Ways to use the new features.

[RoadRanger]

It looks like you can put the output of a subgroup to an fx so the proper way to run fx on something not directly routed to the L&R is to NOT have the individual channels that are in that group turned up in the fx but to turn up the subgroup in the fx so that the fx "tracks" the subgroup's master.

[Wynnd]

I was thinking the same thing, but need to wait until a rehearsal to test it out in action.

[Rdmitch]

I set up a scene using vca's instead of subgroups and will try to make a comparison.
I think I'm understanding it better as it more relates to how the fx are handled during the fade.
I was more concerned that if the VCA fade dropped the entire input signal it would also decrease
The monitor sends which I need to avoid.  I'll know how it functions better after I test it tomorrow.

[Wynnd]

If I understand correctly, Pre-fader monitor sends should be unaffected.  Post-fader monitor sends will go down with the VCA controlling the channel fader.  Just one more thing to test.  (My mixer and PA is in storage and it's too cold to be testing there.) 

[lightguy48]

The difference between VCA's and Subgroups are the VCA's are nothing more than remotely controlling the channel faders - the advantage being as you lower the VCA the send to post-fed auxes are also lowered, so the effects sends remain with the proper ratio to the main fader's level.

A subgroup is actually passing audio through it. This has the ability to assign a compressor to the subgroup so that as an example if all of the drums went through the subgroup together the compressor worked on all of the audio passing through that subgroup equally.  The downside to a subgroup is if you mute or turn the subgroup all the way down the feeds/levels going to the post-fader auxes continue to feed so if you had as an example a plate reverb on the drums that level would remain unchanged.  The fix?  Make sure that same effect is not feeding the LR, make it feed to the sub group so it's controlled by the subgroup fader as well.

[RoadRanger]

Make sure that same effect is not feeding the LR, make it feed to the sub group so it's controlled by the subgroup fader as well.

Not terribly practical when we only have one reverb .

[Topsøe]

I'm still trying to wrap my head around the differences from VCA to subgroups.
The videos are not real clear, but it seems like the subgroup master lowers volume only so
Any residual fx are still present. On a vca group it's like turning the trim/gain down so anything
On the channel including fx get reduced.   Is that the difference ,or am I realing missing something
Else?

A VCA Group fader controls the channel fader(s) so it affects the signal like if you turned the fader up/down and there is no signal flowing through a VCA it is only a remote control, there is no change in routing of the signal.

A Audio Group is summing the signal (like a master) and you can proces the audio ie compressor or eq , the signal is flowing through the group and has to be routed to the master , if you want to you can route a channel to both group and master and compres the group ie parallel compression

[lightguy48]

Not terribly practical when we only have one reverb .

I'm not sure I follow your statement? If you had the drums feeding a plate reverb you could put the drums and the reverb into a sub group.

Or the delay and vocals into a sub group.

I agree a third reverb would be nice, one for drums, another for vocals or at least make the delay switchable so you have two reverbs and no delay. At least with the delay switchable you could have reverb for songs that need them and delay for the effect when you need it and just switch to it.

Just because we don't currently have 3 or 4 effects doesn't make the use of the subgroup less functional.

[Wynnd]

On most mixers, the internal effects go straight to the output.  Mackie gave us tools that allow greater choices.  And after some consideration, the VCAs aren't as important as they might be on some mixers.  I'm pretty sure that I'll be using them all.  (I missed groups on my MixWiz.  Didn't expect them to show up on the DL)

[RoadRanger]

I only used groups on my old 1608 to do weird things like run an external fx fed back into an aux input. On the MixWiz I never missed them at all. I can see them becoming useful on a larger mixer but for a measly 16 channels not-so-much . As you raise and lower the drum group (for instance) the individual mics get out-of-balance as the direct sound doesn't change - you might even have the snare off at lower volumes for instance.

[Rdmitch]

Running the same song from an iPod thru 2 channels with reverb and delay turned on I tried to see if there was any noticible difference.  Routed to subgroup 1 and to vca1 I noticed no difference at all.
When the fader (either vca 1 or subgroup 1) were reduced the fx dropped equally.

While there may be other subtle differences, it appears for my purpose either would work fine.
Maybe it's because Mackie set up the option for post fade EQ .

[sam.spoons]

if the fx send is post fade the DCA will affect both the dry and fx equally (assuming the fx master send or return is NOT in the DCA). If the fx is returned to the same group as the dry channel the group fader will also affect both equally as the group fader is downstream of both the channel fader and the fx return. Each, basically, is achieving the same effect but at different places in the signal path. There would be subtle differences with dynamics processors if used as send fx but as they are usually used insert/pre fade anyway it should not be an issue.

[WK154]

Sam your X32 training is starting to show, but you are exactly right calling Mackie's "VCA"  a DCA cause that's what it is. These are no more "voltage control amplifiers" than the man in the moon.  Johnny come lately Mackie haven't earned the right to change 20 yrs. of audio technology to suit their marketing needs. If someone is interested here is a history of VCA's from some of the early developers.
  http://www.thatcorp.com/History_of_VCAs.shtml     Does any of this remotely resemble what Mackie implemented??
They could also adopt Midas's VCA definition " Variable Control Association". Since VCA is not in Mackie's glossary maybe they're not sure what they've done. One thing they haven't done is update the block diagram on the DL1608, DL806 to reflect MF 3.0 changes. My advise to anyone here commenting on what is and isn't, RTFM at least twice. Of course it would help  if the info was correct. Don't get me wrong this manual is leaps and bounds above the prior doc's such as the 1604 series. Interesting is the total lack of any mention of the well debated Channel Trim control and recall. I guess it's not important to them. I may have to agree with them on this but it should still be in the manual explaining it's intended use. I won't be getting to this for at least another 2 weeks because of tests that require MF 2.1.1. so all my info on MF 3.0 is from the manual and posts here.

[robbocurry]

Digital trim addressed on page 30 of the reference guide. Didn't need to RTFM to find that out.
Does it REALLY matter if it's called a DCA or VCA in this device?
We get the idea what it's trying to achieve, no "X32 training" necessary.

Does Mackie use VCA terminology because of the manual gain pots on the DL?
Has Mackie stated what VCA stands for in this product? Genuine question, I'm too busy actually using the mixer to "RTFM" twice.
Very costless accessory?
Virtual control amp?
Variable cost analysis?
Very contracted anus?
Vicious critical attack?
Verbal contract applies?
Voltage controlled amp?

Please, enough of the nit-picking!

[sam.spoons]

No I don't suppose it really does matter what it's called 

I called it a DCA 'cos that's what it is (X32 training aside WK )

Very contracted anus?

ROTFL