# Digital Mixer Trends/Futures/Philosophy



## BlueHerdim (Mar 16, 2012)

Hi all,

First time posting here. In the past I have found all my answers with some Google searches, but not this time.

Had a conversation with someone today and he focused in on something I have unconsciously noticed. I have been looking at digital mixers a bunch in the past few months (I run an LS9 and an iLive) and have noticed a couple things and was wondering what the community thought about it.

It seems that a several years ago Yamaha kind of had the lion's share of the digital mixer market in many different venues as their range covered many needs at an affordable price point with clean design and good service. 

But I have noticed that they haven't come out with any major new products since 2006 with the LS9. (I guess you could include the M7CL-ES that came out in 2010) Yet Allen and Heath have come out with their iLive range, Avid with the VENUE stuff, and Midas proclaiming from the hilltops that, "Digital goes Midas," followed by "Digital _is still_ going Midas," in the last few years. Heck even Mackie is getting into the game with their iPad idea as well as Soudcraft and Presonus.

Do you think that Yamaha is losing ground in the digital console market and turning into a has been? Or, do you think they are quietly working on another set of mixers that will cover the needs of sound engineers once again? (hopefully without an external word clock or attenuation wizardry)

What do you think?

C


----------



## Footer (Mar 16, 2012)

In the pro music touring world the only yamaha console you will ever see is an M7 or 5D in monitor world. 2 years ago everyone was carrying some type of Digi console. Now, everyone is carrying Digico. With the SD9 priced where it is, nearly everyone can afford one. The only time we see Yamaha FOH is for theatre tours. Then again though, we reguarly have people bringing in XL4's, series 5's, and Heritage 3ks. Yamaha has lost a lot of ground in the last few years but their gear is still pretty rider friendly just because everyone knows how to run it. However, analog is even more rider friendly that that is why our Heritage is still sitting FOH. If we were to go digital here, it would probably be with some sort of Digico. The only issue with that is my audio guys would have to become digico system techs in order to put people who don't know the console into the console. I have yet to see one of the Midas desks come in. Would not surprise me if that happens next season.


----------



## avkid (Mar 16, 2012)

I've been told that Yamaha has a whole new platform in the works, but i'll believe it when I see it.


----------



## Chris15 (Mar 16, 2012)

I've been hearing that for a few years now, I too will believe it when I see it


----------



## BlueHerdim (Mar 16, 2012)

Maybe they are working on trying to release the 3 replacements in 3 years like they did with the PM5D, M7CL, LS9 in 2004-2006 respectively. Yoiks! Not a lot of time for press conferences and interviews.

C


----------



## Stookeybrd (Mar 16, 2012)

This has been raising eyebrows around town. Yamaha has been very tight lipped about these three and no one is sure what they'll be.


----------



## BlueHerdim (Mar 16, 2012)

Stookeybrd said:


> This has been raising eyebrows around town. Yamaha has been very tight lipped about these three and no one is sure what they'll be.



Did this go up in the last few days?


----------



## bishopthomas (Mar 16, 2012)

I think the only competition Yamaha has is Avid. Those are the only two consoles I see on riders, M7's or SC48's. Any artist that wants something different is carrying their own. And I rarely see that (at least in my world). There is absolutely no competition (still) for the LS9-32. At its price point no one can beat it. Lots of companies are making consoles a little more expensive, but I find there's always something missing that makes me go back to the LS9. I think Yamaha consoles sound like garbage (the 5D is only starting to get "okay," the M7 and LS9 are crap), but they are the most intuitive, feature-rich, and inexpensive. The Studiolive is not a competitor as it's much less expensive and has less features. The SI Compact is more expensive, less channels, and not as intuitive. Believe me, we've tried to replace our Yamahas, mainly because we want something ENJOYABLE to mix on. But even though we have both an LS9-16 and a Studiolive 16.4.2, the LS9 is the one I take to "real" jobs where I need to be quick and efficient. 

The SC48 will be our next console. I'd love to try the SD series but I've never once seen a rider that called for Digico...


----------



## BlueHerdim (Mar 16, 2012)

bishopthomas said:


> ... but they are the most intuitive...



I know what you mean- clean/intuitive design and design that will look and work well in the future. 

One other thing that I like about Yamaha is that this carries over into their documentation, offline editor, and iPad app. Their user manual is easy to read, (take notes A&H iLive manual folks) and find things when someone asks you to do something weird... Their offline editor I have found easier to use than many others and the same goes for their iPad app.

However I will agree with you that there is much to be desired from their sound without additional "help". Hopefully the link that Stookeybrd mentioned a couple posts above will change that, but keep the strengths that Yamaha has.

C


----------



## Stookeybrd (Mar 17, 2012)

BlueHerdim said:


> Did this go up in the last few days?


I'm not sure when it went up but I saw it Tuesday.



Getting back to your original question, Yamaha is very interesting. These are just some observations I have made and my experiences rather than hard market research. When they entered the market with the PM1D(2000) there was nothing else available that could even touch it. The PM5D was released in '04 and even then Yamaha was still ahead of the other console manufactures. There was a few years where you couldn't throw a rock in the US and not hit a PM5D. They were everywhere, every rental shop had one, or had a partnership with another shop that had two, and they were listed on every rider. The PM1D was the go to broadcast console for nearly a decade. The Grammys just stopped using a PM1D for the first time last year. In just the past few years if you needed a digital console, Yamaha isn't the first on the list like it used to be. Reliability and familiarity are driving factors in our industry, and Yamaha had that in spades in the middle of the last decade. What we see now is a very saturated market where the Yamaha has been relying on momentum. Avid and DiGiCo have absolutely exploded recently and not without hard work and great products, but they are still competing with 12-year old, 8-year old, and 5-year old technology, which is an amazing testament to Yamaha. The 1D has been retired and the 5D cannot be too far behind(listen to those preamps), but until another console becomes as ubiquitous as the 5D, it'll stay as everyone's back-up option. Again, my observations I've probably missed something in there.


----------



## Stookeybrd (Mar 20, 2012)

Looks like NEXO let slip a few hours early.

http://nexo-sa.com/attachments/categories/185/DanteSpecs.pdf


----------



## chausman (Mar 20, 2012)

Stookeybrd said:


> Looks like NEXO let slip a few hours early.
> 
> http://nexo-sa.com/attachments/categories/185/DanteSpecs.pdf



:

Wow...


----------



## Ric (Mar 21, 2012)

Stookeybrd said:


> Looks like NEXO let slip a few hours early.
> 
> http://nexo-sa.com/attachments/categories/185/DanteSpecs.pdf



Its a surprisingly good pic to zoom in on as well. Yamaha CL3 ! Hints at 3 different models, at least.
It looks like a good evolution from the M7-CL.
I think I see display/channel ID strips above each fader, as well as light up functions as part of the buttons.
This looks like either small format i.e LS9 replacement, or they've gone to the flip pages philosophy for the M7 replacement.
Sadly it looks look the meter bridge is still an add on/option 

I do like how it looks like theres a comfortable blank space to rest show scripts on.


----------



## Chris15 (Mar 21, 2012)

Ric said:


> CL3 ! Hints at 3 different models, at least.



Hardly
Look at the original evolution...
PM1D
PM5D
M7CL
LS9

Numbering appears to bear no predictable relationship to evolution...


----------



## soundlight (Mar 21, 2012)

Judging by the size of the USB connector on the front panel this is to be a fairly compact model - I thought the thing under the front right was a pull out keyboard, but it looks to be just a headphone out with volume control.

I do like how they actually put a bar at the bottom of their script tray, a lot of manufacturers seem to skip out on that and just leave space for stuff to fall down on to your faders, with possibility of a small recess that might hold on to something very thin.

Looking forward to an actual info sheet or something coming later today or this week!


----------



## bishopthomas (Mar 21, 2012)

Maybe it will actually sound good. Imagine that!


----------



## Stookeybrd (Mar 21, 2012)

Well, Ric is actually correct. Yamaha has their website live now and there will indeed be a CL1, CL3, CL5.

Sad to see that there is no PM1D replacement. I think it is safe to say that they are giving up the 92+ channel market to DiGiCo. Also, if this is what we have all been waiting for, it is a little underwhelming. I do like the Dante integration.


----------



## museav (Mar 21, 2012)

Another Yamaha related new product, STM SERIES DEBUT - A NEW CONCEPT FOR TOURING AND LIVE EVENTS - Nexo. Leaks about it started about a month ago and an e-mail regarding it arrived a few days ago.

It's interesting that Yamaha and Allen & Heath were so close lipped about the CL and GLD compact digital console products until they had real products and information to present while some other manufacturers have shown and marketed compact digital console products months, and in at least one case more than a year, before the products or related technical information were actually available.

I do not envy digital console designers. It is no longer just a matter of good hardware design but also of firmware and software. Adding to that, one must be careful of patents and rights issues related not just to components, circuits and aesthetics but as methods of operation are now commonly patented, also in how things function. A console could look totally different and have completely different electronics but still encounter issues with infringing on patents related to the methods of operation. Coming up with new and improved user interfaces thatcan be challenging, which may be why many new digital mixer products seem to build on the manufacturer's existing mixer interfaces.


Added: Just found this, http://blog.svconline.com/briefingr...-systems-launches-cl-series-digital-consoles/ and http://www.yamahacommercialaudiosystems.com/news_detail.php?newsID=242, regarding the new Yamaha CL series mixers. Obviously the price point is not for an entry level mixer and I believe the CL series mixers are intended to slot between the M7CL, especially the -48ES model, and the PM5D.


----------



## Ric (Mar 21, 2012)

Stookeybrd said:


> Well, Ric is actually correct. Yamaha has their website live now and there will indeed be a CL1, CL3, CL5.
> Sad to see that there is no PM1D replacement. I think it is safe to say that they are giving up the 92+ channel market to DiGiCo. Also, if this is what we have all been waiting for, it is a little underwhelming. I do like the Dante integration.


I wonder why no CL 2 & 4 !

Another quick review on ProSound Web. AV: Yamaha Launches New CL Series Digital Consoles At Prolight + Sound 2012 - Pro Sound Web

"A scalable system is easily constructed by simultaneously attaching up to eight I/O racks via Dante, providing up to 256 input sources. Pairs of CL consoles can also be cascaded to handle larger mixing requirements."


----------



## museav (Mar 21, 2012)

Ric said:


> I wonder why no CL 2 & 4 !


Probably the same thing that happened to the PM2/3/4D, the M1/2/3/4/5/6CL and the LS1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8.

Since this is the new CL series and the CL is for Centralogic, then does the M7CL eventually morph into the new line as a CL7 model?


----------



## chausman (Mar 21, 2012)

The thing on the front is a headphone jack with volume, and a talkback input with volume control.

It does not have many built in inputs or outputs, and relies on the Dante integration for most of the inputs.

Specs Sheet is on their website.

What do you think about a 2.5ms delay (Omni In to Omni Out)

Oh, and of course sequential numbering isn't really a big deal to companies. How many years and revisions have we had the Source 4 now?


----------



## MNicolai (Mar 21, 2012)

chausman said:


> How many years and revisions have we had the Source 4 now?



That number appeared to based on something (number of filaments in lamp), whereas many other model names seem arbitrary. If you want really confusing model names, look at the DiGiCo mixing consoles. The order of the SD-series consoles is the most arbitrary numbering system I've seen to date. The SD7/8/9/10/11 may reflect the order in which they were released, but certainly not the order from smallest channel count to largest, or least powerful to most powerful.


----------



## Chris15 (Mar 22, 2012)

MNicolai said:


> The SD7/8/9/10/11



Let's not forget the newly released SD5...


----------



## Stookeybrd (Mar 22, 2012)

chausman said:


> What do you think about a 2.5ms delay (Omni In to Omni Out)



It's alright. Right now 2.5ms is not bad, but in 10 years it might be part of the conversation when choosing consoles. A 5D has 2.31ms and the AVID MixRack from Avid has <2.3ms. The only company killing the latency issue is DiGiCo at under 1ms. A friend of mine here at school is working in a lab that has made a AD/DA that can operate at 35 microseconds(0.035ms). Now it can't convert anything close to real sound, but the work is in the pipeline for major improvements. If Yamaha is going to have this as their flagship for too long that number might become a problem, but not for a while.


chausman said:


> It does not have many built in inputs or outputs, and relies on the Dante integration for most of the inputs.


 Shut up and take my money! What a terrific decision to dump Ethersound for Dante, and chose it over MADI. I think in this scuffel of standards, Dante is going to come out on top.


----------



## FMEng (Mar 23, 2012)

Based upon my experience with digital broadcast consoles, 2 to 3 mS of latency is a big issue if you are using in-ear monitors. In just a few years, the deaf musicians will start filing law suits. Why? The delay causes phase cancellation in the singer's head. The hearing damage happens when they turn themselves up to extremely high levels to hear themselves enough. Long live analog.


----------



## museav (Mar 23, 2012)

Stookeybrd said:


> It's alright. Right now 2.5ms is not bad, but in 10 years it might be part of the conversation when choosing consoles. A 5D has 2.31ms and the AVID MixRack from Avid has <2.3ms. The only company killing the latency issue is DiGiCo at under 1ms. A friend of mine here at school is working in a lab that has made a AD/DA that can operate at 35 microseconds(0.035ms). Now it can't convert anything close to real sound, but the work is in the pipeline for major improvements. If Yamaha is going to have this as their flagship for too long that number might become a problem, but not for a while.


The issue is not just A/D and D/A latency but also latency associated with the processing and routing. In fact the A/D and D/A latency may by a small portion of the overall latency.

You also have to consider if the consoles incorporate some form of delay compensation. A simple example, split a mic to two channels. The A/D latency should be the same for both channels but if one channel is heavily processed and the other is not then the processed channel will have additional latency associated with the processing. If you then combine those two channels on a bus without delay compensation you would have the same signal with phase differential being summed. So, do you allow that? Or do you calculate an absolute worst case potential latency and then apply latency as required to each channel so that every channel has that same latency? Or do you constantly calculate the latency for every channel, determine the worst case and apply an appropriate compensation delay to each channel so that the latency on every channel equals the worst case at any time? A similar situation applies wherever channels or buses may sum and to the outputs (should latency from any input to any output be the same regardless of the path or processing?).

This can get into tradeoffs and each manufacturer will use the approach that works best for their console architecture. Assuming a potential worst case latency may mean assuming a longer latency, but can simplify the math. Keeping track 'real time' of the delays and applying constantly varying delays may allow accommodating shorter 'worst case' delays but requires more processing to do all the related math in 'real time'. Not applying delay compensation or maybe just an overall input-to-output compensation is less complicated and should result in lower latency for most paths, but could be problematic with concepts such as parallel compression where you split a source to two inputs (or an input to two buses), compress them differently and then sum them back together.


----------

