The best thing about the ICON!

[RT60]

You know, I can't wait to throw down for one of those ICON desks, it looks hot. Know what'll be even better? When Digi comes out with something newer and better two months from now! Yee haw, I'm gonna go to my back yard, dig a pit and start throwing all my money into it.

Will that monitor arm support the Macintosh Color Classic I'm using to run my system?

Jason

[Icon1357]

Post deleted by Icon1357

[Sean Halley]

It's you.



Interest seems to be rather high.

S..

[Scott Sheppard]

You have no clue on this on .....

For what the ICON gets you for a starting price of $60k you could not even get close to it a month ago for under a $100k

The ICON ROCKS !!

This is a professional tool for a professional environment.

Go look and see what's out there and I think you will reconsider your view of this tool.

[ekuehnl]

It's OK guys. The first post is always the hardest. Keep trying.

[grivel]

>Is it me or is this going to have trouble selling with this price

I think actually the price is justified for a control surface + whatever else is included. If it was any higher than say 100K, then maybe that would be a little steep.

The ICON has a chance competing with the MID level products. The only problem I see, is it ties a facility into only one DAW platform, so I don't know how it will pan out.

This could be a great tool though for many new upstart companies (with a pro tools workflow) who want to try and get a bigger piece of the pie.

[RT60]

Fine, it's better and more expansive than any other option out there. What else out there compares to this? Does that make it something worth drooling over? This thing is huge, and not only much more vast physically, but also in price. And for this price you get... a control surface. Does it include any more processing power? No.

Ok, makes it easier than working with a mouse, and it's nice having access to everything at your fingertips. And further, it's true that an 80 channel desk would cost you an arm and a leg, and that might just include moving faders, and nothing else automated. Fine. Hey, what (*& do I know, it was my first post, right? Well, guess I don't know much. (Been working in pro studios for almost 10 years, tho'.)

The D-Control, in its size and its aspirations, seems all wrong. It is a vestigal concept, a big toy. Here we are in the age where ProTools is, in many ways, responsible for bringing multi-track, professional audio to the masses, and here they are building this hulk. I'd rather get a used DMXR-100. Really, I'd rather get a used MCI. Hear me out.

I think that sometimes technology takes us backwards in time. For example, I used to live at the foot of the Brooklyn Bridge, and I'd walk into Manhattan and back several times a week. So many times, I saw people with videocameras on the bridge and they were taking what was, essentially, a still photograph, but with a video camera. Instead of using a normal camera, and creating an image that could be viewed at leisure, they had an image which could only be viewed by pausing a VCR, or could only be viewed for the 20 seconds or so it flashed on their TV.

When I mix, I like to grab a bunch of faders. I hate mixing with a mouse, because I can work 8 or 9 faders at once (more if I have a group or two going) instead of one. I can ride a fader and eq simultaneously. But we're talking about going from one extreme to another. Unless you're in a film mixing situation where you have three people sitting at a console, why do you need the D-Control? One great thing about not needing a big desk is the acoustical advantage of not having a huge obstruction in the room. Or the idea that you could assign a channel to whatever faders are in front of you on your control surface without sitting to the far left or right to mix those channels, like you would have to do if you were working at an 80 channel D-Control. You want me to be excited that I can, once again, sit in on the far right mixing my BV or percussion tracks, or sit to the far left mixing drums? Or hey, I can assign the channels however I want them and always sit in the middle? Cool, then why do I need 80 channels of controller-only faders? For $60K? Stupid.

Also, ultimately, this is a piece of computer equipment. You're going to spend $60K on a controller that will be obsolete in a few years time? You think this thing is going to be functional in five years? Are you going to get $60K worth of use out of this thing? Hey, more power to you if you will. You're doing good business. Amortize like the wind, my friends. I'd rather spend a buck or two on a Tascam, Mackie, or a more modest Digi controller and put the rest of the money into something else, like decent monitors or diffusors, or a mic or two or three. Always something else worth having... Is the monitor section that smoking? Really, is it? Better than the Dangerous, API or something Glenn Coleman or Andrew at Purple could build for way less?

There are recording studios going out of business every day. There are many reasons, but 'Tools is one of them. Financial overindulgence in gear is another. So why would they launch such a dinosaur of a concept, such a visibly insane investment? Sure, you can get a used SSL for cheap - but the thing stands on it's own, it's fully functional *by itself*. You buy an ICON, when you are done with it you will throw it out or turn it into a planter because nobody is going to want it. Nobody is going to be able to do anything with the ICON once Pro Tools version 8.0 comes out in a few years. You hear me, Mix24 owners? Yeah, you used to have a Nu-Bus system, and nobody wants that now, do they? A fool and his/her money are soon parted.

I'm not sure, but I think the "D" in D-control might stand for Dumbass.

Jason.

ps. Was my second post better than my first? Because I'm concerned with quality control, you know.

[grivel]

>Unless you're in a film mixing situation where you have three people sitting at a console, why do you >need the D-Control?

First off I agree with many of the things you say. I don't think the ICON is to service the music markets. I think it is an attempt to get into the post markets for mix-to-pix consoles. However I think it is going to fail.

You hit the nail on the head in stating one of the contributing factors to it's early death. DigiDesign gear will be obsolete so quickly, as a company of their size can only stay alive by new things coming out. I read somewhere on the site that the software is being discontinued for some of the older DAW hardware.

I think some people will buy it though, but you wont see it around like you do Harrison desks, far into the future.

Theoretically I think one could control a number of transports and DAWs from this board. I haven't really read the description, but I guess it could be done through the SYNC I/O....feed it RS-170 and 9-pin slave everything else.

NOETHELESS People will think of this thing as a DAW only. That is the big problem. Pro Tools is known as SOFTWARE/HARDWARE DAW. It's been stamped into people brains. Even people that don't know about gear, if they know one thing they can say : Audio people use Pro Tools.

High end post will always prefer traditional style digital consoles [ie. bigger versions of the DMXR100 style]. There's many awsome console manufacturers from Europe that nobody usually mentions on this site. Mid level and low level post is hurting, as companies are dropping out of business. There's no more money in audio anymore. People are cutting corners to stay alive, and the last thing they will do is replace their already expensive investments (BMWs & Ferrari's) with a Honda Civic.

Small upstart companies could really benefit it though - low end post.

I think it's cool to see new things come out though.

[RT60]

Hey folks,

There's a lovely letter in the June issue of Mix ("Design and Acoustics") from Barry Hukfer. I won't re-type the whole thing, but in case you don't read mix (don't we all read Mix?) here's how it begins and ends:

"I wonder how many people see the introduction of Digidesign's ICON as the complete failure of computer-based editing and mixing? ...Are we really that limited in our imaginations that we can't devise a new and wonderful way to take better advantage of what computers can offer us?"

The same issue has an article on the new SSL AWS900, which looks pretty sweet. The new Mackie dxb's look interesting also. And both control DAWs other than Pro Tools.

I think I've had my say on this topic,

jason

ps Where are you Scott Sheppard? Ekuenhl? Anybody going to defend this boat anchor? Oh wait, it's too light to be a boat anchor...

[dr sound]

Jason,
I'll take you on..
I will defend it. You probably don't know me so I'll give you a quick recap.
25 Years as a Re-Recording Mixer. Worked on nearly every major console over that time frame. Started out on a Quad Eight then a new custom built SSL 6000, then a new Otari Premier, new Harrison MPC, Neve V series, Neve Logic 2, Euphonix, SSL 5000 and settled with a Control 24 and Pro Tools. I don't miss any of those consoles at all. I prefer a Control 24. That's right a $7500 board (control surface) instead of the over a million dollar consoles I've mentioned. I did enjoy the SSL at first because of the great ergonomics of it. It sure didn't sound nearly as good as the Quad Eight, but it had a lot of functionality to it. Now long before you even got into the business those of us mixing on the SSL had to deal with the crappy "E Series Automation". It was terrible! Maybe great for you guys doing a pass on the guitar, then the rhythm guitar, then... It sucked for Post. Now let's jump ahead to this years NAB show. Jason I take it you didn't go to it did you? We'll I did. I saw every new board that was at the show. Took the time to talk with the vendors and spend time looking/ playing with the boards. I can tell you if you want to see a boat anchor, just go to Guitar Center and play with one of those new SSL's. Just spare me! Oh and the Mackie, very nice people, not a well thought out product. It needs some help. As for your comment on the Icon being made for "a film mixing situation where 3 people sitting at a console" you are partially right. The problem is there is only one 3 man team in all of Hollywood Mixing Film. All others are mixing 2 man. Having spent the day at NAB getting a private demo and then two group demos until you take a moment and have a person who knows the ICON run it through its paces while you ask question you will not grasp how cool it is. It is very flexible, very fast and feels good. The faders are P& G. The center section with its dedicated knob for items such as EQ and dynamics is quite a treat. I think the biggest problem for the ICON is the music buisness.Since the vast majority of music these days isn't very good (not just my opinion), and add to that the issue of Piracy and downloading there is nothing to support the music business. I see quite a few people who complain about the ICON are the very same ones who are barely surviving even with the SSL's etc. Having just mixed on a Harrison MPC a couple of weeks ago all I can tell you is " I'll never mix on a traditional console again!!!” As for the fact that the ICON only supports Pro Tools, in my world (Post) that isn't a draw back. Pro Tools is the platform of choice for Post sound in Hollywood. I think that at $60k it's a pretty good price point especially when you have P&G faders. It would have been nice if it was $75K for 32 faders, but oh well. In my mind it's an excellent choice for the type of work I do. In regards to the center section remember you're talking two 7.1 and a couple of stereo monitors in the "Xmon". Once again since you haven’t played with it and see what it can do, you really need to wait before you post your reply. Then again I guess I’ll see your 4th post before I know it. I’ll be in the market for an ICON very soon and when I get it you can come over to tell me what a boat anchor it is.