DCA Processing

Forums Forums SQ Forums SQ feature suggestions DCA Processing

This topic contains 12 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of Jordan T. Hurt Jordan T. Hurt 1 year, 6 months ago.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #78223
    Profile photo of Jordan T. Hurt
    Jordan T. Hurt
    Participant

    What if we could EQ, compress, and gate a DCA? This would be great for some theatrical environments where you want to EQ more than just a lav group, for example.

    #78231
    Profile photo of Chris93
    Chris93
    Participant

    DCAs don’t carry audio, there’s nothing to process.

    Use subgroups.

    Chris

    #78232
    Profile photo of Jordan T. Hurt
    Jordan T. Hurt
    Participant

    Chris, you’re missing my point. I’m saying what if we COULD use DCAs this way. Surely through technology anything is possible. You could use a subgroup AND the DCA for processing.

    #78235
    Profile photo of Steffen R
    Steffen R
    Participant

    no, he don’t misses your point…

    #78237
    Profile photo of GCumbee
    GCumbee
    Participant

    That’s just not how it works. Use a group.

    #78246
    Profile photo of Chris93
    Chris93
    Participant

    What would you envision the difference being between a subgroup and a “processing capable DCA”?

    Given that there is no audio in the DCA, how would you envision the signal flow working?

    Chris

    #78247
    Profile photo of Jordan T. Hurt
    Jordan T. Hurt
    Participant

    I would envision it being post-group processing. It would have to be a setting that would make the DCA carry audio. I get that it’s different and not something that exists, but that’s why I posted it. Isn’t that why this forum exists? Since we can’t use multiple EQs for on group, it would allow for more processing on what would already be a group. Maybe it’s not done through DCAs – maybe instead they just give us the option to add more processing to busses. Again, it’s all theorhetical. I understand that’s not how it works. My point is what if we could use it in a way to open more doors. I didn’t say it was the only way.

    #78248
    Profile photo of Chris93
    Chris93
    Participant

    You basically want a second tier of subgroups? This is sort of what a matrix does, but you can’t route those to the LR. What you’re suggesting isn’t necessarily a bad idea, I’d probably use a second tier subgroup myself, it just couldn’t be called a DCA because it has nothing to do with what a DCA is/does.

    Would the ability to route a group to another group allow you to do what you want? On GLD at least, you can route an aux to a group, and a post-fade aux with all the sends at unity is essentially the same thing as a group. That might be worth experimenting with.

    Chris

    #78403
    Profile photo of Jordan T. Hurt
    Jordan T. Hurt
    Participant

    Yeah, that’s basically what I would want. Honestly, the best thing would be to just have the ability to add additional EQs to channels and busses, but that would probably take lots of processing power. But yes, I would love to route a group to another group. I’m fairly certain that this ins’t currently possible on the SQ, but if it is, hopefully someone will correct me.

    #78421
    Profile photo of Jgrift
    Jgrift
    Participant

    The closes thing I know of for what your imagining is what SSL does with stem groups. They sit in the chain before auxes and can be routed to all buses and to other stem groups. (take a look at the attached file). But at the end of the day you could just assign a group to a DCA. Maybe its me but there seems to be a trend on the A&H forum for people wanted more processing. MORE EQ. MORE DYNAMICS! MORE EVERYTHING…… From my professional opinion and from the best live mixes I have ever heard, have the least amount of processing. Don’t be temped to just add and add to “fix” the sound. Most of the time taking away is more effective. LESS IS MORE.

    sorry for the rant.
    Jason

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #78435
    Profile photo of Jordan T. Hurt
    Jordan T. Hurt
    Participant

    Jason, in a good room with a good PA, you don’t need lots of processing, but when you do a theatrical tour in a room where you have lots of issues that can’t just be fixed with the room EQ, that extra processing comes in handy. I’ve had mixes that I was really happy with wihtout any compression and minimal EQ, but I’ve also been in situations where I’m using the entire parametric EQ to cut bad frequencies on a mic and wishing I could just have another EQ to add to that mic. I agree with you, but I’m also not going to spend close to $100k on a console. I’m also partial to the A&H preamps anyway (call me crazy, but I’m just not a huge fan of the SSL Live).

    #78448
    Profile photo of Jens-Droessler
    Jens-Droessler
    Participant

    I don’t fully understand what you want. You say you want more processing, you say you want it at the DCAs. Why? If more EQs are what you want, why not ask for the feature already on the wish list here: Insertable PEQ modules. Insertable like the Dyn8 is: Just select it from the insert list.

    #78525
    Profile photo of Jordan T. Hurt
    Jordan T. Hurt
    Participant

    Yes, insertable PEQ, compression, etc. modules is basically what this thread has arrived at since processing a DCA wouldn’t be possible. Or even having them in the FX rack to use as inserts would be acceptable, though that would greatly limit the amount of “extra” EQs you could use versus the Dynamic8.

    It’s my fault for being ignorant to the fact that DCAs simply CAN’T have processing put on them, but I guess in my mind anything would be possible on a digital desk (given the right hardware).

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.