New small control surface for DX32

Forums Forums SQ Forums SQ feature suggestions New small control surface for DX32

This topic contains 12 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of Hugh Hugh 1 month, 1 week ago.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #102792
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    The new A&H Prime I/Os offer pristine, detailed transparency that will greatly benefit the acoustic music world. The “Prime money channels” are offered in 8 channel configurations and require a DX32 module housing. Most of the pop music world will not reap the same advantages from the Primes that the acoustic world will however it is important to understand the importance of high quality processing in an appropriate sized footprint for these magnificent pre amps.
    To this end, given the much smaller channel count needs for these activities, It is my belief a dedicated DX32 surface controller loaded with the D-Live FPGA xciv core and a dyn8 engine and all d-Live deep options. 8 faders with the SQ 7 inch touch screen and controls along with right side FX and Aux buttons. 6 pages of 8 channel read outs could reach a max of 48 channels. Maximum access for all external needs including the existing Waves/Dante port and I-Pad remote control but only one XLR Input for talk back purposes. It is my contention that very few DX32s loaded with Primes will ever need more than three strips of 8 pre amps providing 24 money channels along with 8 prime output channels.
    As an owner of both a DX32 loaded with Primes and an outstanding DX168 stage box I am totally convinced my SQ5 with 16 XLR inputs is not a good fit for my purposes. Universal adaptability is the mantra of most gear producers, however I know there is a very viable market for a small footprint, high quality surface controller that would be an ideal match for either a DX168 or DX32 stage box.
    Hugh

    #102799
    Profile photo of tourtelot
    tourtelot
    Participant

    Old tune being sung by me but a DT32 for Prime is still of interest to me. Imagine being able to have 24 Prime pres available on my Dante network?

    D.

    #102804
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    Many reasons led A&H to require a DX32 module to house their new “Prime money pres. “With a street price in the $200. to $275.per pre amp range. (between $1,600./$2,200. for each sleeve of 8) the DX32 module allows the user to buy only the number of in & out sleeves (between 8,16,24 or32 channels) they really need. Most all of the DT stage boxes are pre configured with 16 or more ins with 8 or more outs and it is unlikely A&H will develop a 24 & 8 DT prime stage box that would have to carry a $9,000. price tag for a 16/8 stage box.
    When my A&H dealer delivered my DX32 and Prime I/Os and we started unwrapping the parts he remarked that the DX32 had a lot of Digico structural elements including hot swappable power supplies and main frame. The DX32 was developed primarily to work well with a D-Live control surface: my suggestion is to develop a small footprint control surface for those of us that are small channel count, high end users. The following question remains to be answered: How many potential buyers will there be for high end, world class capture and processing needing 24 or less channels? The entire question turns on the importance of appropriate, dependable tactile control for stage located performance capture. This is todays high end acoustic SR protocol and A&H is well on the way to establishing the bench mark for these endeavors. In the event a DX168 will be a better fit for your work flow if your max channel count is less than 48, a small footprint 8 fader surface controller would make a lot of sense. Why buy 16 inputs you will not use when the D-Live dyn8 engine, a 12 inch touch screen and D-live deep up grades could be very useful.
    Hugh

    #102908
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    One of my associates that has been in discussions with me about a “best practice for the Prime money channels” suggested a D-Live C-1500 control surface that would do most everything I was looking for. After a closer look the reality is I do not need 6 XLR ins or 6 XLR outs. I need 1 XLR in for a talk back mic. I do not need a 12 inch touch screen if a “Screen out port” is available for a 24 inch touch screen like I am using with my Waves LV1: the 7 inch screen works pretty well for me on my SQ5. Truth be told the SQ array of Aux,FX, digital XLRs, Waves card processing and EQ system is working well enough for my needs. A little bit of the D-Live processing that is not available on the SQ series would be great if it was not too difficult to fit into the SQ architecture. But there is no way it along with the other features I do not need I could justify an $8,000. msrp. A mini DX control surface could be housed in a SQ5 shell that has a much more suitable footprint.
    I fully well realize the importance of “Flagship Brand pricing” however the SQ has already encroached well into FPGA processing and other than the dyn8 engine the SQ5 offers for a street price in the 2K range most of the D-Live magic if DX stage boxes are deployed. Does the D-Live C-1500 deliver 4 times more in function and quality than the entry level SQ5: not from my wallet. Yes I have spent a large premium on a DX32 and Prime I/Os along with a bargain 1K purchase of a DX168. However they offered a substantial improvement in the detail and transparency that is key to my daily work flow. This is not the case with a C-1500: IMO it is too big and way too expensive for the function it offers beyond the SQ.
    Think about your work flow: are you into stage box capture with a 24/96 DX168 or DX32 primes for your live and recording needs. If so why do you need 16 ins and 8 outs on an SQ 5 desk to process your work. Eliminating Half of the faders and all of the analog XLR I/Os except for a single talk back input should reduce the price , not increase it, if there is a clear market for a simple DX controller.
    Hugh

    #102911
    Profile photo of SteffenR
    SteffenR
    Participant

    After all you didn’t get the point of the dLive platform…?

    a C1500 and a DX32 do nothing together… without a real mixrack

    #102921
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    I certainly understand the difference between a mix rack that houses the processing and a DX I/O expansion unit. I also made abundantly clear the SQ platform, that houses the subject essential processing, is very satisfactory for my work flow. What I do not know is the real difference between the D-Live FPGA xciv core and the SQ’s: other than channel count. Also the D-Live’s dyn 8 engine apparently delivers deep processing that is beyond the SQ platform’s capability however these are details that have not been published. In my final analysis these missing embellishments would be nice to have but in fact do not make a significant difference for my work flow.
    SteffenR, I do not now ,nor have I ever wanted a large channel count D-Live scale SR system: I seldom use as many as 8 I/Os simultaneously. The entire question turns on the fact that A&H has released their world class processing in a small scale, entry level SQ5 desk. For some of us, that deploy DX “expansion” stage boxes, the 16 X 12 XLR I/Os are a useless redundancy. The number of faders we need is also a very debatable point. I an very comfortable with the Fader port 8 I use with my DAW and it also coincides with the Prime pre amp strip count. The real use average needed channel count is an unknown, however I am suspicious there is a growing number of potential customers for a high quality, small channel count, SQ5 footprint DX processing controller.
    Hugh

    #102922
    Profile photo of SteffenR
    SteffenR
    Participant

    DX has no processing, nor has a controller processing…
    You still need something that does the processing… there are some choices already

    I don’t understand what you are trying to suggest…

    A smaller (cheaper) solution with faders makes no sense to me, this is covered with the SQ5 already.

    #102924
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    SteffenR,
    Please read again my post #102921 very carefully before you post a critical comment. I have stated in plain English the features I need, including processing, and those I do not need including 16 X 12 XLR I/Os. If you do not understand my post ,as it is stated, we do not have any basis for a conversation.
    Hugh

    #102927
    Profile photo of SteffenR
    SteffenR
    Participant

    SQ5 footprint DX processing controller.

    DX processing?
    This does not exist…

    #102928
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    It appears the SteffenR and I finally have agreement. There is no dedicated existing DX processor with tactile controls: that is precisely why I have posted my request in this SQ forum!

    #102930
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    There have been several requests in recent and past posts to expand the SQ options to include more of D-Live’s FPGA & dyn 8 engine features. I would greatly appreciate, in this regard, any detailed information Keith might be authorized to share with us pursuant to the actual design limits of the SQ FPGA processing platform other than the obvious channel counts.
    Hugh

    #102932
    Profile photo of SteffenR
    SteffenR
    Participant

    Have a look at the document about the XCVI core…
    until Keith answers…

    https://www.allen-heath.com/media/XCVI.pdf

    #102940
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    Thank you SteffenR for the very well written article: It answers a lot of my questions, but not quite all of the specific Processing limitations of the SQ platform. Perhaps Keith can add some info for us.
    Hugh

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

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.