## Big Mixer

Device/Module Wishlist

Original topic on PlanetZ: https://forums.scopeusers.com/viewtopic.php?t=17567

####

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 3:27 pm
by garygiles
I have been doing a load of internet search on Creamware to get some history of the kit. I see there once was a mixer called Big Mixer. This look good on paper, does anyone what happened to it?
Regards
Gary

####

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 3:34 pm
by MD69
Disapeared when Scope 3 arrived
check here also:
http://www.siegelmusic.de/siegelmusicdevices.html

####

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:10 pm
by Mr Arkadin
It was also lovingly known round these parts as Bug Mixer, i'll let you draw your own conclusions. Mind you, i loved it at the time.

####

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:37 pm
by garygiles
Thanks very much for the info. They are very close to the sort of mixer I have been looing for.

####

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:53 pm
by MD69
Glad it helped you
There have been (1 or 2 years ago) a guy (Sonolive) who have/was going to publish a mixer. I don't remember what happened as I was not seeking for a mixer but some old timers there might recall this
Got it! here:
https://forums.scopeusers.com/viewtopic ... 1&f=16
Michel

####

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 5:54 pm
by garygiles
i really like the look of the big mixer
Why did they stop doing them?

####

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:11 pm
by MD69
There were some bugs issues and they replaced it by the 24/48 when they updated Scope.

####

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 8:09 pm
by hubird
and gave it a more professional GUI...

####

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:35 pm
by at0m
The STM series is superior - the didn't call the other BugMixer for nothing

####

Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:07 am
by garygiles
but these have better routing. 16 Aux's, fantstic. Yes the 24/96 are good and great for studio use, but for live use far too complicated. All I want is loads of inputs and loads of output with individual routing from each channel.
G.

####

Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:20 am
by garyb
congrats!

####

Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:32 am
by djmicron
garygiles,
you should think about the free routing capabilities of scope and not just the limitations of a single device.
You can do every sort of routing using for example the modular or the sub mixers.

####

Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:02 am
by garygiles
What do you mean by congrats!????

####

Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:04 am
by garyb
congratulations that there is a device that works for your needs. a friendly expression...

####

Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:27 am
by samplaire
@ Gary
When I first saw the BM my computer was equipped with a monitor capable of viewing 800x600. The BM was fffar too large for it and I didn't use it even a time but nowadays with modern monitors... Who knows... Modern monitor and the Big Mixer - what a duo!

####

Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:27 am
by garygiles
Well the idea works for me but there not reliable. They, I guess, are designed to work work old version of Scope software. I just prefer the inface on the Big Mixer.

####

Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:48 am
by MD69
Hi GaryGiles,
If you have an old pulsar software (v2.4 ) you should be able to find the bigmixer in the devices/mixer directory (You might need to have a pulsar key in your key file in order to run it as it is a pre scope device)
Best regards
Michel Delcant

####

Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:46 am
by at0m

> On 2005-12-09 02:27, samplaire wrote:
> When I first saw the BM my computer was equipped with a monitor capable of viewing 800x600. The BM was fffar too large for it and I didn't use it even a time but nowadays with modern monitors... Who knows... Modern monitor and the Big Mixer - what a duo!

Also, the BigMixer's panels don't 'share memory' yet, each next panel selected takes extra memory. At the time I had 384MB, and the BigMixer took 12MB per 8channel displayed, plus 8MB for a cached GUI of each Bus panel. May be overcome nowadays too eh. STM is way more proficient memory wise, it takes like 10%...
Personally I'd not go for that complex mixer and set up a couple of micro-/dynamic mixers for that purpose. To enhance some of the Routing Window, you can name those where their name is displayed on their GUI panel. Another thing worth exploring when working with lots of IO are the (search in Devices folder/manual) External Source/Destination/Effect devices, they can alias IO and double inputs of what would be otherwise grouped and named to default in hardware block representation (ADAT,ZLink,ASIO). Also a lot of cables can be avoided using the External Devices.
There's even a PinkMixer, pink version of the BM, which should be available as free download if you search a bit.
There's options, use whatever works best for you
at0m.

####

Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:17 am
by garygiles
i know the newer mixers are much more efficiant on the memory side of things. What I like about the big mixer is 1, the visual you can quickly see whats going on with a mix as you can see all the aux, op routing and Eq. 2, the number of outputs avalible on each channel. Why did they stop having 16 Aux's, did it use up to much memory?

####

Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2005 9:18 am
by symbiote
Yeah, it might be DSP-usage related. Each Aux needs its own submixing module, so for 24 mono channels that's 16 x 24, double for stereo.
That would be overkill for the smaller cards, while the STM4896 most likely wouldn't even fit on a 6 DSP card if you make most channels stereo.