PQ Monitors

[morrison.ece05]

Does anyone know what the future is of the PQ Monitors? I haven't seen any push for them in a long time. It seems that until Roland's release of the M-48 there haven't really been any new innovations in the personal monitor mixing market.

I can understand that the PQ monitor is no longer a feature set worth pushing or that it isn't a decision making element for most anymore, but just curious about how other people are handling personal monitor mixes.

I am working with a church that has over 48 "standard" inputs that are being condensed down to two different aviom systems and working to simplify while getting everyone what they want or "need."

Anyway, just sparking some conversation.

Thank you,

Brian

[Roland Clarke]

It's probably more the fact that no one has come up with some thing else they want to do that they can't do with what is available at the moment.

Personally I like the idea of PQ's, outside of the fact they can be used as additional stereo busses, for in ears, a main mix with a bit "more me" it works perfectly well. I have also seen them deployed when monitor engineers have "difficult" musician's, those that complain that their monitor mix is never right, whatever you do, as a way of making them responsible for their own mix.

My only problem with giving the musician their own mix control is that some systems are too involved and up the workload on players when they really should be concentrating on their playing. Often if you listen to mixes done by players, they can be surprisingly bad, whilst they may not complain, it isn't necessarily conducive to better performance.

[digidesigner]

I really like the Venue PQ idea, but the limited options (too few channels in general) is my problem. I would like to see at least 8 user inputs PER PQ MIX, not all of them sharing the same 8 inputs and when using stereo groups, I hate wasting two PQ channels to get one stereo group mix "in" so stereo OR mono PQ channels would be a huge help here. These could be software-redesignable features I believe.

[Kenmillerjr]

As digidesigner said, I think they are waay too limited. I like the Aviom idea (sorta) for larger session when it is impossible to mix ears for everyone (foldback as an example). I think PQ was a good idea...but in my humble opinion, needs to be re-thought out.

I do use the PQ buss' for stereo matrices tho =)

[Traveller]

Agreed whole heartedly!

Have been running 6 PQ mixes on a national touring country act for 3 years now.

It works ok. It gets by. Especially when you subtract the cost of a full time monitor engineer+hotels+flights for a year.

BUT....

With some fairly simple tweaks it could be SO much better. It could truly be a revolutionary system that would be much more of an option to many people.

Simply changing the options so that any channel can be picked off the top instead of only a specific ten. That small change alone would completely change everything.

Currently running a dshow with 48 inputs, split to 48-96 for monitors. And due to PQ restrictions I have every in/out/group/mtx on the desk full.

Would love it if Avid would be into making some software changes.....I'd be happy to guinea pig! ::hint hint::

[digidesigner]

Originally Posted by Traveller

Agreed whole heartedly!

Have been running 6 PQ mixes on a national touring country act for 3 years now.

It works ok. It gets by. Especially when you subtract the cost of a full time monitor engineer+hotels+flights for a year.

BUT....

With some fairly simple tweaks it could be SO much better. It could truly be a revolutionary system that would be much more of an option to many people.

Simply changing the options so that any channel can be picked off the top instead of only a specific ten. That small change alone would completely change everything.

Currently running a dshow with 48 inputs, split to 48-96 for monitors. And due to PQ restrictions I have every in/out/group/mtx on the desk full.

Would love it if Avid would be into making some software changes.....I'd be happy to guinea pig! ::hint hint::

yes

[Traveller]

Haha glad you agree

I really do think it's a good system. but with a few simple tweaks it could be a game changer.

But I don't know how interested AVID is in pushing it or even continuing support. I know the SC48 doesn't have PQ support but I'm figuring thats to keep the size down?

We have never had any sort of failure or problems with any of it. One of our controllers was even submerged in 4 feet of water for 3 days and it still functions just fine. That alone says alot.

[digidesigner]

Originally Posted by Traveller

One of our controllers was even submerged in 4 feet of water for 3 days and it still functions just fine. That alone says alot.

Must of been a hell of a gig

But yes, the system could be made better.

I do understand that it's all DSP related but AVID, give us options to choose how to re-allocate the power. We know there is too little busses overall, but please let us choose how to use them.

We have: Auxes, Busses, Matrixes, PQ's. Let's say one day I would be fine with just a reverb and a delay @ FOH, but I would like to give all the power to the guys using PQ's so they could build a dream mix for themselves. Please allow that.

What I mean is give me a way to choose for example 2 aux sends, 0 matrixes, 0 busses but a dream PQ mixers.

And the again when a show comes I do not need PQ's and/or Matrixes at all I could use these resources for something else.

Or just do so that we have unlimited everything

But for PQ's, independent assignable user inputs per PQ mix or better yet, free direct selection of input for mixer channels, and 12 inputs being either mono OR STEREO would be a nice start.

Really hope to find them in D-Show 3.0, we know you can still make it :)

[Kenmillerjr]

While we are on the topic of PQ's...

I noticed today on my two stage racks that the "Fault" light is on...in the PQ section. Is that always on if no PQ controller units are not connected?

[digidesigner]

Go in and select the ghost units and right click forget devices, should fix it.