ICON vs Other console for film post

[Bokir]

James & GVDB,

So far I can summed up the answer of my very question:

Big console: DFC, MPC, S5 = expensive & luxurious
Soundwise: DFC has great filters, MPC has great routing box
Dubber: only needed to acommodate other/external DAW editors
ICON: has enough lights to amaze the clients

Can you fill up anything I missed?

[James Kellar]

>So far I can summed up the answer of my very question:

>Big console: DFC, MPC, S5 = expensive & luxurious
>Soundwise: DFC has great filters, MPC has great routing box
>Dubber: only needed to acommodate other/external DAW editors
>ICON: has enough lights to amaze the clients

>Can you fill up anything I missed?

I don't think it is that easy, but yes you are generally right about, the ICON has enough lights to impress general clients. After this is the entertainment business....and lights per dollar is a BIG issue. People like to be impressed...it makes them feel like they spent their money well. I think the ICON can do this for a variety of situations.

To Add, but not a technical review:

BIG CONSOLE [Film dubbing]: Services large traditional dubbing theatre with heavy machine rooms. Aircraft grade...and purpose built to do one thing...Mix. Reliable. Sound un-matched in it's category. Priced accordingly for the large companies with big budgets to afford them...union type facilities.

SOUNDWISE: DFC-MPC = High Quality ICON with Proper Outboard gear = High Quality

DIGITAL DUBBER: These cast iron consoles you speak of needed a way to play back and record elements.... Made the transition from DA-88 to non-linear digital...purpose built. Replacement for MAG dubbers, could chase biphase to work with projectors...biphase not necessary anymore since almost all picture playback is done by Doremi etc... Dubbers used now by either LTC chase or P2 slave to sync to video...8 years old now.

PRO TOOLS VIRTUAL DUBBER: Now reliable enough to be used as playback dubbers. Have been used for quite some time for playback. Main reason is because majority of editors these days use PT for editorial. Not generally used as stem recorders in high end applications...because why? If a company owns MMR-8's or MX-2424's, you wouldn't downgrade to something lower end...unless you are of the generation trained In-The-Box, then some may prefer a mouse to do recording...it can go either way as time goes on.

>Dubber: only needed to acommodate other/external DAW editors
YES. See= MX-2424 Not MMP-16...too expensive.

>ICON: has enough lights to amaze the clients
YES. Clients generally have no clue what's gong on. THe ICON could work in a variety of applications, except the largest of audio post main theatres, as the centerpiece.

I think the ICON presents significant savings for facilities wanting a cost effective controller/console...that are built on Pro Tools. The ICON is cheap enough that, buying a piece of technology wont put you out of business. This is a MAJOR problem. I think people sometimes get caught up in the technology, and fail to remember that this is business...and you need to make big profit to stay alive. Bokir, you may look at the DFC and think, OK if we stretch it over this long, we could pay for it like this...BUT NO, there's other costs to consider. Synchronizer etc....more...if you buy a DFC you wont want to use crappy Quick Time for playback. Meaning, if you are going all out on the console...you have to go all out on everything. Plus, you'll need some dubbers too, or else the machine room will look bare and empty.

[GVDB]

You've got it.

- PT can be playback and recording dubber. As I mentioned before we also have a MX2424 and it rarely gets used nowadays, I don't see this like downgrading, it's just more confenient this way and since the system can handle it. So I would say, don't buy a dubber! It's a waste of money IMHO.

-Some other consoles might have nice routing options, but basically you can also route your signal in and out Pro Tools in several ways. And when you record in the box you'll only need to get out of it if you've got some nice outboard gear.

[James Kellar]

>PT can be playback and recording dubber. As I mentioned before we also have a MX2424 and it rarely >gets used nowadays, I don't see this like downgrading, it's just more confenient this way and since >the system can handle it. So I would say, don't buy a dubber! It's a waste of money IMHO.

Bokir, as you can see GVDB uses Pro Tools to record in the box. If you are mixing in the box and doing everything in 1 box, then a stem recorder is kind of useless, I would agree.

I think GVDB uses an ICON, therefore everything is done in the box, even recording.

The only time I can see dubbers of being use to you, is for plug and play playback of other DAW material. Again, if you are not large enough a facility to deal with outside freelance editors, you may not be running into other formats.

>As I mentioned before we also have a MX2424 and it rarely >gets used nowadays, I don't see this like >downgrading, it's just more confenient this way and since >the system can handle it.

I'm glad you found a way of working you like! Enjoy your workflow. As far as downgrading, what I meant by that GV, is if you were a large facility owning a traditional console and racks of dubbers and heavy equipment assets...moving to Pro Tools as a stem recorder would most certainly be downgrading your 'selling feature' of your services. [I didn't mean to speak of your operation solely] The very fact that you are able to afford equipment like that (dubbers), is certainly a selling feature. If you have elite gear...and you know what you are doing...you have 1 up over the next guy. Again it's that audio post illusion...more lights per dollar.

Again, don't break the bank and go broke just to buy this expensive stuff. Know what you need and the technical aspects of design, and then you will know what you need and could use.

[Bokir]

James & GVDB,

Thank you for your explanation. Don't worry about the business thing, I will not going to invest anything that will put the company into risk. I also very aware of the technical aspect, complexity and the difference between system based on center console and ITB.

I myself already used to work ITB so I know quite a bit about it pros & cons. However to prove the feasibility of the other, I need to know from people that use to work with console setup. I haven't work with it so I don't know the pros and cons of it. Now you all have given me your insight, it's quite clear for me now.

Many thanks to all who has responded to this thread, now I've got a better idea to what I really need.

Thank you.