Can one ICON control several PT rig?

[Bokir]

Something like layers perhaps? PT A layer one, PT B layer two, and so on.
Or perhaps via software switching just like a KVM on a server rack?

Thanks.

[bigbadhenchman]

I have asked this question.
The answer is No.

[Blake A]

Henchman is right, kind of.

Your D-Control will have full control over your main protools system and its disk tracks. Your other ProTools systems tracks can be brought in to Aux tracks on the main ProTools system. These sound limiting but they are no different to channels on a regular digital console, with the advantage that they can use all the 3rd party plug ins out there, fully controlled and automated from the Icons surface.

There are up to 128 stereo Aux tracks on an HD system plus your 192 disk tracks.

Blake

[bigbadhenchman]

Henchman is right, kind of.

Your D-Control will have full control over your main protools system and its disk tracks. Your other ProTools systems tracks can be brought in to Aux tracks on the main ProTools system. These sound limiting but they are no different to channels on a regular digital console, with the advantage that they can use all the 3rd party plug ins out there, fully controlled and automated from the Icons surface.

There are up to 128 stereo Aux tracks on an HD system plus your 192 disk tracks.

Blake



However.....

You can't access any of the plug-ins via the Icon on the "Slave" machine.

So you'll have to really beef up the DSP Farms on the main machine.
So you'll need a whack of extra DSP and I/O's.

[Blake A]

However.....
You can't access any of the plug-ins via the Icon on the "Slave" machine.




Your right, that really sucks not being able to access plug ins of a slaved Pro Tools from the console surface.
I don't know how everyone with a regular digital or analog consoles can stand it.

Blake

[bigbadhenchman]

Your right, that really sucks not being able to access plug ins of a slaved Pro Tools from the console surface.
I don't know how everyone with a regular digital or analog consoles can stand it.

Blake



But isn't that supposed to be the point of having a control surface?
So, if you want to control that system, as I've stated before, you buy another Icon or use a pro-control sidecar if you want to save money.
Either way, you're back to running all the outputs of one system into inputs of the main system.
You know, kinda like the way you do it when using a digital console.

Now, if they incorporate a way to control a 2nd or 3rd system without having to run all those outputs into Aux returns, then that would make more sense, don't you think.
That way you would only have to return stems.

[cmaynes]

Henchmen-

That is a terrific point- I hope Digi tries to implement that sort of feature as soon as possible.


charles maynes

[Bokir]

Now, if they incorporate a way to control a 2nd or 3rd system without having to run all those outputs into Aux returns, then that would make more sense, don't you think.
That way you would only have to return stems.



Indeed. This is what I thought ICON should be able to do when reffering it as "a Control Surface". It shouldn't be tied with only one engine (one PT Rigs), instead it should give some degree of engine flexibility, just like most OTHER digital console.

Or.. should we wait for the next DIGI offering?

[dmazurek]

what's keeping an Ethernet switcher from working?

[JKD99]

In regard to an Ethernet switcher, if the ICON is anything like a Pro Control, that as soon as you switched from one rig to the other, the one left behind would flash the "Pro Tools cannot communicate...." dialog.

[GVDB]

If you've got a heavy PT system what's the point in having the ICON control more PT systems? I don't get the initial post? I am sure Digi could make it control more than one system but specify your needs for this a little better, what's it for?

[filmixer]

I got three words for you. Pro Tools seven.

[Bokir]

If you've got a heavy PT system what's the point in having the ICON control more PT systems?



Imagine a simple 3 PT setup: two DAW (2 x the max audio tracks + 2 x the bussess) + one dedicated stem/master recorder controlled from a single surface.

[GVDB]

I already thought you were going to say something like that, but I meant do you have a job which requires so many tracks/busses? I know that the amount of tracks can build up very quick, especially if you have all your music tracks seperate, but even then, one rig is more easy to manage then 3 rigs, and recording the stems, we just do this on the main machine also and it manages to do this.

[bigbadhenchman]

I already thought you were going to say something like that, but I meant do you have a job which requires so many tracks/busses? I know that the amount of tracks can build up very quick, especially if you have all your music tracks seperate, but even then, one rig is more easy to manage then 3 rigs, and recording the stems, we just do this on the main machine also and it manages to do this.



Yes, but on large mixes, you'll hav e 2 mixeres, with 2 separate systems. Allowing individual access to the session.

[GVDB]

Yes, but on large mixes, you'll hav e 2 mixers, with 2 separate systems. Allowing individual access to the session.



Yes, true, but then 2 PT rigs would be sufficient, and then you'll still need 2 ICONS, to sit comfortable, but this would be the same for any large format console.

Over here, the different stems are usually already premixed inside PT but are not recorded yet, only automation and still accesible as seperate elements when needed and this is bussed to several masters, this works quite fast and you don't need 2 seperate mixers.

[Bokir]

Do you have a job which requires so many tracks/busses? I know that the amount of tracks can build up very quick, especially if you have all your music tracks seperate, but even then, one rig is more easy to manage then 3 rigs, and recording the stems, we just do this on the main machine also and it manages to do this.



I am totally agree with you. I too can not handle large track counts. My current record is not even close to what PT Accel can hadle with single system.

I am asking just want to leave the option open, whenever there will be other mixers who like to work with those hundreds+ tracks.

Somehow I see it like, whenever the technology has achieved what we dreamed in the past, people just want it some more and then more.