sac

[Angie]

I actually smile a little when I meet someone with a LV1 system at a gig, because I used to be frowned upon by other sound engineers, when I turned up at a gig with "a computer instead of a real mixing desk", and now it's the hip thing to do :-)

Yes, and when the CMOS battery on the Avid Profile at an auditorium I work died, no one understood what I was saying when I told them it was just a computer with a fancy controller. I had to chuckle also, because the same people would frown on my SAC rig.

[mr_es335]

Angie,

I had to chuckle also, because the same people would frown on my SAC rig.

...Gosh, I just love those type of observations! I even had a MAC user tell me that the reason why MAC's are "so good" is that they are not really computers. What MAC 's were exactly, I was never able to ascertain.

[operationwhat]

Yes, and when the CMOS battery on the Avid Profile at an auditorium I work died, no one understood what I was saying when I told them it was just a computer with a fancy controller. I had to chuckle also, because the same people would frown on my SAC rig.

Same thing happened with AVOLITE, and DIGICO though it uses a different type of audio processors,
called FPGA that now some of the new audio cards use.

Still, I like SAC the most of all....
to me it's so flexible, so awesome but.... still underdeveloped!

[mr_es335]

Good day,

As was stated at the outset, once you get your head around the way in which Bob things and works, SAC/SAW are...really-and-truly...an unbeatable combination!

A trusted comrade-in-arms own a Waves eMotion LV1 - and he attempted to replicate my SAW/SAC combo - and though the LV1 came very close to the way in which I employ SAW/SAC in-tandem, at the end of the day, all that came to mind is "Why change what is already working...and working incredibly well!"

[andrew b]

if you need an ax you take an ax if you need a saw you take a saw sac and saw very harmonious products why something else

[just Doug]

I don't know of any other software mixer- or hardware based digital mixer, for that matter- that competes with SAC in terms of audio quality.

Bob's approach delivers the most phase coherent signal I've heard. Nothing else compares. Well, there are a couple of major acts still carrying an all analog front end, but I don't need a tractor/trailer to carry my rig...!

[mr_es335]

Good day,

I heard a very interesting story about someone whom had used two, 48-channel digital consoles for many years and was gradually switching-over to a SAC/SAW-based system – all without informing the band members that there was a "switch" taking place.

During one of sessions, the members of the band were performing a sound-check using the previous night's recordings - with the engineer muting their part during their individual sound-checks.
• I do believe that this is was the overall procedure that was occurring anyhow.

Apparently, each of the band members – after their sound–check was completed commented on how much better the overall sound was! Some were even commenting that what they were hearing sounded as if the audio had come from a recording studio – or something to that effect. Even the "openers" were making similar comments.

Apparently, the engineer was very pleased with the comments that he was hearing.

Another testament to Bob and his genius! (Sip...sip!!)

[Peter O]

Come on guys!
I mean I absolutely love mixing on my SAC rig, but there hasn't been a update to SAC in more than a year, and except for the 64 bit migration, there has not been a new feature implemented in SAC for even longer, so isn't fair to say that the development of SAC is pretty mush dead?
As I said I love mixing bands with SAC, but saying that there is nothing out there that matches SAC in terms of quality and features is simply wrong! SAC has it's strengths and weaknesses as any other console. I frequently mix on Yamaha SQ mixers and they sound great and have all the features I need for the gigs I do with them.

Last month I mixed a band with about 40 inputs, 7 IEM stereo mixes and a side fill mix at a large outdoor event. I used dynamic EQ's, convolution reverbs and real time auto tune. I did it with SAC and it was great. But I could have done it with a lot of other mixers + Waves mulitirack or similar solutions as well.

I'd love to be proven wrong and see a new version of SAC with VST 3 support and/or any of the multitude of requested features implemented, but I simply do not dare to hope for it.

[mr_es335]

Peter,

I'd love to be proven wrong and see a new version of SAC with VST 3 support and/or any of the multitude of requested features implemented, but I simply do not dare to hope for it.

...I often wonder why posts such as this begin in the first place. To me, this is the "Ford versus Chevy" debacle.

In an article that I wrote entitled, "A New Way to Perform Live", I made note of eleven software applications that I have tested over the years - and the only software application(s) that did what I wanted that software to do - were SAW and SAC. I have to this day, never regretted that decision - even for MIDI composition!

I have also owned numerous Vans over the years and I am content with the Dodge Grand Caravan. So...in the end..."To each his own!" Sure, I could make other vans perform the same end results, but I prefer the Dodge. In the end, a van-is-a-van...similar to, a mixer-is-a-mixer...I guess! I do hope that this makes sense?

At this point, I simply cannot see what advantages any other software platform/hardware platform does that RML Labs software does not already do! And VST3 support is - to me anyhow, a complete non-issue!