well, about the budget, we have 200k for everything; we only need the consoles, speakers, cabling, and additional in-ear
monitor systems.
This is just me thinking out loud, but do you all think a PM5D + DSP5D for
FOH and a PM1D for
monitor world with an analog split would work well? I spoke with the director and he agrees that a 5D would work for
FOH since it doesn't need as many mixes as
monitor world needs. And from what I've seen, the 5D can be more throughly integrated into the DME64N we're considering for the
system processor. Other digitals with as many outputs as the PM1D has are kind of out of the ballpark.
Would the 1D still be a bad choice in
monitor world? From what you all have told me, I really don't want to see the 1D out at
FOH.
Since you have a fixed budget my suggestion would be to think big picture. You need a
speaker system that will provide the coverage, output, response,
etc. desired and you need the basic infrastructure in place to support everything. So start with making sure you have those aspects properly addressed. Then also consider all the cable, hardware, installation, testing, tuning, documentation,
etc. costs involved. That may help define the budget you then have for everything else.
It may be good to
address some terminology issues, some of which become important in dealing with digital consoles. Unlike analog consoles where there is pretty much a direct relationship between inputs and channels and and between mix buses and outputs, that does not necessarily apply to digital consoles. Many digital mixers, and just about anything in the range you are considering, utilize virtual input and output patching. Basically, you have a central 'brain' that can process a certain number of input channels and a certain number of mix buses. The actual physical inputs to the
mixer are assigned to the channels via software input patching, thus you can have more inputs than you have channels and via the
mixer configuration software assign the inputs to channels as desired. Similarly, the mix buses are assigned to physical outputs from the
mixer by software output patching and thus you can have more outputs than buses with a bus assigned to multiple outputs. I bring this up as the limiting factor for the stereo IEMs seems likely to be in the number of mix buses supported rather than being the number of outputs.
I personally find it difficult to give a specific recommendation regarding the PM1D without knowing more specifics such as the configuration of the
system, the condition of the
system, the cost and so on. Many people really like using the PM1D, finding it fairly easy to transition to from the analog world. Some of the concerns in some applications include the large physical size, but if you currently have a large format analog
console then that may not be a factor for you. It is an older basic design and has been discontinued and while
Yamaha is usually very good about parts inventory, it does mean that you may have to look to the used market for many related items. It also uses large 68 pin SCSI cables as interconnects, something you may have to consider in terms of infrastructure and for which there apparently is becoming some difficulty obtaining as people with PM1D systems seem to be holding onto the cables they have.
I'm not used to working with churches, but does the director normally have that much say over what
console you pick?!
It is rather amazing how much
power some Music Directors of Ministers of Music wield. It is also surprising how much politics can be involved in other church leadership hesitating to tell such people "no", I've seen churches go to great lengths to get a good MoM or Music Director only to then find themselves in a relationship where they are afraid that person will walk if they don't get their way. Several times I have found a big part of my
role is to be the arbiter between the MoM's goals and the goals of other church leadership. I have literally had a pastor pull me aside after a meeting and thank me for telling the MoM the things everyone else was afraid to say. And just to be
clear, this is not a condemnation of the MoMs, it is simply that their goals and priorities do not always coincide with that of the rest of the church leadership and for some reason there often seems to be rather limited or tenuous communication between those parties.
Another common situation for churches, and many other applications, is some parties taking the perspective of it being 'their'
system. This is easy to understand and it is good to see people taking such a personal interest, however the reality is that the church is likely going to have an audio
system for many years regardless of whether the media, music and tech staff change. Maybe look at it this way, a
console decision was made now based solely on the
current Music Director's personal preferences, then would the church plan to replace the
mixer if next year that individual left and their replacement had a different preference? I have been involved in church projects where all of the primary tech and music worship staff changed between the time the project started and the time it was completed and have find that while the personal preferences of some individuals are important, they often have to be balanced with what may best serve the church in the long run.
To your last question, YES certainly. LAKE is the big-bucks standard when it comes to
system processors. You can a
ccess it via any computer/tablet interface, and it's extremely powerful and easy to tweek on the fly, or design presets for. Aka, if yo're only using the bottom
level of the church, turn off the top fills and use beam steering (not sure of your mains) to tailor to different room configurations.
Lake processing is very nice but there are many options. The
system processor may also be very dependent on the
speaker system as some companies such as d&B and Nexo offer processing, amplification and speakers that are all made to work together as an integrated
system.
The CL series was basically built for churches and other permanent installs where you can run Cat6 through the walls to everywhere. That being said, if I was in your place and had the budget, I would go with either an iLive
system with two desks linked together and two mixracks (128 inputs 64 outputs, 16fx channels and full dynamics on each
channel), or if you had the budget two
Venue Profile systems and an analogue split. It's one of the most powerful, yet most intuitive consoles I've ever used.
You are also falling into the SD9 price range. Digico makes the best sounding digital consoles out there.
Processing is a must. Either lake or xta are both good ways to go.
DiGiCo and Avid/Digidesign consoles are very popular in the tour and
theatre worlds, however they are less common in
House of Worship applications where
Yamaha, A&H, Soundcraft/Studer and even Midas seem to be the more popular choices for larger format digital consoles. A lot of that has to do with user interfaces that are more intuitive for volunteer operators as while the DiGiCo and
Venue consoles may be effective to use once you get the hang of them, the general consensus I've gotten from many that are quite familiar with all the options is that they are generally less 'user friendly' for volunteers, a view my experience also supports.
Like the PM1D, the original Lake
Processor was discontinued some years ago. Lake is now part of LabGruppen and both their and xta processors are similar in that they are common in some markets but much less so in the
House of Worship market where brands like BSS, dbx,
Peavey Nion, Xilica,
Yamaha,
Biamp and some others are much more common. One reason the Lake and xta are probably not as common in HoW applications is that they are rather limited in size and flexibility, they are a fixed rather than open architecture approach and they are limited in terms of the number of inputs and outputs a
processor can support. I have designed projects with other processors providing overall
system processing that then feeds multiple Lake processors providing the processing for each
speaker or
array, also applying that same approach for Nexo and d&b systems using their processing. Lake and xta processing is also rather expensive, especially on a 'per processing path' basis, which is a factor for many churches. However, it should be noted that a
Yamaha mini-YGDAI card with 8x8 Lake processing is now available that may be a little more cost effective, however it is apparently not compatible with the PM1D (another factor in the age of the PM1D is that many of the newer mini-YGDAI cards may not be compatible).
Again though, what I would strongly suggest is the
system tuning and
system process setup be done by a trained lake engineer. Just like anyone 'can do'
system tuning, if you have the budget your gear seems to
express, it's worth the 2k for a real solid calibration.
I strongly agree with the importance of
system tuning. You are typically spending a lot of money on a
speaker system and will hopefully be using it for many years, so
system optimization is usually a very wise investment.
I do differ a
bit on the qualifications. I think that the party that configures and programs the
processor(s) should be qualified to do so, but for the
system tuning the important factors to me are someone with a good understanding of the physics involved, who has the tools to help them and knows how to use them and, most importantly, who has a good ear for not only what sounds 'right' but for also discerning when it doesn't sound right and identifying the potential cause. Thus it may be that the person performing the
speaker system tuning is not necessarily the same person providing the initial
processor programming and configuration to get the
system working properly.
