Crafting Killer Drum Tones with the Yamaha DM7

_____________________
#audiotech #eventproduction #yamahadm7 #livemusic #mixing #audio

[OmegaDerrick]

Killer video! Not to mention those drums already sound great without processing! Properly tuned drums is the key🤘🏼🤘🏼🤘🏼

[apologeticajosecarlos]

Great digital mixer. If I had the money I would buy it.

[mvilla]

We just got this board. We’re gonna use it as our monitor board

[gast]

How can the board be impressive if we need all this additional thru the river thru the woods plugins to get a good drum mix? Maybe the people who make plug ins need to make mixing consoles

[jeffk]

If that Round trip latency via USBc is actually that low, that is seriously impressive, but I seriously doubt it. I have to question the quoted times given (~1.5ms round trip). A 64 sample buffer has 1.3ms of latency on it's own. Depending on the software, you might have a buffer for both input and output, making a combined latency of 2.6ms; but let's say for the sake of this argument that your software only has one buffer at 1.3ms (64 samples at 48k). There is still latency in the USB bus itself. Every time I've measured latency on any computer, using any form of USB, it's always added 3-6ms of latency EACH way. The computer itself needs this time to schedule the USB content through the CPU among all the other CPU processes. This is a limitation of the USB interface itself... it is a SERIAL bus meaning it has to wait in line, and can send processes one at a time (oversimplification). It's not a parallel bus that can run multiple processes simultaneously, thereby reducing latency and having smaller buffers (think older firewire).

Now there's a lot of questions I have about the implementation of this USB insert path on the DM7. One, is it actually using USB over USBc or is it using thunderbolt over USBc? Thunderbolt over USBc would run faster than USB over USBc. (Keep in mind the USBc is the plug type and not the actual data protocol). If it is using USB over USBc, then is it USB2.0, 3.0, 3.1, etc? All those make a difference in speed and actual measurable latency.

I'd be curious to hook a SMAART rig up to a DM7 and pass a channel via the USB insert path to measure the actual, full, round trip latency. I'd be willing to bet that it's probably somewhere in the 12-15ms range total. However, if it's under 10ms RTT, that would be crazy impressive on it's own. A 1.5ms RTT just seems physically impossible with current technology.

Edit: So I looked up the DM7 manual. Page 13 says it is USB2.0 over USBc. That's going to put total RTT latency through a normal, modern computer right in that 12-15ms range. Still fine for FOH processing, but still too slow for anything going to monitors, if sending monitor feeds from the same desk.

[kevinmcdonough]

Very informative video, great to see and hear some detail about the channel processing of the desk.

"I'm gonna pipe in the

No, you're not. Stems are tracks that are already grouped into small subsections. If you took the drumkit, or a string section or a brass section or whatever, and premixed the individual channels together to then send them on for further processing as a group, what you then have is a Stem. Here in this video you have individual channels, not stems.

[videyo]

18 channels usb. How much is this desk again?