages? 8 touch sensitive On screen faders with bank left and right controls, as well as f keys. Each of the 8 faders also have a full vu meter, as well as the labels so you know which channel you are on. I believe a recent revision in 2.9 also allows the ninth master fader to always control output one on the back console. Setup is relatively painless, and the website does a great job of getting you started.

Disadvantages? You are working on the same instance of SAC that is running on the PC, meaning, if I change monitor consoles, so does the iPad. If he thinks he's controlling his wedges and I switch to FOH, He may crank himself in the house trying to get more monitor. It is NOT a separate instance, like sacremote. I believe there is a workaround for this, but I haven't tried it yet, so I won't comment about it yet.

Any more questions, let me know, and I can gladly give you more details when I'm not flying down the highway =)

If you were to run an instance of SAC Remote and then patch the virtual MIDI port to it, rather than the host, you could keep the iPad completely independent.

[garth.bowman]

If you were to run an instance of SAC Remote and then patch the virtual MIDI port to it, rather than the host, you could keep the iPad completely independent.
That was my question!
You might be able to run one remote on stage that was a Mon only.
Can you switch between monitor boards on this if the F keys were setup correctly on the remote computer?
Just some thoughts.

[RBIngraham]

That was my question!
You might be able to run one remote on stage that was a Mon only.
Can you switch between monitor boards on this if the F keys were setup correctly on the remote computer?
Just some thoughts.


I doubt it. You would need to have access to F-Keys or some other way to switch from one mixer to another via a control surface that connects to SAC. To the best of my knowledge none of the control surface support allows you to switch mixers or trigger an F Key recall. They are all set up with the assumption that you are using a control surface in conjunction with the computer keyboard and hence there would be no need. So I don't think you could make a button on the iPad that would do that. Unless the software that is running on the Windows PC that the iPad connects to can also make a button in the iPad screen that is able to send a computer keyboard keystroke as well as MIDI data. I don' t know if they do or not.... so someone else will have to chime in...

[Bob L]

The Mackie Control template does allow 8 F-Key views.

Bob L

[RBIngraham]

The Mackie Control template does allow 8 F-Key views.

Bob L


Ahhh... cool. Well in that case then some buttons could be programmed to switch between 8 different mixers.

[JeremyJo]

I've also found this to work in AC7; I can only switch between eight mixers though. For some reason the other eight f-keys do not work on AC7 with SAC. I had good user experience using AC7 with SAC, but it's not complete and the developer doesn't respond to inquiries.

Another one I tried that worked about as well is V-Control. That developer DID respond to inquiries and with enough interest might spin a template that is tweaked for SAC.

JJ

[garth.bowman]

and now you have a control surface wirelessly talking to the sac software.
So this does work wirelessly?
Does it work through wifi or bluetooth?
I'm assuming wifi!
But we know what happens when you assume!

Is setting it up on the remote the best option for multiple monitor controls?

[garth.bowman]

Another one I tried that worked about as well is V-Control. That developer DID respond to inquiries and with enough interest might spin a template that is tweaked for SAC.

JJ

Can you go into more detail about our experience working with V-Control?
It is about 6X more expensive.
Like control ability, ease of function, setup, etc!

[garth.bowman]

Another question I have with AC-7 or V-Control is do they work with SAW.

[JeremyJo]

I only tried V-Control free version. I noticed it was a simpler layout than AC7 and I had meters right away in V-control where I did not have meters in AC7.

The biggest plus I found in trying V-control was that the developer responded to my inquiries. They seemed willing to entertain the idea of updates to accommodate SAC( though I don't think they've made any yet).

They also had a remote page view type thing where they did their own Remote Desktop type control inside V-control; that might be useful for plugins?

If they would tweak the Mackie Control template for SAC use and get all f-keys to work I think it would actually be WORTH the money.

JJ