Uh-huh

Discussions about the use and operation of SAC (Software Audio Console)

Re: Uh-huh

Postby IraSeigel » Fri Jan 24, 2014 2:19 pm

gdougherty wrote:... There is also a big difference between the accuracy of hitting tactile controls vs onscreen touch points when you want to do it while looking at the band. I spend half the concerts staring at the ipad.


+1
Ditto for any of the Digidesign (Avid) and DiGiCo surfaces I've used. Way too much time looking at the screen, lining up the cursor with the onscreen control, etc, and not enough time paying attention to the stage.
IraSeigel
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 9:58 pm
Location: Bainbridge Island, WA

Re: Uh-huh

Postby WurstWerner » Fri Jan 24, 2014 4:19 pm

Midas really has died.
This is exactly what people were afraid of when the Music Group bought out Midas.


No, Midas was dead before Music Group bought them.

It is no big secret, that the original Midas Pro Series didn't match the desired sales expectations.
This is what brought Midas in trouble. They were also too late in the digital business.
Uli created a money maker with the M32, which is like a "digital Midas Venice 320".
It will sell, if your like it or not.
WurstWerner
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 5:24 am

Re: Uh-huh

Postby gdougherty » Sat Jan 25, 2014 10:42 am

randyhyde wrote:
gdougherty wrote:On a second glance at the MIDAS website, it really is an X32 with upgraded hardware. Any X32 user would be completely comfortable stepping up to one since the control layout and software is identical to what's used on the x32.


Midas really has died.
This is exactly what people were afraid of when the Music Group bought out Midas.
Oh well, low-end trash has worked for Harmon (e.g., JBL). Maybe it will work for Midas too. I just always thought that Behringer was supposed to be the low-end Midas. The Music Group is starting to look like GM with all the cross-company products built around the same platform.

OTOH, this will let someone buy an X32 without having to worry about people bitching about the "Behringer" name on the device. Maybe I'll have to get one :)
Still like the QU-24, though. Very easy to use (and learn how to use).
Cheers,
Randy Hyde

I've had both the full x32 and my newer x32 rack on some pretty sweet systems. D&B J rig as well as an eaw line array to name some of the better. Same bands, mostly same mixes recalled and tweaked slightly. Terrific sound and compliments about how good the mix sounded. With better mic pre's and a higher quality hardware surface the M32 is an entry level digital desk that should hang with the best from anybody else.

It sits at a price point far enough below more expensive offerings from competition and siblings that the minor limitations are forgivable, yet not so high above the x32 and others that it's unreachable. In the price range I'd take one hands-down over an x32, knowing that it will likely be that much longer till the console physically wears out.

The qu-24 looks quite nice as long as 24 channels fits the bill. Definitely one I'd like in a b or c rig and a great choice if you're invested in or planning on the GLD series for larger rigs.
http://softwareaudioconsole.wikidot.com The start of a wiki. It's slow going and there's a ton of info that should be in there yet.
Biggest item is the Command Reference on how to do most actions within SAC. It's 90% of what you need for UI proficiency.

g is for George
gdougherty
 
Posts: 407
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:10 pm
Location: Westminster, CO

Previous

Return to SAC Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 9 guests

cron