Profile w/Mixrack or SC48?

[TheMAXX7]

Profile w/Mixrack or SC48?

I am working (consulting) with a church that currently has an A&H GL4000-48 and we are looking at a digital console. All of the wiring infrastructure is already in place including the split to the audio for broadcast control room. I would love to find a 56 channel capable console so there is future expansion capabilities. But I have brought up expansion multiple times and they feel that with what will be freed up with line level inputs that can come into the stereo returns and the free channels that they have now that they will be fine with 48 mic preamps. Both of these choices would include the output expansion card. They have actually run out of outputs and their DSP’s (the 4 of them) will take AES inputs. So the output card will come in real handy.

The only benefit I can see from a Profile w/Mixrack over the SC48 is the ability to double assign some channels without loosing a preamp. And I think the number of input faders on the surface of an SC48 will be fine for them. I also think they will get along fine with the mix engines that come with the SC48. I don’t see them getting carried away with plug-ins.

Is there something I am missing in the differences between the two choices and some reason to choose one over the other?

They are more likely to actually buy the less expensive version or nothing at all. The numbers I am getting put it at about $10,000 more for the profile w/Mixrack over the SC48.

Any comments or suggestions?

[Third Eye Studios]

Recording needs?

[TheMAXX7]

Originally Posted by Third Eye Studios

Recording needs?

The audio for broadcast control room already multi-tracks and records a stereo mix in there. So for now no recording needs on the live side that this console is for.

[jkisser]

I'm the TD for a church that was in nearly an identical situation earlier this year. We ended up going with the Profile and MixRack for a number of reasons. A bit of future proofing being the main one. Meaning if/when the need arises for more inputs, we can sell off the mix rack and replace it with FOH/Stage racks and keep the same surface intact.

Recording was another big factor for us. I had originally thought that the 18 tracks I could get through the FWx interface of SC48 would be fine as I could send busses and submixes to ProTools, but now, having had 64 tracks available through HDx to a PT comp with HD Native... I don't know how I could do it with FWx.

Also, I know how common it is in the HOW market for 'the powers that be' to not see any real need to upgrade much past where they currently are. If that were true however, they wouldn't be looking at VENUE would they?

That's my $.02 anyway.

Feel free to shoot me an email if you want to chat further. ( jason (at) cclife.tv )

Jason

[albee1952]

For me, the biggest difference is AUX sends. With the SC48, you have 16. With the Profile setup, you can have 24(the 8 variable groups act exactly the same as the 16 AUX sends). This can make or break a setup where you need lots of sends for IEM's, yet still have some left over for reverbs.. Then, the Profile setup CAN be bumped up to 96 inputs IIRC, while the SC48 is not expandable.

[Roland Clarke]

The Profile with mixrack is obstensibly the same (without a digitally connected stage box) as the rest of the range and as pointed out above, easy to get an upgrade path from. The SC48 is a little bit more fiddly to use, has less faders available directly, and doesn't provide subgroups. Combine that with the limitation on Plugins (20 sounds a lot, but with a 5-6 effects, and a few output compressors you are quickly limited to 10 or less. This might well be enough, only you can decide this. I personally view the SC48 as an upgrade to things like an LS9-32, more than that the mixrack makes really good sense, indeed at it's price it's a bit of a bargain!

[TheMAXX7]

Originally Posted by Roland Clarke

The Profile with mixrack is obstensibly the same (without a digitally connected stage box) as the rest of the range and as pointed out above, easy to get an upgrade path from. The SC48 is a little bit more fiddly to use, has less faders available directly, and doesn't provide subgroups. Combine that with the limitation on Plugins (20 sounds a lot, but with a 5-6 effects, and a few output compressors you are quickly limited to 10 or less. This might well be enough, only you can decide this. I personally view the SC48 as an upgrade to things like an LS9-32, more than that the mixrack makes really good sense, indeed at it's price it's a bit of a bargain!

It looks like it does have subgroups to me.

[rivetheadsound]

ive got 8 sub groups and 8 vca's on my SC48. it really comes down to your needs and your budget. for me...the sc48 was perfect. ive decked it out with 32 outs and now just waiting for the 32 channel patch from avid....oh how i am waiting!

[albee1952]

SC48 has 16 AUX sends and 8 groups. Those 8 groups cannot be made variable like they can on the Profile, so you cannot do something like 8 stereo IEM mixes, plus a subwoofer AUX, plus a front fill AUX(for something like vocals only), plus a bunch of effect sends. If you can do all you need within the 16 sends, then you should be quite happy with it. I do like the SC48 plenty, I just prefer the Profile(and the sends are 1 reason).

[Roland Clarke]

My appologies, my mistake. My point was that the Mixrack was in almost all senses the same as the rest of the range, certainly from an operational point of view allowing for further expansion, where as the SC48 is different and as such has limitations.