Could the DAW Become Part of the Allen & Heath Mixing Environment?

CQ CQ Feature Suggestions
,
1

Hello dear A&H team,

Allen & Heath already offers integration with LiveTrax 3, which covers multitrack recording very well. However, I believe there is an opportunity to take the concept much further.

Today, most digital mixers are designed around the idea that all processing happens inside the console. At the same time, modern computers have become powerful enough to run complex real-time processing chains with extremely low latency.

This makes me wonder whether future Allen & Heath systems could evolve towards a hybrid workflow, where software such as Nuendo, Nuendo Live or Fairlight Live is not only used as a recorder, but also as an extension of the mixer itself.

In such a workflow, the console would remain the center of the live setup and the primary control surface, while the DAW would act as an external processing environment. Selected channels, groups, auxes or matrices could be sent to and returned from the DAW whenever additional processing is required.

The real benefit is not the recording aspect. The real benefit is access to an almost unlimited processing ecosystem.

This would make it possible to use advanced workflows that are difficult or impossible to implement inside many live consoles, such as side-chain dynamic EQ, intelligent ducking, multiband dynamics, tape saturation, analogue compressor emulations, broadcast processing, loudness management and other specialized VST-based tools.

At the same time, the system would continue to provide all the advantages of multitrack recording, virtual soundcheck and post-production workflows.

What I find particularly interesting is that this approach does not try to replace the mixer. Instead, it allows the mixer and the DAW to complement each other, combining the reliability and immediacy of dedicated hardware with the flexibility of modern software processing.

From a user perspective, this could significantly extend the capabilities of products such as the CQ, SQ and Avantis ranges without requiring Allen & Heath to implement every possible processing tool internally.

Rather than thinking of the DAW as a recording destination, perhaps it is time to start thinking of it as an integrated part of the live mixing environment.

I would be very interested to hear whether Allen & Heath sees this type of hybrid hardware/software workflow as a possible direction for future development.

Best regards,
Thurisaz

2

Isn’t that basically what Waves is?

1 Like
3

Hi @Dave54,

I didn’t know that Waves has a platform like Nuendo, or Fairlight Live, or something that could serve as an external mix console?!
Also we need some solution that works well with interfaces like CQ, that doesn’t support third-party plugins.

4

Regardless of the fact that your CQ lacks the capability to utilize a Waves interface, the use of the USB interface itself unfortunately results in too high a latency - a fact that likely prevents the implementing it in the way you dreamt.
It is possible that your computers are technically capable of handling this, but the interface built into the unit by A&H simply is not.
See also the example of the QU here:

5

Well, no doubt that comparing Allen & Heath’s ASIO drivers to RME’s is a difficult benchmark. RME has spent decades building a reputation for some of the most stable and lowest-latency drivers in the industry.

While testing the CQ-18T with Cubase 15 and Nuendo 14/15, I did notice a considerable difference between the two ecosystems. In my case, CQ ASIO Driver 5.50.0 caused both Cubase and Nuendo to become unstable and occasionally crash. That said, what really triggered this discussion was not the driver performance itself.

The idea came to me after watching the presentation of the newly released Fairlight Live and seeing how it can work together with a Behringer Wing as part of a hybrid mixing environment.

It made me think:

What if the next evolution of compact digital mixers is not simply adding more DSP inside the console, but allowing the mixer to seamlessly expand into a DAW-based processing environment whenever additional capabilities are required?

The CQ series is an excellent example.

For its size, portability and price point, it is an impressive mixer. I genuinely like the CQ-18T because it is one of the few mixers that I can literally take anywhere, power up within minutes and operate directly from its own touchscreen.

However, as productions become more demanding, there are certain processing tools that many users eventually start to miss:

  • Side-chain compression

  • Side-chain dynamic EQ

  • Ducking for delay and reverb effects

  • Intelligent ducking

  • De-essing

  • Advanced multiband dynamics

  • Tape and tube saturation

  • Console-style analogue processing

  • More sophisticated monitoring workflows

Traditionally, the answer has been to move to a larger and more expensive console platform.

But perhaps there is another possibility.

Modern computers already provide enormous processing power. DAWs such as Nuendo, Nuendo Live and Fairlight Live have access to a virtually unlimited ecosystem of plugins and advanced processing tools.

Instead of trying to implement every possible feature inside the mixer firmware, perhaps future Allen & Heath systems could allow the DAW to become a natural extension of the mixing environment itself.

The mixer would remain the heart of the system.

The DAW would become an optional external processing engine.

Need a side-chain dynamic EQ? Route the channel through the DAW.

Need advanced ducking or broadcast-oriented processing? Use the DAW.

Need tape saturation or analogue compressor emulations? Use the DAW.

At the same time, the very same platform continues to handle multitrack recording, virtual soundcheck and post-production tasks.

Of course, latency would be the critical factor. Any practical implementation would require extremely efficient ASIO and CoreAudio performance, together with intelligent delay compensation and seamless routing.

But if this challenge can be solved, I believe the concept could open an entirely new category of hybrid workflows.

Rather than viewing the DAW as a recording destination, perhaps we should start viewing it as an expandable DSP environment that complements the mixer whenever additional processing power is needed.

To me, that feels like a very natural next step for modern live production systems.

Best regards,

Thurisaz

1 Like
6

This could be likely one of the reasons why interfaces like Dante and Waves already exist - it’s just that they aren’t available on the entry-level CQ consoles.
But however, as long as A&H hasn’t explicitly state that this isn’t technically possible, you can hope that - provided there are enough votes - they could even work on it.

7

I will admit to have retired as am EE over 10 years ago, However, even with the intervening computing advances, I would prefer firmware enabled functions rather than trust third party software, even on a USB-C/Thunderbird connection into a powerful computer. For a live show there are just too many possible points of failure to my way of thinking. Harrison Livetrax is in some respects a dumb client and the jump from there to a DAW with useable live plugins is a step or two too far. Whilst there is some overlap between Digital Mixers. DAWs and Digital Editing, IMO, the last two are substantially “offline” functions.

8

Isn’t this closely linked with the USB chip ? (hardware limitation ?)…

9

Only A&H or RME could give you an answer to that.
However, the linked thread states, among other things, that regarding the USB interface, RME prioritizes low latency above all else, while A&H focuses more on reliability.
Apparently, you can’t have it all.

10

I guess I really don’t understand what the OP is actually trying to ask for/accomplish. The A&H console don’t need to integrate with something like Fairlight (which is a software based audio console) because they already ARE a hardware based audio console.

If you want external FX, you have always been able to add external FX to consoles (even back when they were analog consoles) through the use of inserts. Several console manufactures (like Digico with native Waves integration) have attempted various levels of “integrating” the control of outside FX systems into the console, and I think they have all scaled back their integration aspirations after realizing it just isn’t worth the constant R&D updates required to keep two systems being developed by different companies working reliably together. There are still some companies that offer limited integration (Digico, Lawo, Avid, etc). However this “integration” is often just hosting a “remote screen” of the FX system on their console’s screens.

I doubt we will ever see a truly integrated solution from A&H like I think the OP is asking for, nor do I think it is worth A&H R&D time and resources exploring those options in the first place.

If you really want an audio console that is deeply integrated with external FXs, you should honestly look at the Waves LV1 Classic console. It’s really the best option currently available (and it works well because Waves is a FX plugin software company that has decided to produce a hardware interface for their software product. It’s not two companies trying to make their systems work well together).

11

I was not really questioning:

…CQ… "… use a standard unoptimized XMOS USB chip. This solution is easy to implement, much cheaper, does not require specialized engineering and works with standard drivers. Voila, here comes a $200 interface.

RME on the other hand is going the other possible way, by recreating the USB protocol in an own chip, which fully exploits the limits of the standard (RME Pro Audio XCore). Channel count, latency, clocking, sync, fixes stability issues and more.
Additionally the code can be updated at any time, as the chip is fully re-programmable (FPGA). So even 15 years old RME interfaces still get updates, to work with the latest USB hardware - fast, reliable, usable!

On top of it: To achieve record low latencies with USB, it needs a special highly optimized driver. Only RME is doing both. RME interfaces are using a fully customized USB implementation, to the utter limits of the standard with a special driver technology, which delivers the same stability and speed on Mac OS and Windows…."

(source: Why RME interfaces work so well - #4 by themaartian - Hardware - Gig Performer Community)