New D-Command 24 ES vs. Blue D-Control 32

[trombino]

Hi all,

This is probably a ridiculous question to ask, so my apologies in advance. :)

I want to get a control surface by the end of the year. I have been looking at both d-controls and d-commands, and while the d-control is the obvious winner as far as features and ease of use go, the d-command is more within my reach financially.

However, I recently came across a used blue d-control 32 for about $45K - close enough to a new d-command es to be really, really tempting... and confusing.

The blue d-control has 8 more faders, a better center section, more knobs, and just seems quite a bit more buff than the d-command. But - the d-command is new, looks better, has a nicer form factor, and from what I gather can do just about everything the d-control can do, just not as handily. And is cheaper. And would come from a reputable dealer. And would be under warranty for a year. etc.

I am wondering what some of you guys would do in my situation. FWIW, I mix music exclusively, so a lot of the post features of the d-control are probably wasted on me. That said, I do feel the added knobs and switches would not be wasted on me. Ugh. Head. Spinning.

If anyone has any insight or opinions I would LOVE to hear them!

Thanks guys!

[Soundtrack]

This is for sure not a ridiculous question, because we asked ourselve the same question a few months ago....

We had the change to demo both the D-Command and the D-Control on the same day in the same room. Because we worked already for a long time on the ProControl, we already new a little what to aspect.

Because of the budget we went to the demo “thinking” that the 24 D-Command ES would be the perfect solution for our needs and budget.
During the demo we focused because of this on the D-Command, a very impressive controller with lot’s of nice things and options, but by feel still a “controller”.

Offcourse the D-Control has some extra options and dedicated buttons, 3 Cue mix outputs , more encoder rows making the new ‘Matrix” plugin assignment future or plugin mapping far more easy to work with etc. The fact that you have the FocusChannel fader as a seperate fader is a very big difference and the trackball/keyboard in front of you makes editing very fast and easy.

Besides of the extra functions and options on the D-Control, there is one more very big difference: The feel of the D-Control is far more like working on a classic mixing-console.

Also the total overview for the D-Control is far more clear and very easy to work with. During the demo we where so impressed by the feel and possibilties of the D-Control that we went without doubt for the 32 D-Control (Blue version)

We work now for two months with the D-Control and every day again we have the feeling that this was the best decission we made. We don’t use it in split configuration, but 32 faders at our left. This is also a thing that you really have to think about. The split configuration looks great on the picture, but for music mixing it’s far more easy to have al your faders at your left.

The D-Control ES version was far out of budget for us, but if you see the difference between a new D-Command ES and a used/ demo version of the D-Control (Blue version), I really can say that the D-Control has so much more to offer.
To be more specific, if I had to make the same choice between a 24 fader D-Control ES and even just a 16 fader used D-Control, I still would direct go for the used 16 fader D-Control.

So go for the 32 fader (Blue) D-Control .....

Grz,

Louis

[trombino]

Thank you for your insight, Louis!

I think that you would go for a 16 fader D-Control over a 24 fader D-Command says a lot. In your opinion, then, are the number of faders less important than the number of encoders per channel? Is that what makes the difference for you? Or is it the center section?

I think I might actually prefer a smaller, 16 channel D-Control now that you mentioned it. I hadn't really thought of that as an option before.

[Norad155]

D-Control hands down.

I would go as far as to say I would mix on just the center section (1 focus fader) on the D-control over a 1000 fader D-command...

okay that's a bit much... but the center section on the D-control is far superior. Many more dedicated buttons as opposed to paging through soft keys. Also being limited to 2 knobs (sends, pans, or plugin parameters) on the channel strips kills the D-command for me. You could even ditch 16 of those faders (if you could find a buyer) and save some money.

Go for the blue D-Control... Def.

[Soundtrack]

Hello Mark,

In my opinion it's a combination of factors that makes the difference. More encoders means more overview, direct access, but also direct automation control.
For the matrix view it's really impressive but over all so much faster to do assignment, view VCA members etc.

The center section is also very functional. Don't forget that the EQ and Dynamics are having more controllers, so the lay-out fit to nearly every EQ and Dynamic without the need to page up/down to the next row of control.

Also by argonomics I think the placement of dedicated buttons etc, is far more logical on the D-Control. Having the Qwerty and nummeric is far more easy. On both controllers you can for example acces the memory locators (organized in blocks of 6), but it's far more fast and easy using the numeric keypad if you want to go direct to memory locator 153.....


The faders are important also, but with 16 faders you can do most of the basic mixing needs. Beside that you have to option to make regular Protools groups but also special FocusGroups (these groups only excist on your controller and not on the Protools screen). And don't forget the use of the VCA's in combination with spill function (showing you all the members of your VCA.

This in combination with show/hide groups, aux, masters, VCA, instrumenttracks etc, makes that you can navigate very fast on 16 faders. Also you can nudge and/or bank the faders very easy (by 1, 8 16 or 32 channels)
You just have to be organized and you really should take same time to make a basic template to start your sessions with.

Having 32 faders makes this even more comfortable, (specially in combination with the two separate focuschannels/groups etc) Needless to say that we where more than happy to find some extra budget for our faderpack...

grz,

Louis

[trombino]

Okay I'm sold. Thanks guys!

[mix109]

+1 re the DControl functionality,but have in mind that when the Blue Lexan overlay gets worned out,you will probably need lots of..light to actually view the printed commands.
...at least with ours after 2 years of 24/7 operation...i need a magnyfing glass to see ;-)

[Pete Gates]

If it's the only surface you'll be using (you won't be using D-Commands/C24s elsewhere),
you (really!) can afford it,
it'll physically fit (mine is in a small room),
you don't need to move it,
the client wow factor is of any use to you,
you do any surround work,
you do a lot of editing/mixing where you rapidly switch between the two,
you don't mind the blue (I prefer it on the D-Controls but prefer the dark D-Commands, don't know why!),
happy to budget on needing to replace the Logic and LED power supplies sooner than with a new one...

Then I'd agree with the others, D-Control no competition.

I went to look at a D-Command originally and came out having bought a D-Control which at the time was a huge stretch money wise. I have to say I really feel constricted when I go onto a D-Command or C24 which as a freelancer I have to do quite a lot. I really like the D-Control. It's not quite an old fashioned desk and not perfect (I'm always making feature requests) but it's by far and away the closest thing currently that works well with Pro Tools. I'm using it on quite small projects a lot and even on them it really is noticeably better.

Pete

[Brent_Sydney]

Im going out on a limb here to say that I actually prefer a dcommand. Key reasons:

Most importantly, I prefer a Qwerty keyboard in front of the transport section in the sweet spot

Since PT8 you can now do almost everything on a dcommand you can do on a dcontrol - plugin mapping, access to plugs on channel strips, mapping them into custom fader groups etc

Reach - 6 pots are great but are they in use a lot? I can reach two and Ive got arms like an orangutan, the top 4 on a dcontrol dont get a lot of use from me

Personal opinion key detractors:
Only 8 custom groups
Cant control multiple PTHD rigs
Have to choose between PT groups vs custom groups, rather than having dedicated button in the CF section for each
Smaller EQ and Dyn section, particular for in and out levels having to page...

So yeah, just throwing in a vote for the d-command, even with its little niggles, if you learn your shortcuts its super powerful and, IMHO, sits very nicely within reach, both physically and economically!

[Pete Gates]

Originally Posted by Brent_Sydney

Im going out on a limb here to say that I actually prefer a dcommand...

Watch out, Digi Sales staff may read this!

Originally Posted by Brent_Sydney

Most importantly, I prefer a Qwerty keyboard in front of the transport section in the sweet spot

I'm fine with a D-Command, I use a C24 a lot too. The keyboard is my biggest problem with them though and one of the main reasons I prefer the D-Control. I've never come across a good keyboard solution, so if you have any suggestions! I've used consoles in Argosys where the keyboard has been stuck to the Argosy soft armrest - with the mouse precariously perched next to it on the armrest. I've used horrible slide out keyboard trays that always wobble and/or clunk your knees. I've used custom made desks where the mouse and keyboard are fine but you have to reach halfway across the desk to grab any faders - of all the compromises I've dealt with this is the one I can cope with best but it's not great.

Pete