Can a Pro Workflow Translate to Any Console Budget?
In light of me recently using a DM7 with my current artist, it was brought to my attention that it would be interesting to cover how I bring a high-level workflow to a console that sits at a lower price point. Before I proceed, I think it is important to keep in mind that these insights are primarily derived from my experience as a monitor engineer. This is by no means a tutorial of “How to mix monitors at a high level with any gear.” It is solely an insight of my primary considerations when using any console that may place limitations on my workflow that would not necessarily be present on higher end consoles.
So what exactly are we looking at when we talk about moving from a high-end console to a more beginner-friendly console?
Despite mixing for a solo artist + a four-piece backline, I typically like to be on a DiGiCo Q5 and more recently a Q7. This probably sounds insane because you almost certainly know other engineers who have bigger bands to account for. My argument for a desk of that caliber comes from several reasons including physical ergonomics, local IO capability, accessibility in different parts of the world, and to some extent sheer fader count. Maybe one day I will do an in-depth explanation of my workflow, but for now, let's break down a few of the most important hurdles I try to solve when migrating my workflow to another platform.
Speed
First and foremost, the most critical part of my workflow is speed. How fast can I respond to incoming requests? How many button presses does it take to get to where I need to be? These are the questions I ask myself when I first look at any console. I need to be fast.
What’s the best way to get fast? Learning and using the console. Unfortunately, there is no way to circumvent the learning process. In the digital age, the luxury of using offline editors to begin to learn the GUI has been invaluable. As manufacturers get better at blurring the lines between the editor and the software on the surface itself, engineers have almost no excuse to walk up to a console with a blank file.
Another aspect of speed that I agree with seasoned engineers on is maintaining consistency when setting up a fader layout. You can expect fader banks to have 8 to 12 faders per bank. This gives you a level of familiarity to work with regardless of platform. If you keep things in a similar, if not identical order, the muscle memory should follow.
Simulate Issues
For better or worse, I constantly have people reach out to me for help with problems they run into with their audio systems. I mention this not to say that I know everything, but because I have had to troubleshoot so many issues with the systems that I am familiar with. I have been through the fire with the gear that I would normally choose to use. This isn’t to say the gear I use is the best; clearly it can have its issues too. What I am saying is that knowing how to resolve those issues on the console is almost more important than knowing how to mix on it. At a high level, some would say that it is the tech’s role to resolve those issues. While I don’t inherently disagree, I would argue that it serves the artist more if the engineer can recognize the issue and rectify it quickly, instead of relying on a tech every time.
When you move to a more entry-level platform, try to think through the potential pitfalls. Even if it is not a technical issue, it is important to think through last-second requests. Can you accommodate added inputs quickly? Can you add an extra reverb for a guitar easily? Can you swap the patch on the snare bottom when a preamp dies? Can you move your fader layout on the fly to accommodate a necessary mix move that would otherwise happen between layers? I would say these are problems that need solving quickly. If you as the engineer cannot make those changes quickly, you become a barrier to whatever is happening at that moment. Simulating these issues before they happen can give you a sense of how you can respond.
Find the Unique Aspects of the Console
Lastly, I try to embrace the platform as a whole. I have always stood behind the notion that anyone who develops a tool for a task has a goal in mind. No one is going through the whole process of design all the way to delivery to the end user just for the sake of money. These console manufacturers all have unique approaches and compromises for their console lines. No console can be all things to all engineers; otherwise the console landscape would not be near as fun. I like to embrace the unique approach of each platform.
For example, on the DM7 I recently covered, I had to find a new approach to navigation as that console is very “page” based. I found that making a number of User-Defined Keys to navigate to the approach pages quickly helped in accelerating my process as someone who comes from a macros-based workflow.
Despite the title, my approach to making my workflow work across consoles has less to do with the console itself and more about my understanding and experience as an engineer. All the tools are effectively the same; EQ, compression, gain staging, signal flow, etc. Sure, they may sound different, and the nomenclature may be a bit confusing, but at the end of the day, it’s essentially inputs to outputs. I believe it is our job to continue to push these tools to their limits, encourage innovation from manufacturers, and ultimately mix great shows.
