Will you pay for a SAC update?

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

Will you pay for a SAC update?

Yes
4
20%
No
6
30%
Maybe, if it finally has feature X
10
50%
 
Total votes : 20

Re: Will you pay for a SAC update?

Postby RBIngraham » Tue Apr 07, 2015 9:37 am

I like the Qu series and think they are a good desk. But let's remember here that you've replaced your SAC system with what is essentially a 16 input x 12 output system. Of course since it has the ability to do the personal mixer thing the output count is a bit deceiving since it could handle more personal mixes if you add the boxes. But it's never going to have more than 16 inputs plus a few line level inputs. Any playback via USB chews up inputs as well.

But to be fair it's hardly an apples to apples comparison here. Love it or hate it, SAC does have at least the potential of a lot more I/O and routing possible. The Qu will probably serve you well and be a much better tool for the type of work you seem to be doing. But let's be realistic, you're not going to use it to mix musical theatre with dozens of wireless a full pit band, plus playback and all the necessary routing. It's not really in the same league to use a dumb analogy.
Richard B. Ingraham
RBI Computers and Audio
http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/
SAC details and goodies at: http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/SAC.html
RBIngraham
 
Posts: 1021
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:05 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH USA

Re: Will you pay for a SAC update?

Postby RBIngraham » Tue Apr 07, 2015 10:06 am

randyhyde wrote:


And yet, the better control surfaces out there have them. So why wouldn't it be a good idea to support them?


Let me be more clear.... I don't think the 102 channel generic MIDI control template should include scribble strips. I think that because I took that template to be a generic template. It's not supposed to be product specific. In my mind that was always Bob finally responding to what I told him years before which was he should expand the General MIDI template beyond the stupid 16 channel limit (more flawed logic on his part... because there were only 16 MIDI channels, how can you have more than 16 channels of control... snore...).

I am not saying he shouldn't support scribble strips. Just not with that template. What he SHOULD do and been doing all along is working with as many controllers as he possibly can and creating templates for them if he is not going to make it possible for an end user to roll their own. He should be working with the new Behringers. If it was me I would also be looking to turn an X32 into a control surface, probably via OSC. (even though I think that protocol sucks, it's the only real alternative to MIDI) I would have made better templates for the Mackie stuff. Perhaps the AVID Eucon stuff at least the artist series. I probably wouldn't bother with the bigger surfaces if it were me those are simply not cost effective for a SAC product.


Well, I suppose you're talking about me here.
Certainly over the past three years my experiences with control surfaces and SAC have taught me that expecting anything to change is a misplaced expectation. I'm not expecting anything this round. Bob's stubbornness on the control surface issue has cost him a lot of sales and a lot of ill will from the audio community.


No, I am not talking about you. You never took my comments as personal attacks against you. I'm not going to bother mentioning names, especially since they don't use their real names anyway.




Here's how it would happen: I'd have a small PC (netbook or similar) read the Ethernet data in, translate it, and pass it to Mackie units via USB or MIDI.


I understand, that just sounds like even more of a kludge to me. When the real answer is that the software should just support surfaces directly. ;)





The NRPN issue is easy enough to work around. Remember that PC in the middle between SAC and the control surfaces? It handles all that quite easily. I've written an Ethernet interface that patches into Windows (using drivers like MIDI-Ox) that solve the data transmission and synchronization problems SAC has. The big problem is data. Bob ships out everything, not just the data that has changed. If stuff gets backed up on a real MIDI interface (e.g., as happens on Mackie XT or similar units) SAC has real problems. But if you stick a computer in the middle, that largely goes away. Of course, with better programming (e.g., shipping only the values that have changed) SAC's problems would go away -- but that's probably expecting too much from Bob's programming skills, to be honest.


Thank for that I literally LOL'd on that one.




Not expecting it. Not holding my breath. Just looking for the final excuse to jump ship when something better comes along (something better will have to include a decent reverb, btw).


It does... even Joe likes it. ;)


IMO, the big advantage of SAC (and AMP?) in the sub-$5,000 area is:
1) Better quality sound (assuming the use of decent preamps),
2) Better routing options (as much as I hate to admit it, I'd pick SAC over the LS9 I'm using in the black box theater I manage),
3) Expandability,
4) Effects options,
5) SAC Remote with the host on the stage

The big drawbacks to SAC are:
1) User interface and ease of learning
2) Control surface support!
3) Dependence on Windows (especially older versions),
4) Rider compatibility (even X32s are getting respect in this department these days!)
5) Never living up to the promise, no expectations of new feature sets.


Well AMP should at least mitigate drawback 1,2,3 and 5. Or it at least has the potential to.


A I can hardly wait for the "But AMP does this...." comments on Bob L's board.


And you actually expect those comments to stick around for more than a few minutes? :D Not to mention all the private messages of condemnation anyone that makes a comment like that would have to endure from the self appointed forum cop over there. :lol:

Hopefully AMP's forum will be so popular that there will be almost no traffic on the old forum except for the Kool Aids.
Richard B. Ingraham
RBI Computers and Audio
http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/
SAC details and goodies at: http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/SAC.html
RBIngraham
 
Posts: 1021
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:05 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH USA

Re: Will you pay for a SAC update?

Postby randyhyde » Tue Apr 07, 2015 11:48 am

RBIngraham wrote:I like the Qu series and think they are a good desk. But let's remember here that you've replaced your SAC system with what is essentially a 16 input x 12 output system.

Of course, there is the QU-24 (is there a QU-32 now?).
But the output limitations are a big problem. One of my sound guys has a QU-24 and the 12 outputs on the stage box are a real limiting factor for us. It barely handles our standard outputs with nothing left over for in-ears, should they come along. That, plus the routing on the QU series is a little deficient (then again, what do you expect for that price?) It is a relatively easy desk to learn and use, though. The big advantage of the QU series is that with two small boxes (we have the stage box) you're good to go. Our SAC rigs are in 16U and 20U rolling cases. Can't simply throw them into the back of the pickup for a small gig. Yeah, people have made portable SAC rigs using laptops, etc., but those wouldn't service our large gigs very well.
Cheers,
Randy Hyde
randyhyde
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:42 pm

Re: Will you pay for a SAC update?

Postby RBIngraham » Tue Apr 07, 2015 12:22 pm

randyhyde wrote:Of course, there is the QU-24 (is there a QU-32 now?).
But the output limitations are a big problem. One of my sound guys has a QU-24 and the 12 outputs on the stage box are a real limiting factor for us. It barely handles our standard outputs with nothing left over for in-ears, should they come along. That, plus the routing on the QU series is a little deficient (then again, what do you expect for that price?) It is a relatively easy desk to learn and use, though. The big advantage of the QU series is that with two small boxes (we have the stage box) you're good to go. Our SAC rigs are in 16U and 20U rolling cases. Can't simply throw them into the back of the pickup for a small gig. Yeah, people have made portable SAC rigs using laptops, etc., but those wouldn't service our large gigs very well.
Cheers,
Randy Hyde


Yes there is a 32 now. Each model adds more buses and more physical I/O. The catch on these is that all the remote stage boxes on the Qu series replace the I/O on the back of the desk. It does not expand it. One thing I forgot to look at when we had a demo unit in the office for a week here is if a stage box allows for splitting outputs to multiple places. That doesn't expand your channel count but if it does it could be handy.

If I was doing In Ears on the Qu I would buy as many ME-1 personal mixers as I could afford. These will expand the capabilities of your Qu series desk greatly. You can pick and choose 16 inputs to each of these mixers. So submix things like your drums to a bus and then the other instruments can take a direct tap off the console input channel. That is almost like adding mix buses to your system and it is adding outputs to your system. By using those you could even create quite a few custom mixes even on the tiny 16 channel version.

There is a lot to like on these desks. But even the 32 is too small for many of my projects. It would only work on smaller musicals and doesn't have enough Inputs, DCAs and Matrix Outs for the amount of routing needed in most of shows. However they are cheap enough that one could get multiples. But then they don't have a good way to do splits across multiple desks yet. For that there are other choices which are better in my opinion, such as Soundcraft and Presonus oddly enough.
Richard B. Ingraham
RBI Computers and Audio
http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/
SAC details and goodies at: http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/SAC.html
RBIngraham
 
Posts: 1021
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:05 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH USA

Re: Will you pay for a SAC update?

Postby newmediamark » Tue Apr 07, 2015 8:19 pm

WurstWerner wrote:I wanted to join the AMP beta test as well, but never got any replies to my mails.


I was told by the AMP folks that they were interested in beta testers that used smaller format digital consoles than I normally used. Looks like they have a couple of good testers here.

WurstWerner wrote: I would go back to SAC, if there was a professional integration of a digital stagebox, that could be directly controlled out of SAC and if there was at least one propper hardware controller. Friends of mine works for the German montarbo distributor and he said, there is something going on, heading this direction.
But they don't expect any real news on that before mid 2015.


I was surprised to discover an old acquaintance (former Synclavier expert from yesteryear) hosting the Montarbo booth at NAMM in Los Angeles in January who said they would be coming out with a preamp package. Not sure if that was in stagebox format, or local.

Mark
newmediamark
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 2:58 pm

Re: Will you pay for a SAC update?

Postby jlepore » Tue Apr 07, 2015 9:49 pm

Ah .. they must have finally figured out how to put 4 ADA8000's in a metal box and call it a preamp package :)
Gigabyte H55-USB3 i5-650/4G/XP/SSD Profire 2626x3/ADAx2/MLA7x1 Motormix x2 AMP/SAC/SAWLite
User avatar
jlepore
 
Posts: 648
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Will you pay for a SAC update?

Postby newmediamark » Wed Apr 08, 2015 1:29 am

Yeah. It's as if this is new and they are introducing something earth-shaking. My acquaintance from back in the day was still impressed with the sound quality of SAW that "he can hear" in an controlled environment. Breaking news ... that ain't the concert stage.
newmediamark
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 2:58 pm

Re: Will you pay for a SAC update?

Postby RBIngraham » Wed Apr 08, 2015 7:12 am

I have yet experience the sound quality boost over any other DAW, when you compare apples to apples.

Yes my SAC system sounded better than the LS9 in one theatre with a good system where I used the LS9 as a control surface. But the LS9 also sounded better as well as soon as I digitally connected the same preamps to it inputs. And just to drive Joe crazy, those were Presonus. :-) But I had the same result when using an ADA8000.

And Yes Randy I would agree with you, for theatre shows I would take my SAC rig over an LS9 most days as wel. But sometimes board op comfort zone, ease of use and other factors than sound quality, feature set and routing take precedence. Although that is ussually when the house owns an M7 in my case.
Richard B. Ingraham
RBI Computers and Audio
http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/
SAC details and goodies at: http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/SAC.html
RBIngraham
 
Posts: 1021
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:05 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH USA

Re: Will you pay for a SAC update?

Postby jlepore » Wed Apr 08, 2015 11:27 am

Sorry but comparing anything to an LS9 is just setting yourself up. I'm not sure where they went to find that preamp design, but I'm guessing it was from someone that designed AM radios back in the day. I think if you carefuly peel back the labels on the LS9 you're going to find a Radio Shack label underneath.
Gigabyte H55-USB3 i5-650/4G/XP/SSD Profire 2626x3/ADAx2/MLA7x1 Motormix x2 AMP/SAC/SAWLite
User avatar
jlepore
 
Posts: 648
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Will you pay for a SAC update?

Postby RBIngraham » Wed Apr 08, 2015 11:37 am

jlepore wrote:Sorry but comparing anything to an LS9 is just setting yourself up. I'm not sure where they went to find that preamp design, but I'm guessing it was from someone that designed AM radios back in the day. I think if you carefuly peel back the labels on the LS9 you're going to find a Radio Shack label underneath.


Well they stole them out of the M7 actually. :lol:

Yeah their stab at cost effective recallable preamps in those consoles kinda sucked.

But I do think that is a fair comparison. A computer mixing system with appropriate surfaces (SAC or AMP) has more mixing power than these desks and even their newer CL and QL series (but those are pretty nice). I'm certainly not going to compare it to a Digico or something that costs in the $50K range. Those consoles better sound better than SAC with an ADA8000! 8-)
Richard B. Ingraham
RBI Computers and Audio
http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/
SAC details and goodies at: http://www.rbicompaudio.20m.com/SAC.html
RBIngraham
 
Posts: 1021
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:05 pm
Location: Cleveland, OH USA

PreviousNext

Return to SAC Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests

cron