macOS Screen Sharing is Caring

The direction that live audio is heading as show designs become more complicated is filled with more inputs, bigger consoles, more gear, and most visually notable: more screens. The tired joke of people walking up to FOH and saying, “Wow, do you need another screen?” can be heard now more than ever. It is almost more impressive to see a single screen at FOH than it is to see 9 or 10.

For the non-audio readers, you may be asking why do we have so many screens? The short answer is that as real-time software tools continue to develop, they all fight for screen real estate. The art and science of mixing are becoming so intertwined. The art lies within the mind, hands, and ears of the engineer, but the science is on clear display on the literal dozens of screens surrounding them.

But what actually are on those screens, you ask? It depends. Let’s break it down. Consoles will inevitably have at least one screen. On average, you are more likely to see 2 or 3. If you have an AVID S6L 48D, you immediately have 7 without any peripheral software programs. These days, numerous people are running external DSP software programs like Waves SuperRack, Live Professor, etc. This adds a screen; usually a touch screen. FOH engineers largely rely on a real-time measurement software like Smaart. This typically requires a full screen because of the scale along the X and Y axis needs to remain consistent. In the modern age of audio, it is almost becoming a necessity to multitrack shows. Having a screen to view, playback, visually monitor a recording is important. Then we get into the more niche pieces of software. One of the best and borderline imperative software programs for me is ProdCom. This is a real-time audio transcription software that allows me to read anything that is said into any of the talkback mics, radio, or comm. This also requires a good bit of screen real estate because I need to be able to easily read what has been said in case I missed what was said.

Scrolling through posts of the top-level engineers, you will inevitably see rigs that look like space shuttle cockpits. Every screen has its purpose. However, I love simplicity. I love being able to load out quickly. Would I have every screen possible if I had a tech to load it in and out for me every day? Maybe… but still probably not.

One major downside about more screens is usually that more screens means more computers. More computers mean more keyboards and mice. More keyboards and mice mean more surface area to put them, as well as keeping them organized so you know which one to reach for. There are a few solutions for this. The most popular solutions are things like KVMs (keyboard video mouse) which allow you to connect one keyboard, monitor, and mouse to multiple machines to switch back and forth. These are great, but they often only flip between two machines. They also can lag when switching between machines. Another option is a software called Synergy. This allows you to have multiple machines that are connected over a network be controlled with a single mouse and keyboard as if it were all one computer. (Apple also has a feature called Universal Control, but I do not prefer to use features that require an Apple ID login if I can help it.)

But what if there were another option?

I have recently embraced that was presented to me a couple of years ago by one of my audio mentors, Stephen Bailey. It is the concept of using a single machine, such as a laptop, to create multiple virtual desktops of each machine that would normally require a separate screen all in one laptop.

Let’s break this down. Why a laptop instead of a rack mounted computer? First, there is a built-in battery so it can never accidentally have the power pulled. Second, the monitor, keyboard, and mouse are all built in. It can be set on a laptop arm and easily moved around.

So, how do I create these virtual desktops?

This is where networking comes into play. When you have multiple Apple Silicon-based machines on a local network running macOS Sequoia or newer, the built-in screen sharing feature has a high-performance mode that allows you to effectively use one single machine to control as many machines as you want over the network. Then, with each machine’s desktop in full-screen mode, you can easily four-finger-swipe through each machine as if it were all a single machine.

Now, I know this is not for everyone. I began this by explaining that each screen has a purpose. A lot of time, they all need to be visible at all times. For me, I run Bitfocus Companion on one machine, which I also use as my remote control of the other. On the second machine, I have my Reaper record and ProdCom. I am easily able to switch back and forth between the two.

Setting this up is relatively easy. Assuming you have both machines on a local network, on the remote machine, go System Settings \> General \> Sharing and enable “screen sharing”. (I also like to enable “file sharing” as well so I can mount the storage drive of the remote machine on my host machine to share files easily.) Then, on the host machine, open spotlight and type in “screen sharing”. Here you can hit the plus button at the top, type in the IP address of the remote machine, and click connect. It will prompt you to sign in with the credentials of the remote machine. If you are macOS Sequoia or higher, the last setting it will prompt is “standard” or “high performance” mode. I always use high-performance mode for the least amount of latency. One potential downside is high-performance mode also creates a virtual display which overrides any existing displays. Make the best choice for yout situation. Standard mode can still work well but does not feel as fluid.

What about other Remote Desktop options if I don’t have an Apple Silicon Mac?

There are plenty of options out there for Remote Desktop control including Team Viewer, AnyDesk, Jump Remote Desktop, RustDesk, and Parsec. Personally, I like Jump and Parsec a lot. Jump uses a proprietary protocol they made called Fluid that can allow for peer-to-peer connections, which allows for local connection. Otherwise, you usually need to connect via a server over the internet, which introduces lag. The benefit of the Apple screen sharing is that it almost feels like it is running on the native machine. One exception that I have found that works pretty well is the native Microsoft Remote Desktop on all Windows Pro installations. However, this does require the more expensive pro license and installation.

If you have any insight to share with remote management, feel free to reach out!