D-Control--Why so large?

[The Eggman]

RKriz,

configurable: any dyn or eq designed by the digi rules - Waves being an unfortunate exception - will map to the dedicated dyn or eq sections; you don't always have to use the same device. Just the buttons will always be in the same place.

I feel really at ease using ICON. You don't need to know it much to start using it, if you know ProTools. There is a gradual shift from mouse to console as you discover the interface.

The 'size issue' I find really secondary. If you spend all day working on a console, size is not all that matters (who said that?). Obviously, to get on with the job, you have to accept the thing as is and make it work for you. What matters is: how does it feel? I would say: uncluttered. Feels good.

Top on my Con's list is XMon, which wasn't designed for film use and can't directly interface with the Dolby units. So we continue to use our old monitoring switcher for the time being. Hoping they'll come up with a mod.

-Florian

Florian,

Keep it coming! You are providing us with good info!!!

Thank you!!!

[RKrizman]

I understand that the Icon is not what you'd like to use. No problem. You'd like a smaller surface with a lesser feature set at a lesser price point of 20k. What would be wrong with a ProControl with an extra fader pack or two? Smaller footprint, lesser feature set at the lesser (20K) price point for you. That's kind of exactly what you're asking for.

No, what I'd like is the same feature set in a smaller footprint. And since I wouldn't be paying for the glitz factor then I'd hope for a lower price point. Sure, 20 k is a pipedream, but only because the competition has been locked out. With the Icon, at it's current size and price, I'd think you could fit twice as many knobs and therefore have twice as much intuitive dedicated functionality. Fewer meta controls. Less empty space.

I may well pick up a used Procontrol, or perhaps a Control 24, but I was hoping for something better.

I know it doesn't make sense to debate what the bigtime mixers, whoever they are, will do about this. But producer/composers such as myself really constitute more of the backbone of the whole Protools revolution, I think, and I just want to speak from that perspective. I believe I'm more the typical than atypical Protools user, and my needs have not really been addressed in a control surface. I make quite a bit of money at this, am under tremendous pressure to consistently deliver first rate product, and my needs are no less professional than those of any big time mixer.

I'm curious, what is your relationship to all this. Can you envision yourself with a D-Control?

-R

[The Eggman]

I'm curious, what is your relationship to all this. Can you envision yourself with a D-Control?

-R

I am a person who believes that mixing ITB will continue to gain ground. However, FOR SOME PEOPLE, mixing ITB would be a more enticing proposition if there were a more professional mixing surface on which to work. You mentioned TLA, for instance. He's the type of guy who may see the Icon as a reasonable surface on which to mix records. Will he do so? Who knows? Engineers in the US absolutely refused to work on SSL's (for the most part) until Bob Clearmountain did "Let's Dance" and the AE community realized that perhaps you "could" make good sounding records on SSL's. Now SSL's are the "standard" for mixing. Will the Icon represent the next step of our evolution? I don't know, but I wouldn't bet against it at this point.

There is no denying that mixing ITB is gaining ground...we agree on that, no? There is also no denying that our most successful mixers are used to working on nicely built, large frame consoles...we agree on that, no? There is also no denying that our most successful mixers are using ProTools as their playback medium of choice (save for Bob C)...we agree? There is also no denying that these mixers are doing more and more of their work (eq, compression, effects) in PT...we agree? Given all of that, will they make the jump to mixing on the Icon? Don't know.

Digi built it. It may or may not be perfect for you or perfect for me or this guy or that guy, but it is what it is. Now, let's give it some time and see how it is accepted at the pro level. But I do NOT agree with your assessment that Digi should have made the desk smaller, less featured and less expensive. For you, maybe. For me, no.

[RKrizman]

I am a person who believes that mixing ITB will continue to gain ground. However, FOR SOME PEOPLE, mixing ITB would be a more enticing proposition if there were a more professional mixing surface on which to work. You mentioned TLA, for instance. He's the type of guy who may see the Icon as a reasonable surface on which to mix records. Will he do so? Who knows? .....

There is also no denying that these mixers are doing more and more of their work (eq, compression, effects) in PT...we agree? Given all of that, will they make the jump to mixing on the Icon? Don't know.

But I do NOT agree with your assessment that Digi should have made the desk smaller, less featured and less expensive. For you, maybe. For me, no.

That was not my assessment. I did not say that Digi should have made it smaller with less features. Please review my above posts. Also, I'm not questioning the value of having a good control surface for mixing ITB. I'm just questioning whether the Icon is the best solution.

And as you said, the net is already full of discussion about who will embrace the Icon, so there's no point in going there again. Anyhow, whether or not the so-called big boys do it will have little bearing on my opinion or needs.

Also once again, I'm curious as to what you do in order to see where your opinion is coming from. I'm not asking for a resume, just wondering where you position yourself (composer? post? studio owner? etc) Do you see an Icon in your future? Or are we just having a philosophical discussion?

-R

[RKrizman]

On the other hand, when the ProControl came out, the pro market said "That's not the right product for us. We'd like a product which is more full featured, we won't mind if that necessitates a larger footprint and we don't care if it costs accordingly.

Ah, see this is where we disagree. I don't think the D-Control "necessitates a larger footprint". I think it's size is excessive and is there for show and I believe that the board would be more ergonomic if it were smaller. That is the crux of my criticism. Other than that I'm quite happy that they've created something more sophisticated than the ProControl. If I didn't feel like I was paying too much for a lot of unused real estate I'd be tempted to buy one myself.

And believe me, I'm a guy who's standing here just waiting to write the check. Who wants my business? (and I'm certainly not the only one).

-R

[grivel]

TO EGGMAN:

>I guess bottom line for me is that Digi has had a challenge getting the 'big name" mixers and studios >pushing the concept of mixing ITB. Part of that may be the lack of a "professional" surface. Hence >the Icon. I'm not sure that the engineers that Digi is targeting are as forward thinking as you might >give them credit for

'pushing the concept' - Of course they have a hard time. They are trying to mould the way people should work according to their money making schemes. The so called 'big name' mixers are most likely true 'old school audio guys', that want to work the way they work, and not have people trying to force anything on them.

I went to a recent Digidesign promo. The turnout was poor, the digi reps were rude and obnoxious. They were showing the latest PT software version and talking about the ICON. I will tell you that not that many people were impressed. They were trying to push new ways of working. Boasting about their silly 'track punch' and 'destructive mock tape mode' and 'virtual dubber'... stuff that has been around for 7 years already on the MMR-8.

OK, back on topic - no more ranting and raving. I think what it comes down to is I have no tolerance for rude sales people. It reflects poorly on the company, and these were some of the key people from the new software version.

>high end mixing engineers and high end studios (be they post or music), and I'm going to assume >that you may not fall into either category

I would like to to as to what you define 'high end engineers'. Like some dork that gets to touch an expensive console is 'high end' compared to a engineer that only works on a Sony DMXR100? Is he a low end engineer?

I can't speak for music studios as I have no idea there. As far as high end post? With a 60K price tag this kind of instantly rejects the ICON to even enter into the high end post market. They won't even make it onto the sidewalk. Yes, a couple will be used here & there, but it has no chance to compete with the established post console manufacturers that have groomed their products over many years of hard work and customer service.

People use Pro Tools because it's cheap and it gets the job done. It's cheap and dirty and has no grace. It pays the bills. I think it's good personally. It works AS A DAW.

In general as the quality levels drop in high end audio post in North America, as the industry goes further in the toilet, the ICON may have a chance with smaller post studios bidding at the bigger pie. It may just work for them because it isn't unreasonably priced. The trouble is, many mid guys are getting driven out by the large guys, so for post I don't see how that many ICONs are going to break in.

>Sony DMX, these things seem more like personal studio products than professionally oriented >products

I disagree...I think the Sony DMX product is better build quality than the ICON.

>This one is aimed at the big boys, and we'll have to let some time pass to see what the big boys >think about it

Again with the big boys, I take it you are talking about music? You must be, because no post 'big boys' [who are mainly large corporate entities] are going to throw their expensive post consoles (that work well for them) in the garbage to make room for a plastic ICON.

RKRIZMAND

>or even any good, to be marketed successfully and to make its money back

Of course, you are speaking of Digidesign. They have wonderful marketing. Great marketing. It works. From their marketing efforts alone they will probably recoup their costs through sales, on this ICON venture.

EGGMAN

>On the other hand, when the ProControl came out, the pro market said "That's not the right product >for us. We'd like a product which is more full featured, we won't mind if that necessitates a >larger footprint and we don't care if it costs accordingly. We'll be using the product in a >commercial room and will charge the client accordingly like we always do". Thus, the Icon.

This is just their [studio representative] polite way of saying to the digi rep. "we aren't interested... we like the way we work" Even after digi comes back with their new product, a new excuse will be made to politely make them (digi) go away.

>Will the Icon represent the next step of our evolution? I don't know, but I wouldn't bet against it >at this point.

No, because if that were the case, all pro audio manufacturers would close down and we would be left with 1 box that makes music and makes movies and 1 mouse that controls everything...resistance is futile.....not in my lifetime.

>There is also no denying that our most successful mixers are using ProTools as their playback >medium of choice

I would like to know where you get these figures for 'most successful mixers use it for'... I didn't know ther was a worldwide survey? I think you believe in a hoax.

>let's give it some time and see how it is accepted at the pro level

Enough time has already passed for introduction of the product. I foresee it as being used in some facilities, but not as many as Digi would have wanted.

GUESSING GAME 3 YEARS
Worldwide deployment into the overall post console market? Guess? 4% Marketshare
Worldwide deployment into the overall music console market? Guess? 8% Marketshare

[The Eggman]

That was not my assessment. I did not say that Digi should have made it smaller with less features. Please review my above posts. Also, I'm not questioning the value of having a good control surface for mixing ITB. I'm just questioning whether the Icon is the best solution.

Also once again, I'm curious as to what you do in order to see where your opinion is coming from. I'm not asking for a resume, just wondering where you position yourself (composer? post? studio owner? etc) Do you see an Icon in your future? Or are we just having a philosophical discussion?

-R

Kriz,

You DID say "Scale it down with smaller knobs, closer faders and more dedicated funtionality, with an ethernet rather than MIDI/HUI connection, for 20 grand, and I think you'd have something." Perhaps I mistook that to mean making it smaller with less features for a lower price. (I"m also presuming that you meant to say "with a MIDI/HUI connection rather than Ethernet" rather than the other way around...the Icon does work on Ethernet).

As far as my position, let's just say that I work closely with many of the "big name" engineers who may (or may not) end up having interest in the Icon. And, like anyone in my position, I'm always looking ahead to keep the guys on top of the game.

[The Eggman]

They are trying to mould the way people should work according to their money making schemes. The so called 'big name' mixers are most likely true 'old school audio guys', that want to work the way they work, and not have people trying to force anything on them.

I would like to to as to what you define 'high end engineers'. Like some dork that gets to touch an expensive console is 'high end' compared to a engineer that only works on a Sony DMXR100? Is he a low end engineer?

I disagree...I think the Sony DMX product is better build quality than the ICON.

...if that were the case, all pro audio manufacturers would close down and we would be left with 1 box that makes music and makes movies and 1 mouse that controls everything...resistance is futile.....not in my lifetime.

I would like to know where you get these figures for 'most successful mixers use it for'... I didn't know ther was a worldwide survey? I think you believe in a hoax.

Grivel,

First off, I love your conspiracy theory about Digi "forcing" guys to work on the system. I wonder if you're still thinking that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction?

High end engineers? Well, those would be the first call guys that get the mixing work...Jack Joseph Puig, Mike Shipley, Dave Pensado, the Lords, Bruce Swedien, George Massenburg, etc. Every one of these guys chooses PT as their playback engine of choice. Yes, guys using a DMXR are primarily the "low end" engineers.

You find the DMX build quality better than the Icon? Like I said, that format tends to attract the "low end" engineers.

Perhaps sadly, yes, a lot of pro audio manufacturers will most likely close down as a result of the consolidation in that industry. When the main format is controlled by one manufacturer, that's what usually happens.

Here in the US. the main mixers do prefer PT as their software. That's true in both music AND film. What else is there to say?

PS...rude sales guys ARE not cool. Agreed.

[dr sound]

Grivel stated :

I went to a recent Digidesign promo. The turnout was poor, the digi reps were rude and obnoxious. They were showing the latest PT software version and talking about the ICON. I will tell you that not that many people were impressed. They were trying to push new ways of working. Boasting about their silly 'track punch' and 'destructive mock tape mode' and 'virtual dubber'... stuff that has been around for 7 years already on the MMR-8.

dr. sound replies:
grivel,
Can you post one time without making reference to an MMR8? I know they are good, but every post of yours talks about MMR8's .As a matter of fact I have 3 to sell along with a remote for $4500 ea if your interested! I agree about the silly track punch. I too was at a recent ICON demo and Digi started to talk about Pec/Directs and punching. I've used Pec/Directs for over 20 years and I never want to touch them again!!

GUESSING GAME 3 YEARS
Worldwide deployment into the overall post console market? Guess? 4% Marketshare

Now how many would that be? Probably more than the double the amount of Harrison's and DFC's combined.

[DeVille]

I totally agree with RKrizman on this issue. I actually like the size of my Pro-Control. I think Digi should release a smaller footprint expandable ICON, more in line with the Pro-Control price range. I guess it would have less individual controls per channel and we would utilize the master section more, like in the current pro-control. Such a system would definitely outsell the current ICON.

I know I would not purchase an ICON even if I could afford it .




DeVille