BillFitzmaurice.info

My two Aardvark Q10 boxes still work, but the drivers are stuck forever in XP/SP1 land.
They will never run at SP2 or higher, and never run under Vista/Win7.
If/when the PCI card dies, my Q10 dies along with it.

These are the concerns I have.
Computer hardware is my business... I have no worries about that end, only the SAC specific stuff.

The only thing that is SAC specific is SAC itself. What else are you referring to?

I haven't investigated it enough to itemize the components.
My concerns are more generic: same as the Q10 problems.

I don't want to have $1300 invested in unsupported boxes like my Q10 pair.
There are major changes coming in the Windows platform, and I don't want my hardware orphaned.

If this is a non-issue with SAC, all the better.
Somewhere along the line, that transmitted ethernet signal has to get into some (proprietary?) hardware to do what it does.. something has to de-MUX the various channels, etc.

bgavin wrote:I haven't investigated it enough to itemize the components.
My concerns are more generic: same as the Q10 problems.

I don't want to have $1300 invested in unsupported boxes like my Q10 pair.
There are major changes coming in the Windows platform, and I don't want my hardware orphaned.

If this is a non-issue with SAC, all the better.
Somewhere along the line, that transmitted ethernet signal has to get into some (proprietary?) hardware to do what it does.. something has to de-MUX the various channels, etc.

It is a non-issue for the most part. I'll try to break the whole system down piece by piece so you can see what's where:

Inputs connect to an Preamp/ A-D converter. Most people use the Behringer ADA8000 for this purpose, but there are plenty of devices by many manufacturers that accomplish this. This device usually has ADAT lightpipe out, but can also have the PC interface built in, or another protocol such as MADI. Again, plenty of various devices out there to do this step from Behringer to Presonus to Motu (8pre, for instance). If it has ADAT out, you run into a seperate PC interface like the RME cards (HDSP 9632, 9652, or RayDAT) depending upon the number of channels. Again, multiple choices from RME, M-Audio, Presonus, MOTU, etc. The only current qualification is that the interface have low-latency ASIO or MME drivers. The card then feeds ADAT back to the interfaces D/A converter to get you outputs. In this setup, if any part fails, it can be replaced with an off-the-shelf component that meets the basic requirements, just like a hard drive or video card would.

All of these are major manufacturers, so you're future proofed at least for Win 7, however the current recommendation is to run on XP. The reason for this is that SAC relies heavily on Windows' file sharing for its remote interfaces, with the standard setup being to simply make the C drive an open share on the host (not a security risk as it usually would be because this box should never see the internet. It's really best not to view these computers as PCs, but rather special-use embedded devices. They should never really see Windows update, or even have anti-virus software, as these introduce kludge. Some people have had moderate success with Vista and I think a couple of them have tried Win7 (I'm sure you'd be able to overcome the networking issues given your background) but XP's stability is highly valued here. SAC needs neither a large amount of RAM or 64 bit capabilities to do its work, so XP does quite well, and can be stripped down to bare basics much more easily than Vista (or presumably Win7).

In the standard setup, you can expect to pay:

Computer - Varies, can be done easily for less than $1000
Interface - RME Raydat is about $850, supports 32 in, 32 out connections, double up to get 64, SAC supports up to 72
Converters - ADA8000s can be had for less than $200 shipped from our friends at NSL, 32 channels would be less than $800
Remote Netbooks - $300+, depends on what you buy

So, for a 64 channel mixer with 3 remotes, your total cost could be around $3500- $4000, with the most expensive single component being the RME interface. You now have a system, however, that is the equivalent of a 48 channel VCA console, a digital snake, splitter snake, up to 24 monitor mixers, and full FX and drive racks all around. I won't even bother to add the cost on that, as you can't even get a single mixer for the cost of the whole SAC setup. Further, you can add full multitrack recording and playback for either $1200 or $2400 (depends on channel count).

With that kind of value and flexibility, if a single component fails or becomes obsolete, you simply replace it with something off the shelf when the time comes. Your investment is still well worth it.

Does that help any?

EDIT: I don't want to make it sound like SAC has to be built this expensively. I found a killer deal on an older RME interface on Ebay, you can use an existing PC as long as its fast enough, or build inexpensively, etc. I think I've spent (or will have spent) a total of $1500 to get a dedicated 24 ch system up and running.

Gosh... there is a lot to learn about SAC and the requisite hardware. This has the most versatility, for certain.

Maybe I'll just pickup a Yamaha board initially and migrate to this direction over time.

nola50 wrote:Gosh... there is a lot to learn about SAC and the requisite hardware. This has the most versatility, for certain.

Maybe I'll just pickup a Yamaha board initially and migrate to this direction over time.

If you think you might want to go this direction, save your money and do all your investigation now. SAC can be used as simply as a standalone mixer, or as complex as a 28 unit remote setup exceeding the functionality of a FOH, monitor mixer and 26 station AVIOM system. My laptop with Firewire interface only ever gets used as a standalone wired to a copper snake since networking on it doesn't play nicely with a SAC host setup. Remotes are fine on it, but it has to be the only game in town as a mixer. A laptop and a small rack with an expresscard interface from MOTU or RME plus a few additional preamps would be a nice simple portable way to start and you can choose to stay there or ditch the snake in the future as you get comfortable with networking.

bgavin, I know for a fact that SAC runs just fine on Windows 7. There's less literature about stripping down and tuning 7 so far, but most of the Vista tips probably still apply. I intalled the last RC on my laptop as a dual boot to see if it worked better than XP for my hardware which was really meant for Vista. No luck, but SAC did run fine minus latency glitches.

Networking is a piece of cake for me- I am a computer consultant... but what about the hardware interfaces... is this CAT5 to XLR ??? Yowsers!!!

nola50 wrote: is this CAT5 to XLR ??? Yowsers!!!

No. The network is only for passing data from host to remote. All the audio transfer is done via optical cables and/or firewire. Some people are using Audiorails, or other ADAT extenders to transfer the optical signals to Cat5, but that's a simple plug-and-play type of solution.

I'm an old school sound guy and I find this topic fascinating. Maybe it should have it's own thread? I've downloaded the demo and love it. Been looking at DM1000's and O2r96's but this blows them away at way less than 1/2 the cost. I do have a few questions of course. Are used servers a good way to go? Many on ebay for cheap and rackmountable. Can you load an OS into servers without problems? Thanks in advance to the more knowledgeable.

Depends on the server. Most of the 1U servers don't have any expansino slots, or only 1. Most of the 2-4U servers are more expensive than they're worth. Some of the guys on the SAC forum have had success with this, but I chose to build a system, my cost without case, monitor or CD Drive was $235 with an e5200 processor (which has worked for others).

SAC only uses 1 core of the processor, so having more than dual core is of no benefit (second core is used for Windows processes). A lot of those servers are single core Xeons, which are fine, but don't count out building a new box.

Greg Plouvier wrote:I'm an old school sound guy and I find this topic fascinating. Maybe it should have it's own thread? I've downloaded the demo and love it. Been looking at DM1000's and O2r96's but this blows them away at way less than 1/2 the cost. I do have a few questions of course. Are used servers a good way to go? Many on ebay for cheap and rackmountable. Can you load an OS into servers without problems? Thanks in advance to the more knowledgeable.

It does have it's own forum over at SoftwareAudioConsole.com. No need for too big of a thread here.

To quickly answer your question, some servers may be a decent option. I wouldn't buy without firing it up in person though. All the Dell and HP servers I"ve spent time around are not ones I'd put anywhere that doesn't have plenty of background volume. My QSC PLX amps are pretty quiet to me in terms of fan noise. I've had artists complain when the amp rack wasn't at least 10 feet away in a quiet hall. Most of the servers I've been around (1-4U units) make my amps seem dead silent in comparison. The rackmount case I built into has a quiet 120mm fan up front and a pair of quiet 80mm fans in back. The PSU is pretty quiet, as is the stock Intel fan. The rack spends Sunday mornings 4ft away from a percussionist on-stage and I can't hear it when standing in front of it to mix monitors.

I'm a recent convert and I almost dread using anything else. That's with only a few months under my belt. I run sound for the oldest continuous running municipal band in the states. They have an older 8 channel Yamaha mixer that works fairly well, but has no muting or channel off switches. So each song I get to remix the band after pulling them all down for the conductor to speak in-between. I started using SAC with an 8-channel interface and life has been a dream. I have scenes handling all my muting, studio quality effects, the equivalent of a high end speaker processor and consistent mixes from concert to concert since they have a concert band, 18-piece jazz band and 4-6 piece jazz combo each with different channels and settings. Last night we had an exceptional mariachi band open the evening and they used all 8 channels on the "board". Within 10 minutes of their finish, I had mics rearranged and repatched on the stage and the concert band running with the exact settings I've spent weeks fine-tuning. I can't imagine going back to a non-SAC system.

Yeah I'm looking into building one too. Never done it though - a little daunting. Thanks a lot guys, for the tips on the servers. I think I'll steer clear. I have been reading the SAC forum quite a bit too. Dougherty(sorry - don't know your 1st name) - I'm the guy in Florence that asked about your upcoming show. Probably see ya in the next week or 2. Anxious to see it in action.

Greg Plouvier wrote:Yeah I'm looking into building one too. Never done it though - a little daunting. Thanks a lot guys, for the tips on the servers. I think I'll steer clear. I have been reading the SAC forum quite a bit too. Dougherty(sorry - don't know your 1st name) - I'm the guy in Florence that asked about your upcoming show. Probably see ya in the next week or 2. Anxious to see it in action.

Very welcome on the input. First name is George.

SAC works quite well. I've found a few bugs lately, but nothing that's a show stopper and most are problematic only in a multi-client setup. A solo oddity was the major annoyance last weekend. For me it wasn't a problem since I prefer mixing FOH without touching headphones 90% of the time. For my FOH guy, it made it tough since he spends so much time with headphones on. To me that's a handicap on his part, but we managed to get through the day without. Now that I know what the behavior is we could probably handle it if we had to. It seemed so random and constant with two of us 50ft apart.
A major upside to SAC is that despite the occasional bugs, the developer is highly responsive. The next release expected in the very near future will include fixes to most, if not all, the identified bugs. It will also include a number of very nice new features. Can't wait.

Old Servers: I took an old Windows 2000 Server and formatted it, then loaded XP on it- runs like a champ! After continually putting on ALL the Microsoft updates, it even runs a LaCie DVD LightScribe unit.

nola50 wrote:Old Servers: I took an old Windows 2000 Server and formatted it, then loaded XP on it- runs like a champ! After continually putting on ALL the Microsoft updates, it even runs a LaCie DVD LightScribe unit.

Just remember that low-latency audio performance isn't as much determined by the way the PC responds to the program as it is by the way it responds to the interface card. Servers are designed for redundancy and uptime, which are great, but some of those features may (and i stress may) get in the way of the super-fast bussing needed for low latency audio. As was said, for this purpose, try before you buy, or at least buy from a company that offers no-fault returns, if you're going to buy an old server for audio.