Console Choice OT

[jmh]

The high-school I work at is considering creating a 'recording studio' of sorts. It will be primarily an education space for the kids taking audio production classes. These classes to date have been done on individual macs with rudimentary Korg computer station mixing system that have just a couple IO channels. The software has been Garage Band - I think a complementary to the workstation hardware Korg program and Logic. This facility will probably record demos, chorus, string and band instrument ensembles and concerts in the auditorium next door. They also have a further advanced video production program that records a 10 ~15 minute daily show - and this would also utilize the audio capabilities.

We have a few Allan & Heath SQ series digital mixers - so these are the standard here (similar capabilities to the Presonus Series III that I have and was originally suggesting they get). There has been a suggestion is to get another Allen & Heath with the expectation that the kids who mix the plays & concerts have a similar environment. I don't disagree with this idea but think we can also try to go a bit bigger for this program (this place will spend millions on an artificial football field) and shouldn't restrict ourselves to the type of equipment we are familiar with.

I haven't had too much say in what they use. Still, I want to bring some suggestions into the conversation, and am curious if anyone has any thoughts as to what consoles might be good for this type of environment, and why...

[mr_es335]

jmh,

At present, though I do not consider myself as being "qualified" in any way whatsoever, a music institutor friend of mine has asked me to "assist" a number of 12-14 year old students in introducing them to MIDI and composing.
* He was by a number of months ago and he very curious about my "Live Rig" configuration and wanted to see more of that setup.

The long-and-short of all of this is, is that I am employing SAW and MWS "completely"...and the kids are...thus far...absolutely "lovin' it!"
* So, no hardware devices are employed in this scenario at all....just my Live Rig" and a pair of 12" active speakers...and that is it!
* Things must be going alright, because he has ask me to return in the spring!!

I am not too sure how the high-school you are involved in would respond to this - knowing the versatility and the simplicity of SAW and MWS - al least in "my world", might be of some interest.

Other than that, I am sure others will chime-in here!

[John F]

The Allen & Heath boards are fine, and very representative of what they will see out in the real world. They might benefit, however, from seeing the power of RML's Software Audio Console. I tried hard to get the music minister at my mid-sized church to consider that as a replacement for our failing Roland system, with partial success. In the end, he couldn't get his mind around the lack of hardware for a main system, but he was willing to use it as our streaming system when the new Allen & Heath dLive console gets installed next year some time. I studied SAC quite thoroughly during this process, and was absolutely blown away by how powerful, flexible and inexpensive the system is. In fact, the only question I didn't have a good answer for was this - "If this system is so great, why isn't everyone using it?" I honestly had no answer for that one. I could have built a SAC system to run FOH, IEMs, streaming and full multi-track recording (using SAWStudio, of course) for around $15,000, vs the $100,000 we're paying for dLive.

Anyway, I'd suggest taking a good look at SAC. It could be eye-opening for the kids to see what is possible when you're not confined by a hardware console solution.

John Francis
Rolla, MO

[mr_es335]

John,

You stated, "I honestly had no answer for that one..." Maybe refer to him to Alan Richardson...[Link 1], [Link 2], [Link 3], [Link 4]
* Just think, 2-1/2 years all without a single "glitch"!!

I have often wondered about Bob living in Las Vegas and how many venues may be employing his software?
Hmmm...What of these? [Link 1], [Link 2], [Link 3]

[Microstudio]

I have an Allen & Heath QU-16 in my studio and have owned a Presonus mixer. The Allen & Heath are far more easier to run and understand IMHO.

[John F]

Good links, Dell - I did have my boss read an interesting article about Alan Richardson. His comment - "He's a MONITOR engineer - why isn't the FOH guy using it?" I also watched all of Bob's videos online. My boss' comment - "Can you find me something newer than 10 years old?" I put out a plea on the SAC forum for any other churches using the program, and got one response - in fact, someone with a church similar to ours. But one church wasn't enough to convince him. In his circle of friends they are all using big consoles from Allen & Heath or Avid, and none of them had heard of SAC or RML Labs. He wasn't willing, at least in his own mind, to be the guinea pig. In the end, we still are saving a fair sum by using SAC as our streaming system rather than purchasing an additional Allen & Heath dLive board, and the test rig I built as a proof-of-concept is now our go-to mobile rig, so all was not lost.

John Francis
Rolla, MO

[jmh]

I studied SAC quite thoroughly during this process, and was absolutely blown away by how powerful, flexible and inexpensive the system is. In fact, the only question I didn't have a good answer for was this

I tried to get the school to buy several SAW & SAC licenses years ago. Here is the predicament that my district places on a small vendor: They have to sign an agreement to guarantee that they are free of any software that spies on users, malware, or any other malicious content, and indemnify the district. This is mixed in with other terms that suggest that you still may be in big trouble even if some 3rd party does so. The irony is that Microsoft, Apple & Google - who do all of those things, are regarded as essential. I doubt that we get them to sign.

It's not a good answer - but in this case, it is the answer.

[Pedro V]

Without trying to be disrespectful and without referring to anyone in specific:

I have dealt daily with the type of person who behaves like monkeys. It's incredible how they reject the evidence. Monkeys emulate the behaviors of other monkeys, thus carrying out a large part of their activities. You can convince them for a moment, for a day, but the next they behave the same again. They seem to omit thinking, reasoning, then they emulate, copy, what others do.

No matter what you do their brains are programmed that way. It's kind of like trying to convince them to use teleportation instead of a combustion vehicle.

It is evident that SAC is a superior project, it is not only about valuing its capabilities, but also about supporting the best concept, the state of the art in digital audio.

For education they should be based on analog and digital.

- A system with an old Yamaha PM 5000.
- Small consoles.
- A SAC/SAW/MWS system.

Everything else in my opinion is unimportant.

In the real world you can use the RML Labs website and buy. Or for example read the manual of another outdated option and operate it.

[John Ludlow]

John, I think that, in the past, SAC gave very different results depending upon the hardware it was riding, the VST habits of the user, and the general use of the computer running it. People have been conditioned to think of personal computers as general use machines. For many, the initial lure of SAC was that it would run on the machine they already had - which they also used for email, gaming, weather announcements, etc. Also, the basic power available on a processor today is distributed among multiple cores. And SAC, like SAW, for whatever reason, doesn't make much use of more than one. Also, Windows wasn't really made to do serious sound work. It constantly interrupts running processes in order to share computing power with background processes (like writing to disk). If the interruption is longer than the buffer can compensate for - a glitch occurs. But, using a larger buffer results in delays between the actual event and the sound coming out of the speakers.

In my opinion the combination of SAC64, using a lot of RAM, choosing a processor with a high single-core score, adjusting Windows to cause it to produce fewer interrupts, and using your SAC machine for sound only solves most of that. But in the meantime people moved on to other solutions. I think they just don't realize what SAC has become.

I know that some will point out that they had great luck using SAC on Windows XP32 and don't understand what the fuss was about. And if it worked great for them, I can understand why. But I'll bet that they did all the things they were supposed to do - including their processor and converters choice. And they probably used limited effects and shared them amongst channels.

My own experience with SAC on XP32 was that I would setup my environment for the 3 person ensemble I was in. And it would include SAW and SAC would have channels for the inputs as well as coming back from SAW, and three monitor mixes so we each could have 'more - me'. And several VSTs for front of house, but also for each monitor mix. I'd get it all setup and it would work great. And then later I would change one thing and then something would fail under the surface somewhere where I couldn't affect it. I'd have to scrap the entire thing and start over. That was especially bad during rehearsals because of all the lost time. I think that I was running out of RAM because that 32 bit OS couldn't address much more than it used. And all the copies of VSTs bit into that. Also, my processor, while a relatively strong one for its time, was not strong at single core stuff. My system just felt kind of unreliable and eventually the other guys refused to use it anymore. And then we were using the drummers board and the quality of the sound wasn't nearly as good, there were no individual mixes, and effects were limited to hardware or the shared reverb that came with the board. But we never had to think about it during rehearsal.

Whereas, my new system running on SAC and SAW 64 and W10 with 16 GB of RAM and a processor with strong single-core scores has none of those problems. I spent a long time in the beginning getting Windows the way I wanted it (which is documented here somewhere...). And I do use RME converters, which are known to work well with SAC/SAW. And eventually, I could use it and it just worked perfectly every time. And that kind of matches what hardware systems do. You don't have to think about how they do what they do. You just use them.

I think the people who had my original experience split and never came back. And those that had/have my updated experience love it. I wish the word would get out more that the original potential problems have mostly been overcome. SAC64 is a fabulous system with incredible capabilities that are pretty much unmatched for anything near its price range and, for me at least, it has been rock stable. Of course, my present experience is a sample set of one. It's possible I just got lucky. But I, at least, don't think so.

But then I accidentally blew up its hard drive trying to format a backup drive and everything I had done was gone. SAC, SAW, all my recordings, the hard-won Windows interrupt fighting changes, the Sonarworks settings that make my listening position remarkably flat. Everything. That wasn't SACs fault at all - it was all me. But it's not something that happens on hardware systems either. I still haven't started over. But I will because I'm too spoiled to go back.

[mr_es335]

John,

Regarding your hard drive issues, data recovery facilities today are absolutely incredible!

I have personally seen them recover data from fire-damaged HDD's and dead SSD's!

I use "1stDataRecovery"...so, why not give them a shout!

PS: Great post, by-the-way!