Albuquerque Campus Launch

On September 20th, 2009 we launched our first out of state campus in Albuquerque, New Mexico.  Prior to this launch we had two site visits, a brief 36 hour scouting trip and a longer 5 day integration and training trip.  On the scouting trip I went down as the sole protech representative to assess what systems were already present and evaluate feasibility of continued use of these systems.  I gathered info to draw up elevations of the room, developed full design documentation of the existing campus audio, video and lighting systems, and took hundreds of pictures.  Back in Seattle, I met with the full protech team where we agreed upon proposing a limited scope project.  The entire protech team then headed down the last week of June and spent five days integrating new equipment, troubleshooting existing systems and re-integrating parts of the old system.

Video System

As the gospel is delivered via video to all but one Mars Hill campus, ensuring that the highest quality possible sermon video is the is one of the most important aspects of every project for us.  This led us to procuring and integrating an entire new system. The equipment was all procured in our warehouse in Seattle, where we built all the racks and test the system.  The new video system was then shipped freight to our Albuquerque location where we integrated it onsite.  This system features 2 mac mini computers (one for graphics, one for video download and backup playout), a Pioneer BDP-V6000 blu-ray player for sermon playout, a FSR CP-100 switcher/scaler (same as Barco DCS-100), the Panasonic PT-DW6300 projector, and a 20′ Draper Paragon Screen.

Audio System

We unfortunately were unable to standardize this system (we have established standardized equipment church-wide) and worked to replace only what was absolutely needed.  We rehung the speakers higher in the room to help reduce the DB variance that exists from front to back in this room (single speaker cluster at front of room, no delay speakers).  We troubleshot several hums and buzzes in the system, reducing the overall noise that everyone had come to accept as normal. FOH was demolished and rebuilt, providing a significantly larger work surface.  All the rack equipment was re-racked and cabling was cleaned up appropriately.  In tuning the room we found several issues that resulted in us pushing the subs back (they were out of phase with the mains) and replacing the drivers in the existing EV mains (they were toast…).  We also deployed out an IEM (in-ear-monitors) system at this campus to help reduce the stage volume that the campus was previously experiencing.

Lighting System

We made three upgrades to the lighting system.  First we decommissioned the existing dimmers and replaced them with the same type of dimmer, just new.  The old ones were operating at less than 50% and posed an immanent safety threat as there were cover plates missing and the units were not properly integrated.  The second upgrade was switching the system from multiplex to dmx.  This was an easy win as we were able to reuse the existing cabling with no additional work.  This switch didn’t benefit us at all during this phase of the project, rather it was simply establishing a good foundation upon which to build on at this new campus.  If we want to integrate any intelligent fixtures in the future we now have the ability to do so in just a few minutes rather than needing to reconfigure the entire lighting system.  The third upgrade was simply replacing the old NSI lighting console with a new Leviton MC 7024 console.  Nothing fancy, rather just a simple and bullet-proof interface for our volunteers.

Project Wrap

A key concept that we have been working on is standardizing on equipment that is network ready.  This allows us to ‘get-into’ key equipment from our Seattle office and upgrade firmware, software, etc.  We can also check settings and perform some basic troubleshooting without needing to fly a technician out to New Mexico every other week.  This campus has launched and is growing, and we are excited to see how Jesus will continue bless this new location.  If you are curious what additional equipment is integrated at this campus check HERE for that detail, or if you’d like to see additional pictures check HERE.

700 MHz Wireless Transition

As many of you are aware the FCC sold off much of the frequency space that is used by wireless microphones and in ear monitoring products.  For a detailed explanation of that decision by the FCC please take a moment and read the “FCC Selling Frequency Space” post about it we did back in February.  This action has caused many churches and other organizations to rethink how they are using wireless technology in their facilities.

What does the law currently say?

As of right now the law still allows wireless units (microphones and in ear monitors) to operate in these frequencies.  I know this is information that is contradictory to what most of the information out there about this subject is saying.   There are many people that point to a proposal that the FCC had presented to disallow the use of wireless microphones with in the 700MHz band.  If this proposal had been approved, use of the microphones in this frequency range would have been prohibited, as of the Digital Television Deadline date (June 12, 2009).  This proposal was presented to the FCC on Nov. 4, 2008.  After reviewing the proposal they decided not to vote on it, which also means that it is only a proposal and not actually law, yet.

What did Mars Hill Church do and why?

Many wireless microphone companies have been watching this issue since it first surfaced over 5 years ago.  They came to the conclusion that the passing of the above proposal will eventually happen at any point in time.  Consequently they stopped selling wireless products in the 700 MHz band a couple of years ago.

After reviewing a lot of the information out there, and what the wireless companies are doing, Mars Hill Church decided to do the same.  We had 12 wireless units (headset mics, hand held mics, and in ear monitors) scattered across four of our six (at the time) campuses.  We now have all of your campuses operating in frequency bands that are not the 700 MHz band (over 80 frequencies (includes mics, IEM, wireless Comm, and radios) across 10 locations).

We have kept the units we swapped out (mostly because we couldn’t get any money for them in the rebate programs) and currently use them as a rental type of situation for each of our campuses.  We do regularly do frequency scans of each location, and are happy to report that so far, not much of the 700 MHz frequency space is seeing use.  As of now those units that we replaced are not yet illegal, but it appears that the writing is on the wall for them to become illegal to operate.  (They are also for sale if anyone wants to purchase them.)

So now we only have to worry about the TVBD’s that the FCC hasn’t figured out yet…  We will cross that bridge when the appropriate time comes.

Speaker Demo’s

This last Thursday, we demo’ed some new speakers. In the next couple of years Mars Hill Church will be looking to launch a large number of campuses.  Some of them small, some medium, and some large.  In an effort to standardize what we do to reduce work flow, we are also needing to service a large quantity of rooms and facilities.  We also realize that every location is not the same and that one system, one set up will not properly function in every space.

What we were looking for from this demo:

The column line array is the truest form of a line array there is.  The drivers are all stacked on top of each other and are the closest they will ever be.  Traditionally the column line array has been reserved for the spoken word and highly reverberant rooms.  Renkus-Heinz and SLS Audio, amongst others, have recently come out with a column line array, which is specifically aimed at Churches and are for live reinforcement of Churches.  So, the first question is weather this type of technology will be good for Live music and bands.  (For and example of the types of music played at Mars Hill Church please see our music library.)  We also are interested in the steer-ability of the systems, as well as their clarity.  Speed of set up and tear down was important in our evaluation as well.  We did the demo in our back parking lot to hear what the actual speakers sounded like, without room acoustics.  We then moved into our Ballard campus building to see how a room effects the response of the speakers.

Renkus-Heinz IC Live (ICL-R Array and ICL215S Sub)

Renkus-Heinz has released a new version of their Iconyx column arrays, called the IC Live.  The IC Live is a steerable line array, which basically means that the beam of coverage can be fully adjusted.  In the case of the IC Live it can fully adjust from -30 degrees to +30 degrees vertical, or any portion of that coverage.  They accomplish this by using a Digital Signal Processor (DSP) and an amplifier per driver, to change the time alignment of each driver.  Changing the time alignment will change how the drivers interact with each other, and therefor changing the apparent frequency response/coverage.  The sub woofer contains two 15″ drivers.  This box seams to be aimed at churches and the portable live performance spaces.  The speakers required all of 5 minutes to set up with two guys (one knowing what he was doing and another that didn’t (me!)).  We demo’ed a stack with two sub boxes and two sticks on top.  Setting up out in the parking lot, the Renkus Heinz guy did not want to do any DSP work with in the box and chose to run them flat out of the gate, which I appreciated.

Overall sound was decent.  With this configuration, we felt the low mids were lacking, and that the high end was nice and crisp – in some places.  We did notice that the high end was very “beamy” as we walked through the field of coverage from left to right.  By “beamy” I mean that in areas you could hear 6K and up quite well, and then walk a couple of feet to the left or right, and then the high end response feel right off, almost disappearing.  Overall the high end covered the 120 degrees that they claim on their spec sheets.  In some ways it almost felt like it had a wider coverage then that though.  The subs (ICL215S) had good presence and filled out the bottom of the IC Live quiet well.  They had a little punch, but for our purposes would really want the second sub cabinet to keep up with anything outdoors.

After moving inside, the Renkus-Heinz Tech. did some DSP work using the calculator software.  After putting in only the basic dimensions of the room, he was up and running.  With the steering DSP software he was able to aim the beam down and miss a lot of reflection off the back wall, although there still was some.

The sound changed a bunch.  The low mids were more present, although still lacking, the high end was still crisp, and the subs still had some punch.  The beamy-ness heard outside was severely mitigated and hard to hear now, a great improvement over outside, but still present.

SLS Audio PLS8695 Array and SP810 Sub

SLS Audio is a company which focuses in on Ribbon technologies, and has mentioned numerous times that they want to fully reproduce the sound that is given to them.  They do not want to use DSP, or any thing else, to alter the the sound that the end user produces.  They were showing that they only had a total of three filters in their entire system.  From them we demo’ed their large column array the PLS8695, paired with the SP810 Subwoofer.  The subwoofer contains two 18″ drivers.  We demo’ed two top arrays, and one subwoofer.  The set up was a little long, part of that was because the speakers were built for us from the factory, so we were opening a lot of boxes and bags, which normally wouldn’t be the case.  As the units sit right now, there are two plates which need to be attached to the bottom of each unit.  One set of plates attaches to quick release pins on the sub woofer, and the other set of plates attach the top array to the bottom array.  Our biggest complaint here was that these plates are bolted into the sides of the speaker boxes, and there is no quick release for them.  Also the custom roadcases that the speakers come/came in, does not allow for the plates to remain attached.  After the plates are attached to the array, it takes four people to stand the array on end and attach it to the subwoofer, mostly because of the weight of the double stacked array.  Another pain point of the set up was that the subwoofer isn’t currently self powered, but the top (array) is.  Evidently it is in the manufacturers plans to install an amplifier in the subwoofer box here soon (end of the calendar year?).  Other then this the set up of the column system is quiet simple and decently fast.  It took one person who knew what he was doing and three people that didn’t, about 30 minutes to unbox and set up the stack.  After moving inside though the set up took the same people about 15-20 minutes.

The overall sound of the SLS Audio was good.  The double 18″ subwoofer provided for that good punchy sub sound that only a dual 18″ can provide.  The low mids were good, supportive, and in good balance with the rest of the system.  The high end was crisp and clear, however when we pushed the system (100 dBA at 75′) the high end really got bright and hurt the ears.  I’m almost curious to see what the system running at full sounds like, but I like my hearing too much, the Manufacturer’s Rep. claims a SPL of 145 dBA (web site says 115dB at 60′).

After moving inside the SLS Audio system bounced audio to a large portion of the room, putting a lot of sound where we don’t want it.  The slap back off the back wall was pretty substantial.  The low mids seamed to tighten up a little as well.  We did not push the system to great volumes inside, so we didn’t hear how the high’s reacted to being inside.

Other notes:

Inside we made use of one of the wireless microphone hand held’s and walked 360 degrees around the two speakers stacks.  We were able to be closer to the IC Live then the SLS Audio speakers.  Both systems had real good rejection behind the cabinets and allowed for us to get closer then the mic would actually ever be used.  In front of the column systems, we could get our microphone directly in front of the IC Live, with a proximity of around 4′, and still hitting 85 dBA at FOH (louder then a normal speaking volume) 60 feet away.  Doing the same test with the SLS Audio Speakers, the closest tot he speaker cabinet we were able to get, with the same results was about 8′.

Update: The SLS Audio Subwoofer has two wheels on it, which make it awkward to move.  The SLS Audio Manufacturer’s Rep. that was there, did mention they would be willing to modify the design to put four wheels on it.  He mentioned that he was going to try to get that change into the design change that would come when the amp is installed in the Subwoofer.  Also, the Manufacture’s Rep. did mention that he could make sure the roadcases were long enough to be able to keep the plates attached to the side of the column, speeding up setup.  Hopefully these two changes would allow the system to be set up in 15 minutes.  As another side note; the Manufactures Rep. mentioned that the final product will be rigged to build the column from the front of the array instead of the rear, as it currently is done.

Both systems tightened up, and sounded warmer, when they were inside.  My thought on this is that the systems were now in front of a wall and were using the wall behind them to adjust the low mid response of the systems.

Over all we thought the SLS Audio system sounded better then the Renkus-Heinz system, but the basic build of the systems was slightly different.  The Renkus-Heinz system was a faster set up and tear down, and had programable DSP, with recallable presets.  Renkus-Heinz is considerably more expensize the SLS Audio.  The two systems were so similar and so different in many ways, which makes the decision of which one was better very hard.  In some catergories SLS Audio won out, in other catergories Renkis-Heinz won out.

Transitioning from Live Satellite to Video Playback

As many of you have already heard, Mars Hill Church has decided to abandon live satellite broadcasts in favor of a delayed video playback model. For the rational behind this influential decision I recommend you head over to the Mars Hill Blog and read what Pastor Mark Driscoll has to say about the transition.

Since this announcement I have received countless emails, phone calls, tweets, and facebook posts asking how we plan to technologically support a delayed playback model and I would like to quickly shed light onto our new workflow and its overwhelming simplicity.

We are continuing to capture all four services on Sunday at the Ballard campus, but rather than just capturing two copies of the main program feed (a primary and a redundant backup), we are additionally recording each camera’s unique feed. This is so that in the event we have a bad cut in the program feed or someone walks in front of the camera we have a way to edit out the problem before sending it out to all the MHC campuses. In case you were wondering, all we are using right now for capture is a rack full of Mac Pro towers running Final Cut Pro.

On Sunday nights after the last service Pastor Mark Driscoll and the Preaching & Theology branch decide which sermon was the best and that becomes the service that will be sent out to all the MHC campuses for playback the following week.

On Mondays the audio is ‘cleaned-up’, the intro video is dropped in, the in and out points are smoothed out and the finished ‘product’ is set to export as a 720p H.264 (m4v) video file in the 1.1GB file size neighborhood. Once this is complete we push (currently using Apple Remote Desktop, though looking at a few UDP with parity options and even the popular app ‘dropbox’) the file to a dedicated Mac Mini at each of the campuses for playback.

On Tuesdays the campus staff are asked to check the integrity of the file, playing it all the way through. For playback we simply use Quicktime.

As a backup we have the campus staff download a standard definition DVD ISO file and burn it to an actual DVD. In the event of some form of Sunday AM failure with the m4v file the campuses can easily pop the DVD into the player and hit play.

The video systems across all MHC campuses are changing. While doing satellite transmissions with timeshift playback these systems became fairly complicated, requiring greater knowledge and experience from operators than was ideal. In switching to a week delay model, we have been able to remove all of the complicated equipment, leaving only five main components: 2 Mac Minis (1 for sermon playback and 1 for running Keynote, our song lyric application of choice), a DVD player (for sermon playback backup), a Barco scaler, and a Panasonic projector.

The simplicity is beautiful.

Downtown Seattle Delay Speakers

A project that went wrong during the initial install due to budget cuts has finally gotten corrected.  The Downtown Seattle Campus main room is about 60 feet wide and 100 feet long, and was installed with a pair of EAW KF850’s on both sides of the stage, as mains speakers.  There was also plans to install delay speakers throughout the main room, which got cut due to lack of budget.  This budget cut created a volume problem with the sound system, the front was too loud and the back was too quiet.

Why are delay speakers needed?

Delay speakers allow for a more even volume coverage from the front to the back of a room.  Without delay speakers, the front of the room tends to be really loud, while the back of the room is really quiet.  Even volume (SPL – Sound Pressure Level) coverage from the front to the back of the room is ideal, especially as the room gets full and people have to sit in both the “Loud” and “quiet” zones.  This was the case at the Downtown Seattle Campus.  The front of the room was amazingly loud while at the back of the room, you could barely hear it.

So What Happened at Downtown Campus?

Recently, we installed the delay speakers into the main room.  We installed two rows of delays, carrying the stereo image through the room.  With the install of the new speakers, EAW JF590’s, the audio SPL (volume) coverage of the room has increased tremdously.  Meaning that the audio quality of the room has improved.  The people in the back of the room are no longer straining over the din of people talking in the foyer, to hear the sermon.  And the front of the room is no longer asking for ear plugs.

Hopefully with the completion of this project, people will once again be able to forget about the technology and focus on what God has for them.

Ballard FOH Console and Snake Project

Recently we installed a new Soundcraft Vi6 Digital soundboard into the Ballard Campus.  The Campus had a Midas XL4 at Front of House (FOH) which was given to Mars Hill a number of years ago by Full Sail Audio School.  When we first received the console we put much work into refurbishing it, and it was now getting to the point where we were needing to put some more money into fixing it again.  Much like the process of a car, we have decided it was time to move away from the Midas XL4, as it was just meeting our current needs, and we did not see it meeting our needs in 5, much less 10 years.  Like wise our current snake system barely met our current needs and needed a lot of attention.  Below are links to our findings.

Having made our decision to purchase a new soundboard we debated the differences between analog and digital sound boards.  We decided a digital sound board made the most sense for this particular application.  (A future post will be made giving considerations to the great debate between analog and digital sound boards.)

Having made this decision we then looked at the snake system in the building.  It was a weird setup: A snake head/patch panel routed into 48 channels of pre-amps.  The Main output of the pre-amp went to FOH, while the single Aux output was passively split to Monitors, ProTools and our Production Suite.  Driving all of our equipment at line level made for some interesting gain structure at the mic inputs on the sound boards.  It worked, kinda.  With this system in place there was much discussion about ways to expand on what we do, some of which required additional split outs.  None of these could be done on the old snake system.  We decided we needed a digital snake, because of the “unlimited” split outs that would be possible, giving us the most cost effective solution for the facility.  Further we decided the digital snake pre-amps needed to be controlled by at least one of the digital sound boards, and saved within the scenes of the sound board, enabling full recall of the system preset.

What are our needs with the new system wee are going to purchase?

We evaluated each sound board/system based on the needs which we are going to use the technology.  Some of the key items we were looking at where, in particular order: Audio Quality; Ease of use; Digital Snake Integration; Price; and reliability of platform.  Below are some PDF documents detailing some of this out.

Mars Hill Church | Ballard FOH Console and Snake Needs

Mars Hill Church | Ballard MADI Snake Needs

What Digital Sound Boards Are out There?

We looked at many of the digital sound boards out there.  We started with the Yamaha series: M7CL’s we have at every location so training would be easy, but it did not fit our “future seen” needs.  The Yamaha PM5D looked promising, but the digital snake to go with put it to be an expensive option, and it only meets our current input needs.  A number were just to small: Yamaha LS9, Roland V-Mixer, and the Mackie TT24.  The Digico Sound boards and Yamaha PM1D are a little out of the price range, and one was just way to expensive, the Midas XL8.  That left only a few digital consoles to look at:  DigiDesign Venue/Profile; Allen & Heath ILive; Soundcraft SI3; Soundcraft Vi6/Vi4.

The below are our reviews of each console system and are not in any particular order.

DigiDesign Venue and Profile

DigiDesign currently has two systems out there, of which they expand on to create “other” systems.  There are two control surfaces the “Venue” and the “Profile” each of which connect to a local rack and to a stage rack.  The stage rack and local rack are the same for each control surface.  There is a digital snake which connects the stage rack to the local rack, and a digital control cable which connects the control surface to the local rack.

The DigiDesign products were nice and had a wonderful sound to them.  The idea of being able to take ProTools plugin’s and use them in the live performance was also a very attractive feature.  However after much discussion, we decided that the main advantage to the plugin’s was to recreate a “sound as heard on the CD.”  We decided that the average listener would not be able to discern the difference between using and not using the exact same compressor or effect, live and recorded (Web MP3 or CD).  Therefor, this was not a must have feature for us.

Also, the DigiDesign systems, when combined with a ProTools HD system offer a “sound check” feature.  This feature allows for the playback of previously recorded sets, through the sound board.  The Rep. that was giving the demo was really pushing this feature as a “good way to check your mix” and “a valuable tool for training.”  After looking into this functionality some more, we discovered a couple of things:

1. The playback does not recreate stage volume, so the mix playback is not 100% accurate (expected);
2. The ProTools system and the Venue or Profile do not actually talk to each other.  In other words, any EQ, dynamics, or fader movements made during the live mix, are not tracked in ProTools, or elsewhere.  So when it comes time for playback, you do not get these adjustments, meaning that the “mix checking” feature of the sound check is only really valid for the last 20 seconds or so of the mix.
3. The ProTools playback feature only works as a set of inputs to the “live system” (Profile or Venue)

In the end we decided that since we are installing a digital snake, we could recreate this exact same feature with any console (and probably for not much more in costs).

After walking through a demo with both the Profile and Venue systems, we found that those of us that had a good grasp of ProTools had a better understanding of the systems then the rest of us that didn’t use ProTools as regularly.  Also, in looking at the layout of the consoles discovered a couple on ergonomic things we did not like.

1. Neither system (Profile or Venue) has a screen built into it.  So if you want to use a screen, it is not a touch screen and you have to supply it separately.  This also means that the icons on the screen are stretched/crunched/pixelated if your screen does not meet their specifications.  we had to play a lot with screen placement and never found a location for the external screen that “felt” comfortable when reaching for controls and was out of site lines for the seats behind mix position.
2. On the Venue, when reaching for an Aux send knob, we regularly were grabbing an EQ or Dynamics control.  The knobs/encoders are right next to each other with little to distinguish between the knobs, especially in low light.
3. There were a lot of flashing lights on both consoles, which distracted us from mixing
4. In general the controls where laid out in odd places, with the main feedback of the controls being the screen.  There is some feedback around the encoders, but it is limited.  We felt neither console was laid out well, but preferred the Profile layout over the Venue’s.
5. Combining the plugins and the consoles we found it to be difficult to use after a quick demo.  An important downside, since we train volunteers to run our equipment.

The DigiDesign Profile and Venue use the same stage box/local rack/snake system.  With further research, it was discovered the snake system is some proprietary snake that only works with their stage box, local rack, and ProTools interfaces.  To take this and integrate it as a digital snake backbone for the entire building, interfacing with existing equipment, was very difficult and would mean replacing every console in the building.  Not practical.  This issue is an interesting thought because DigiDesign claims (via the Rep.) to “want to be the solution for all your needs and not limit you on how you do what you want to do.”

With looking at all the plus and downsides to the Profile and Venue Systems, these systems where not a good match for us and our needs.

Allen & Heath ILive

The Allen & Heath ILive system consists of a stage rack and the control surface.  The Control Surface has some local I/O on it an acts as the local rack found in other similar systems.  There is a digital snake which connects the stage rack to the control surface.  The system is a 64 mono input, and 32 mono output system.

We went to a demo of the ILive and quickly where not impressed.

The things we liked:

• Used a Ethersound digital snake – allows for the expansion of the snake
• Local rack connectivity is on the console and not a separate rack
• Ability to use the ILive as a stand alone mixer with no Stage rack (limited to 24 channels)
• LED’s changed color based on mode of the channel
• We also liked Allen & Heath’s reputation with their analog boards

The things we didn’t like

• One very small non-touch screen
• Encoder feedback LED’s are removed from the encoder, and sometimes hard to read
• The “Input Strip” encoders are laid out sideways
• The LED status screen on each channel was hard to read
• The console has 32 mix busses which can be configured as either Auxes, groups, or Matrices.  When changing the configuration of a mix bus from one state to another, the console needs to be rebooted, a process which takes a full 3 minutes. Same when changing effects.
• LED’s changed color based on mode of the channel, they used colors which a color blind person will have a very hard time with.
• A “tall” console – we where concerned about site lines from seats behind mix position.

After going through the demo and asking many questions we decided that the ILive was not a good match for what we are trying to do.  After deciding to walk away from the console, our Vender that arranged for the demo, told us that the ILive was put together in response to someone asking Allen & Heath why they didn’t have a digital console yet.  This answered for us a lot of questions as to why a console would have the work flow that this one had and why it felt the way it did.

Soundcraft SI3

The Soundcraft SI3 is a stand alone system, much like a traditional analogue sound board.  With this type of system it would require a traditional analog snake coming to the sound board location.  The console has 64 mono inputs and 64 inputs, 4 stereo inputs, 24 bus outputs, 8 matrix outputs, 12 VCAs, and 8 mute groups.

We did not spend much time on this console, mostly because of the ergonomics of the console layout.  Another reason we moved is because the console at the time was only on firmware version 0.9.  I try to avoid buying items that are on firmware version less then 2.0, unless they’ve been on the market for long periods of time.  As of the time of writing this they are only on version 1.2.

The ergonomics of the console are weird.  With out a central screen of any type, it relies on a single encoder knob and small OLED screen above each input channel fader.  The down side is that the encoder OLED’s are always red, the function of which is defined by the OLED screen under the fader.  To make a channel Headamp change you have to define the encoder to control the head amps, then make you adjustment.  To change EQ, select the channel to EQ, Select the encoders to the EQ function, which turns all of the encoders into a diferent portion of the EQ, for a specific channel.

After a brief look at this console we decided it was not what we were looking for, and that it would be hard to train people on.

Soundcraft VI6/Vi4

Soundcraft currently has two control surfaces the “Soundcraft Vi6” and the “Soundcraft Vi4” in the Vi Series, each of which connect to a local rack and to a stage rack.  The stage rack and local rack are essentially the same for each control surface.  There is a digital snake which connects the stage rack to the local rack, and a digital control cable which connects the control surface to the local rack.  The only differences between the two are the I/O count and an extra bank of faders on the Vi6.  The Vi4 has 48 mic inputs and 24 mix buses, while the Vi6 has 64 mic inputs and 32 mix buses.

The ergonomics (work flow) of the system/console is very easy and intuitive.  On the Vi6 there are 4 banks of inputs, each with 8 input channels, and on output bank.  Each bank has a touch screen, which allows you to select the section of which channel you wish to work on.  Selecting a section changes the bottom half of the screen to display what you’ve selected.  The bottom half of the screen has 16 encoders on it.  The background behind the encoders changes as the value of the encoder changes and the function of the encoder changes.  The entire console is set up so each function is a different color, and the changes are quick and real time as well.  Our color blind people can even mix on this desk. Walking an input through from the stage box to output is pretty intuitive and easy.  The hardest part of the console is setting up the effects (patching wise), which only requires another couple of seconds of thought to do.

The layout very easy and every basic training session so far has taken 15-30 minutes for the console.  An in depth training on the console and digital snake system takes about 90 minutes.  Ease of use for the console was a very important function for us, as we have many volunteers that use the console.  I asked one of the guys that uses the Vi6 regularly for his thoughts and this is what he said:

“A quick thought on what I like is that everything I need to get at while mixing is 1, or 2 at most, touches away.  The only dislike that I have is about the mute groups.  If channels are assigned to a mute group and are “off” and the mute group is “on,” there is no way to turn those channels “on” and have them stay muted under the mute group.  They actually turn on.”

The audio quality of the Vi series is wonderful.  Soundcraft and Studer partnered up and based the Vi Series on the Studer Vista series of consoles.  This partnership is highly encouraging, given Studer’s performance, abilities, and sonic qualities.  (Studer make broadcast and recording consoles.)  After installing the system we had numerous comments on how clear the sound system was now, even from people I wouldn’t expect to notice the difference.  Even the bands noticed the difference, and they were only listening to the new pre-amps that are in the stage box. (Split off that into an existing Yamaha M7CL.)  As a side note the Front of House Engineer for Metallica told me he would buy a Soundcraft Vi6 if he were to purchase a digital sound board with his own money.

The Soundcraft Vi6 was an easy to use system, which allowed us to integrate with other equipment.  The digital snake is a MADI snake which is an international standard.  The MADI snake allows us to easily integrate the snake of the console with other equipment and sound boards.  Our Digital snake now has the ablity to reach any portion of the building with an infinite number of split out outs.

Images are taken from each companies respective websites.