Skip to main content

New format DAW consoles vs. old school aircraft carriers

So I'm getting back into recording, and I hope someday to have enough money to build a place with full capabilities. At Full Sail, we used the SSL 4000 (I'm sure I only know 25% of that boards capabilities) and I've assisted for a while on same. Watching the SSL youtube videos of the AWS 900, like
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmK0b5w0KuA

I'm confused. When I learned, you needed 48 channels, usually 24 for tracking, and tape returns, and 24 for effects returns. (from what I remember, anyway). With these new, smaller size consoles, how are the effects handled? And if you were in Pro Tools vs. tape, wouldn't an old fashion console, i.e. one without DAW control really present a huge pain in the butt? What's happening now in the big studios? There's used SSL large format consoles going for ~60-100k, and the AWS 900 is like 87k, so in theory, it would actually be cheaper to go full size, but would you be shooting yourself in the foot vs a DAW controller/console? It seems that most outboard gear is software now anyways, or do people still use outboards like the lexicon, eventide, Yamaha, ams outboard stuff

Comments

Kev Sun, 05/18/2008 - 15:27
too big for one thread

the industry has change so much and anything is possible

I use my hardware outboard because I have it
I use Software because it's there

recently sold my analog desks due to space and maintenance issues ... and I'm a tech !

I made the choice to simplify things and go for more MITB

Some people hate the throught of mixing without a control panel but I haven't seen one worth the effort
so
I use the mouse ... yes it can be a a pain in the bum

yes I am on PT HD.

Budget ... money always seems to be the main issue.
?
then floor space
then maintenance

clients ... what do your clients expect and need.
clients can also influence the location of the facility.

big subject

Pro Audio Guest Sun, 05/18/2008 - 15:55
Kev wrote:

Some people hate the throught of mixing without a control panel but I haven't seen one worth the effort
so
I use the mouse ... yes it can be a a pain in the bum

Ever thought of using a 32" touch screen for hands-on mixing action? I have.

only a couple of $$grand. It would eliminate controller compatibility issues with DAWs.

Kev Sun, 05/18/2008 - 16:12
I think the touchscreen and things like the JazzMutant can still only do one thing at a time
just like a mouse

a desk can have two operators and move multiple faders and pan and change an EQ all at the same time.

you comment about compatability issues is a good one
...
also as the DAW is upgraded, will the Control Surface continue to be supported.

I think it can and should but here is one of the issue when considering how much to spend.

Codemonkey Sun, 05/18/2008 - 17:10
Microsoft Surface. Multi-touch technology.
They're recently opened it up a little and created a wall (any flat surface) mountable, ultra cheap version (cheap enough to be considered anyway).

And yes, I love the idea of a multi touch screen with faders on it. Mmmm, near infinite knobs at the touch of a button.
I would get away with a 15" touchscreen, with something like what my ATI drivers have. I can put my 1280x1024 monitor to anything up to 3200xsomething - it pans the output to show a fixed size area of the actual screen space. So you could touch the screen edge and scroll to your effect properties etc....

Pro Audio Guest Sun, 05/18/2008 - 17:35
Codemonkey wrote:

Microsoft Surface. Multi-touch technology.
They're recently opened it up a little and created a wall (any flat surface) mountable, ultra cheap version (cheap enough to be considered anyway).

Codemonkey,

Where can I find info about the wall mounted ones? I did a search, but could only come up with info on the debut of the table one.

Codemonkey Sun, 05/18/2008 - 17:46
Uhhhh...*checks RSS feeds where he thinks he saw it*

Aha! The TouchWall.

The general idea of the thing [="http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/07/nieman-marcus-to-sell-perceptive-pixels-interactive-media-wall"]here[/]="http://www.engadget…"]here[/] but advertises a stand alone wall at 100k.

The actual thing I was looking at [[url=http://="http://gizmodo.com/…"]here[/]="http://gizmodo.com/…"]here[/].
The quote from the RSS feed:
"TouchWall is a fundamentally simpler mechanical system, and is also significantly cheaper to produce. While Surface retails at around $10,000, the hardware to “turn almost anything into a multi-touch interface” for TouchWall is just “hundreds of dollars” says Sands."

Kev Mon, 05/19/2008 - 00:35
Codemonkey wrote: Microsoft Surface. Multi-touch technology.
....
interesting
would have to see and feel it in action

very Star Trek

would need some software to create buttons ... graphics
then assign these to Midi Continuous Controllers etc
... same as for a hardware unit

midibox forum have these things in different forms

we have waited years for something that makes sense
should be modular and scalable
....
one day

Codemonkey Mon, 05/19/2008 - 07:32
TBH, if I had the hardware, I would do my level best to write my own software just to use it.
Although, does Vista not have multi-touch technology?
If your software is built on typical Windows buttons/controls/etc. and uses bog standard ways of coding, there is no reason that it can't have multiple mouse contact points - so long the OS supports it. Which, IMO, Vista does.

One day, Trekkies will be right, Minority report will be mentioned again, and mixers will have fingerprints up and down them...but no dust in the slits!

Davedog Fri, 05/23/2008 - 17:31
kjfarley wrote: which would you rather have? a AWS900 or a 4000/6000 or a big neve?

how do you deal with efx returns on a AWS or 24ch neve?

I thought you said you had been to FullSail and had learned on a 4000.

If this is true then you have a much better idea whether that console would be able to fulfill your needs.
x