[HughParticipant]

A virtual sound check (Or you may choose to call it dialing in a show file on a console) does not have to be a venue based process. The point I am trying to make is this process is far more precise and satisfactory if it is accomplished by the people that tracked and mixed the project in an event where they will be managing the channel processing from the stage. “Tuning the FOH” is a necessary but far less complicated process than venue virtual sound checks.
I am well aware of the convenience stems cam provide to venue personnel when they are responsible for all of the performance processing however today most shows of any significance are dialed in well before show time and well before the venue sound check. This is particularly true of tricky large track count gigs or “hit & Miss” gigs with questionable skill level personnel running some venue systems. This is the real world sonic handicap that we either live with or choose to avoid.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

A “virtual sound check” is not limited to Multi-track stems providing processing targets for the venue to adjust each channel that will be musically in use at the venue. Sound checks occur in every gig set up and the question is what is the most dependable and efficient method to establish appropriate channel processing for any given gig at the venue.
IMO internal management of all processing, other than FOH calibration, is far more dependable and efficient when done in the project studio with the SQ5 that captured the tracks and will also be providing the stage mix of the subject gig. I am more than well aware of the process being discussed in this thread and have learned the hard way the following:

1) Subjugating all channel processing to external personnel with a sound check at the venue will greatly reduce the probably of a satisfactory mix.
2) Calibration of FOH to work well with a stereo track of the show is a much more dependable process that can be well done in the rush of a pre-show sound check.

By virtue of the fact that most of the readers of this thread own or are considering a purchase of an SQ5 the necessity of relegating all performance settings to external venue personnel is optional — not mandatory. Setting up the deck at home well before show time is always a good idea if you have the chops.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

The single most important factor to be determined with any virtual sound check is the choice between a stereo mix VxS individual multi-track stems. The answer will turn upon the amount of FOH and monitor mixing and processing a remote console will be managing.

1) When FOH personnel are controlling the stage gear placement, FOH/monitoring processing and mixing then Multi-track stems will be necessary for a virtual sound check. Generally speaking, unless the console management is provided by an employed band associate the performance will fall way short of the original recording: and in the final analysis that is the target we are all aiming for.

2) Some performers provide all gear and processing from the stage for their mixing, processing and monitoring. They send a two mix to the console for FOH distribution and in this event a stereo mix is most appropriate. I have found ,with out any reservation, over many years of gigging that no external personnel will know more about the specific processing needs of my gear and my show than I do. The “set it and leave it” protocol I have developed over the past 40 years works well for me however it is certainly not for everyone! I have a stereo mix of a sample of the show to be performed that includes an explanation to the seated audience the need to calibrate the FOH sonic balance with bodies in the seats. The adjustments begin with my voice making the announcement and within two min. the process is completed.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

The A & H protocol to deliver cue mixes to performers is about as good as it gets. The IEM “more me” folks have personal custom mix control with the devices A&H has available for that purpose and wedges can have isolated outputs with custom mixing available to suit most any need. This is one of the great advantages digital processing has delivered to the live performance music world: it aint rocket science.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

Keith,
I had a cursory understanding of the channel extension process the OP was pursuing and was not questioning the A & H SQ potential to get it done. My concern was pursuant to the Waves LV1 mixer to deliver the channels effectively with out the ancillary support of a server. My Digigrid/Waves LV1 system reaches it’s full potential when the separate essential elements work with each other. Mix and match protocols possible with the SQ may offer possibilities that are outside of the optimized protocol Waves is designed to work well with.
For this reason I strongly recommend asking Waves for their opinion about the LV1 working very well in this proposed protocol.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

I have a 20 channel Digigrid input system (IOS & IOX) along with a Server One that feeds a 32 channel LV1 mixer that provides the digital info including the plug-in and ancillary processing to a custom ADK audio computer with two hard drives: One for audio processing and the other for my Studio One DAW. When the studio, or live performance, capture is complete and the DAW is deployed in two mix activity I have a Faderport 8 to assist the touch screen operation of the LV1 with these mixing chores.
This is what I think the Waves card does for an SQ desk: It enables a Waves server to deliver all of the loaded structure and processing for your LV1 license that you may have available to facilitate multi-track recording.
I strongly recommend calling the Waves teck people (1-865-909-9200) and clarify with them whether or not you have miss read the possibilities you have alluded to.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

At this point there is no clear empirical evidence indicating any advantage in using USB3 to manage audio digital packets: Unlike Video that is a totally different demand. The controlling A&H USB2 question is the degree to which downward compatibility is available within various USB3 HD devices.
Perhaps a bit of thinking out side of the box will offer a new approach to recording your band that would be more appropriate than your present planned protocol. Reviewing the options will reveal the following.
An SQ5 offers 16 tracks of 24/96K or 32 tracks of 24/48K recording with USB2 Output on top of the desk. A Glyph Studio USB3 Powered HD will capture the tracks and from that point a dump down later to your DAW for processing is a no brainer.
I have been deploying a “set it and leave it” desk protocol for more than 50 years for FOH SR in the acoustic Americana genre and these days it works very well with my live music video shoots. I love the SQ full range of recording options that allows us to customize the exact amount of processing the HD will initially capture that has no relativity to FOH manipulation. To that end after the live tracks are in the DAW re-tracking and/or punch ins are a snap with the SQ5s FPGA processing.
My 5 decades of chasing better sonic captures has taught me a very important lesson: blind loyalty to gear of any type is ultimately a disappointing, expensive trip. Chasing technology is a well known rabbit hole but so is a failure to properly assess better available protocol options.
Hugh
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

I have two Glyph independently powered HDs that work without problems in the A&H USB2 protocol.

1) The small audio packets we work with, unlike video requirements, are a good fit for USB2. However the speed requirement for multi-tracking is pretty healthy and when the USB source is also providing the operating power for the flash drive corruption is likely.
2) SSDs run much hotter than spinning drives and as such are probably not a smart or beneficial choice to use with the A & H USB2 protocol.

Buy a 1tb Glyph Studio HD or similar powered HD for working with the subject A & H USB2 recording protocol.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

You have raised two points I will comment upon;

1) I gave my QU16 to my grandsons for their garage band endeavors along with a custom ADK computer loaded with a Studio One DAW. They have been multi-track recording up to 32 tracks for more than three years with out problems.The gift was prompted by my decision to set up a full Digigrid/Waves LV1 with a new ADK computer with more than enough CPU to manage all DAW activities with all of the Waves CPU hungry plug ins. I bought a QUsb for my small one man gigs and after putting a Glyph, independently powered, HD in the USB2 recording hub I had no problems recording up to as many as 16 tracks to be processed later.
The point is if an appropriate HD is used and the A & H protocol is carefully followed a QU 16, QUsb or a SQ will produce dependable recordings. If I choose a more elaborate recording protocol for my SQ5 the waves plug in would accommodate my server with all of the fabulous plugs I use in the studio every day. At this point it has not been necessary.
2) Be very careful what you ask for: The primary difference between the touch screen operation of My LV1 and the QUsb is Cat6 VxS Wifi. The latency wifi generates can make controlling a show frustrating when lots of fader pushin is necessary. Most of my work is videoing acoustic pro bands that do not require much in the way of audio desk manipulation so the wifi works pretty well. But I recently videoed a one hour stage production with a cast of 30 and more moving parts that a swiss watch and the wifi latency of the QUsb was a nightmare.

I too would be a buyer of an SQ loaded DX168 if the touch screen was Cat6 controlled. However no way will Wifi get you there for most audio activity.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

I have a project studio with a Digigrid/WavesLV1 system running to a S1 4.5 DAW. I record ancillary tracks to use in my one man vocal/guitar gigs and initially was shaping at the sound check the stems along with my live single Flea47 next mic for my vocal/guitar SR.
This is what I know: preparing a two mix from the stems in the studio works much much better than doing it at the gig. It is a simple deal to touch the foot button and Wala I have a full rhythm section custom mixed to play with until the SQ drive finishes the stereo tracks. For starters any EQ beyond installed venue system tuning is seldom a big deal and no venue engineer will get the specific dynamic balance I require for my tracks. This is the point where the rubber hits the road, I always carry all of my front end and monitoring and deliver to the venue the exact mix I desire for my performance. This is my work flow even if I am working with a 5 piece seated Bluegrass band or my solo gig. The question is whether or not the artist has the technical chops or interest in shaping their own dynamics for their performance.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

I called Glyph and the GPT 50 is no longer offered, however their USB3 studio version took it’s place in the line up and it also starts at 1TB, however the man I talked with (Jones) assured me that it is completely downward compatible with USB2 applications. This is real good news: an ultra fast bullet proof device that has external power for $149. If you do not need more than 16 tracks this device and the SQ drive were made for each other.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

The single most important factor to understand is a the degree to which a independent power supply is critical to the process and ultimate HD quality. This is the reason most flash drives provide spotty, at best, performance. I use, with out any problems, a Glyph GPT50 with it’s own power supply and it is a USB2 work horse. I use the USB drive on the face of the unit and can record hours of up to 16 tracks of multi-track performance with out a single hint of a glitch: however it is imperative to be fully versed in the A & H recording protocol. I have a complete Digigrid/Waves LV1 system set up in my project studio: however I find dumping the tracks into the Waves system and S1 4.5 DAW after the fact to be most efficient and have not in any way degraded the final two mixes.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

The single most important factor to understand is a the degree to which a independent power supply is critical to the process and ultimate HD quality. This is the reason most flash drives provide spotty, at best, performance. I use, with out any problems, a Glyph GPT50 with it’s own power supply and it is a USB2 work horse. I use the USB drive on the face of the unit and can record hours of up to 16 tracks of multi-track performance with out a single hint of a glitch: however it is imperative to be fully versed in the A & H recording protocol. I have a complete Digigrid/Waves LV1 system set up in my project studio however I find dumping the tracks into the Waves system and S1 4.5 DAW after the fact to be most efficient and have not in any way degraded the final two mixes.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

Am music & sound provided the answer: The DX168 Has D-Live pres and conversion chips. When packaged with the world class FPGA processing that pretty much resolves the front end sonic quality questions some of us are deeply concerned about.
Hugh

[HughParticipant]

I know there is a clear advantage of cat6 VS USB 2 connectivity and dependability based on the difference I have experienced between my QUsb and Digigrid/WavesLV1 systems recording protocols. I am working my way through replacing my QUsb with a SQ5 and a waves Card: My existing server one and LV1 license will enable this high quality hybred system that will fit in the trunk of my Toyota. (that is a big deal for an old dude like me doing a one man show with a Flea 47 next Tube mic.
Hugh

[Author]

Posts