Mixers/Consoles Please Help, Senior Research Paper

[irishhobo42]

Hey everyone,
My name is Sean, Im a senior at Central Connecticut St. Univ. I'm doing an independent research project on basically the pros and cons of digital vs analog mixing. I have to basically provide a ton of information supporting whether/ or not, digital is better than analog for live mixing. I have had the luxury of working with the Yamaha Digital LS9, and a basic analog Sound Craft and Yamaha (~16 track) boards.

Basically I am asking anyone with a descent background to post their opinion on: 1) Their mixing background (so if i decide to quote you, I can prove you as a reputable source) 2) If you prefer Digital or analog mixer (for either FOH or monitors) and 3) Why? What makes it better (or worse)?

Thanks to anyone that helps me out here!! It means my graduation!!

 

[fx120]

There are many many many many many many many many many discussions like this in many many many many many many many other places around the web.

Personally I don't "prefer" either as both have their major advantages and disadvantages, and it can't be summed up in just a digital vs. analog sort of way.

I mean are we comparing a 01v vs. a H3000 and racks of outboard processing?

Both have their pros and cons and it often comes down to the type of show you're mixing.

I use both and I still like using both.

 

[museav]

Is the project for you to research the pros and cons or for you to gather what others find to be the pros and cons? There is a difference.

One thing to keep in mind is that you typically have to consider the impact the specific application can have on any comments. Everyone will have their own reference and in many cases the specifics of an application will affect many of the potential advantages or disadvantages. Of course budget is often one of those factors, if you need 32 channels of mixing and have $2,500 to spend, then analog has a huge potential advantage in that it is actually feasible to get a new console in that price range. In a new space the compact size possible with some digital consoles may be an advantage but if you are replacing an existing large format analog console the size may not really matter. The users' familiarity with one or the other can affect the potential acceptance, someone who has never mixed on a digital console will likely see huge disadvantages in doing so and vice versa for someone who has only mixed on digital consoles. The flexibility in setup and routing that most digital consoles provide can be one of their biggest potential advantages in many situations but it can also be one of their biggest potential disadvantages. You get the idea, the perceived advantages and disadvantages can be very contextual so you have to have sufficient understanding of the context in order to be fully understand teh responses.

You can also get into differences within each category. Look at Charlie Richmond's offerings from Richmond Sound Design or the Software Audio Console, both are a form of digital mixer that differ significantly from the dedicated consoles you may have in mind. Those would likely have different pros and cons compared to 'integrated' digital mixers.

Finally, it is a good idea to get permission from anyone you want to quote.

 

[MSLD]

I agree with Brad and would add just this.... If you think your question through and define a specific application i.e. Touring Rock band or a long run Broadway show in a fixed theater or a house of worship install, you may find more specific answers. There will still be debate on the most useful tool. Every tool has an application which it best serves. You would not put a crescent wrench in the hand of an auto worker on an assembly line if they were tightening the same size bolt all day. Yet many do it yourselfers would be lost without a c-wrench.

 

[irishhobo42]

You guys bring up some pretty valid points. And now I feel I should probably review my thesis again.

But I guess I would set the venue as a mid sized, stationary venue. Set like attached to a restaurant. (I hope to eventually open a restaurant/ concert venue) So, a couple hundred person venue (3-800? somewhere in that range). Probably with multiple acts in an evening. I would like to be able to hold a yearly festival style show. My belief is that digital would be the way to go. Like I said, I have experience with the Yamaha LS9-32ch digital board (used for monitors and FOH), and I've seen it used as a monitor board by a professional company as a touring board.

With that in mind, do you guys have any pro's or con's for analog or digital?

And for the paper, it is a research paper, that I am writing in the form of discussing pro's and con's of each, and then stating which one would be best suited for this type of mid-sized application.

 

[irishhobo42]

This is what I have for my thesis statement:

Thesis: To give someone new to the field of Audio Engineering an understanding of all the the equipment used in a complete “Live Sound Reinforcement” set-up in order to decide between an analog verses a digital mixing consul when purchasing or renting for a mid size concert venue, lending focus towards digital consuls.

 

[Anonymous067]

This is what I have for my thesis statement:

Thesis: To give someone new to the field of Audio Engineering an understanding of all the the equipment used in a complete “Live Sound Reinforcement” set-up in order to decide between an analog verses a digital mixing consul when purchasing or renting for a mid size concert venue, lending focus towards digital consuls.

The only word that caught my eye was "all"..."...new to the field...an understanding of all"

May want to look at this.

 

[Morpheus]

This is what I have for my thesis statement:

... new to the field of Audio Engineering...

...lending focus towards digital consuls.

I hope this person likes reading manuals.

Not to say that analogue are any less 'complex'...

 

[irishhobo42]

The only word that caught my eye was "all"..."...new to the field...an understanding of all"

May want to look at this.

William, I'm not sure what exactly you are saying here. Can you please clarify? thanks

 

[Footer]

You are embarking on and interesting topic. You are also looking at what is essentially a religious war that is right up there with protestants vs. catholics, mac vs. pc, and dogs vs. cats.

Nearly show that pulls up to my wifes venue carries an audio guy that is either eliated by the venues Midas Heritage 1000 console and a rack of the most rider friendly processing gear money can buy or they want to cut themselves because its not an M7 or a PM5D. There are very few people that are OK with both. Nearly every show I have seen in the past several years that is carrying a console are carrying digital consoles. However, many music venues that install a new console install an analog console.

You might want to go over to pro-sound web and post the same question. However, your not going to get a real answer. You will get the answer you are looking for, which from the sounds of it you already have the and are just looking for support.

 

[irishhobo42]

now what do you think the benifit to installing an analog is? is it just simply the shallower learning curve? because from everything I've heard and read, the main reason for installing an analog these days would be if it is a fixed board and different people would be using it at all the different shows, or just because they can tend to be cheaper to purchase. but then again, you would still need to buy external racks.

is that accurate?

 

[Morpheus]

now what do you think the benifit to installing an analog is? is it just simply the shallower learning curve? because from everything I've heard and read, the main reason for installing an analog these days would be if it is a fixed board and different people would be using it at all the different shows, or just because they can tend to be cheaper to purchase. but then again, you would still need to buy external racks.

is that accurate?

it sounds better?

 

[fx120]

The theory of operation for analog consoles is pretty much universal.

I can jump between a large frame MH5, H3000, PM4000, or a ML5000 down to a small frame Spirit or Mackie and have the general layout and operation be about the same. Because of this it is a lot easier to convince a guest engineer to run with your desk for a single-act event.

Digital consoles are much more engineer-specific. If you're a touring engineer you might only have show files built for the M7CL and PM5D, and have had the most experience operating those two consoles, those are the two consoles you're going to want.

If you've never used a Vi6 before, you probably don't want to walk into a venue that has one as the FOH console with only a few hours of pre show prep and only a single 30 minute sound check before the doors open.

 

[Raktor]

Observations from a 800 seat that sees from primary school shows with teachers operating, to pro shows touring their own operator and sometimes board - it depends.

'Community' shows with operators that have little to no mixing experience travel much better on an analogue board than digital - it just makes more sense. Everything they can possibly change is right in front of them. Our digital board confuses them and ends up costing them money to be trained in its usage (which is a lot longer than it takes to train usage on an analogue board).

Trained operators love the digital boards, especially when the show has been touring and they already have a show file, or if the show is just running in our theatre for many consecutive runs with a tech week and the show has been programmed - it doesn't eliminate the work, but makes it much easier.

So it's all dependant on the situation.

 

[museav]

But I guess I would set the venue as a mid sized, stationary venue. Set like attached to a restaurant. (I hope to eventually open a restaurant/ concert venue) So, a couple hundred person venue (3-800? somewhere in that range). Probably with multiple acts in an evening. I would like to be able to hold a yearly festival style show.

I think there may be three aspects to this. One is the pros and cons as from the perspective of an operator or tech. Another is the perceived advantages or disadvantages from the artist's viewpoint. And the third is the potential advantages and disadvantages as the one paying for it or the venue owner. The latter is often the one that really matters, it may be influenced by the other two but in the end it is often a decision based on return on investment. For that you may have to step back from the technology and even somewhat from being an operator and look at it from more of a business perspective. Which approach better supports your being profitable?

Some examples. If you plan to bring in national or regional touring acts you'll probably be dealing with tech riders. What do the types of acts you envision performing there want or accept for consoles and effects? Is there a level of act you need to be successful that necessitates one approach or the other? Or that requires spending more than you can justify as far as return?

If you plan to have local acts, what can they reasonably deal with? Can you afford to have long sound checks for bands while the BE tries to learn a console they may have never seen before? Are you going to have tech staff that has the time and patience to teach them or take over from them if necessary?

Are you comparable to, behind or ahead of what other similar venues provide? Might you miss out on acts that could bring in profits or are you spending more then everyone else to get the same acts?

What are your options for rental or temporary replacements? Could you rent or borrow a direct replacement easily if something happens? Would it be more cost effective to rent a higher end console for specific events and could you easily integrate that with your system? How about buying used, might that affect things?

Is this a new venue and system or are they existing? A digital console with a stage box and digital snake or stagebox/processor and separate work surface could simplify installation in a new venue but might be of more limited benefit when directly replacing an analog console. This could also tie into the above point in how it might affect being able to have an act use their own console or your bringing in another console.

There could be numerous other considerations but you get the point. There are many venues that are very successful with various levels of analog consoles and other venues that are virtually locked in to having to have the latest and greatest digital consoles but in the end that decision is often driven more by the business perspective than by anything else.

 

[FMEng]

Given my background as a broadcast engineer, I have a slightly different take on the issue. Broadcast engineers are constantly analyzing how something will break, and what is the work around when (not if) it does. We have to keep the plant running 24/7/365.

The circuit design of an analog console is inherently more reliable. Whole sections of it could die, like an input channel, or an output buss, and the rest of the console can still function unimpaired. That means there is usually a work around for most problems. Basically, the only failure that would render an analog console totally useless is the loss of a power supply rail. Most larger, higher cost analog consoles can have redundant power supplies, which makes them extremely reliable.

Digital consoles have many single components, modules, or sub systems that can render the console dead should they fail. Granted, this is less of an issue in a permanent install environment than in touring. In critical uses, the backup for a digital console is to have another one waiting near by. Not for the faint of budget.

There are digital consoles with a higher degree of redundancy with standby modules and automatic fail-over, but they would have to be near the top of the cost scale. They still don't quite reach the reliability of plain, old analog.

These considerations mean less in a more conventional use, like a theater, but it is still something to think about.

 

[Chris15]

a] It's Consoles, not consuls.
b] It really is horses for courses. I was reading the other day that the Sydney Opera House in conjunction with replacing the PA have re engineered things to be able to store a Heritage 3000 below the rear of the stalls because people are still wanting it over the PM5D. It's a 10 to 12 man lift to get the console into place under the old scheme...

Consensus amongst my colleagues is that the LS9 is not a console...

Digital is the only way you can do certain shows. For instance there's a gig here where we calculated it would take about 4 hours to turn all the knobs between acts and it's a 2 hour show. So scene recall enables these things.

The Olympics haven't run analog since 2000. There also the scene recall and such is heavily used. Note that the setup is configured with a LOT of redundancy...

Analogue on the other hand is generally much easier to troubleshoot.You don't get clicking in analogue. Clocking where digital audio transfer involved can be the source of great headaches... Analogue, while you get hums and buzzes and such you have signal that you can trace and fault find. When digital is dead, it's dead.

Low cost and hence low quality AD and DA chips do not faithfully convert audio and hence many of the cheaper digital consoles don't sound anything like as good as their top end brethren.

So as has been said, what's the application and who needs to be able to use it in what manner? Only then can you begin to think about whether analogue or digital is better... Even defining it as a stationary venue of a given seating capacity does not really begin to address issues of proposed content etc. etc.

 

[museav]

The Olympics haven't run analog since 2000.

I my memory serves me, the International Broadcast Center for the 1996 Atlanta Olympics used Graham-Patten digital audio consoles so I think digital goes back at least that far with the Olympics. I can't speak to the individual venues other than knowing that the main AOC Conference Room used an IED mix-minus audio system.

 

[Chris15]

I my memory serves me, the International Broadcast Center for the 1996 Atlanta Olympics used Graham-Patten digital audio consoles so I think digital goes back at least that far with the Olympics. I can't speak to the individual venues other than knowing that the main AOC Conference Room used an IED mix-minus audio system.

I had been referring to the ceremonies systems and it seems I was wrong...
Sydney was FOH on Heritage 3000s, Salt Lake City Unknown, Athens PM1D, Torino apparently analog (why I don't know), Beijing Vi6, Vancouver D5.

 

[cprted]

There is a lot of great advice already in this thread. However, I'll offer some advice of a completely different sort.

This is what I have for my thesis statement:

Thesis: To give someone new to the field of Audio Engineering an understanding of all the the equipment used in a complete “Live Sound Reinforcement” set-up in order to decide between an analog verses a digital mixing consul when purchasing or renting for a mid size concert venue, lending focus towards digital consuls.

You have a fairly significant problem here. That being, the above is not a thesis statement. A thesis is an argument: There is no argument here.

Read your assignment carefully to make to see whether you're simply misusing a term or about to make a grade annihilating mistake.

Best of luck.