Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

D

David Karol

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 10, 2011
2,087
24
38
San Francisco, CA
www.davidkarol.com
Yamaha Commercial Audio has offered us an awesome opportunity for a moderated Q&A with Marc Lopez.

Marc Lopez is the Marketing Manager for Yamaha Commercial Audio Systems and has been with the company since 1997 in various roles that include product manager, applications support and R&D. With a long history of all things digital, Marc has an extensive background in digital formats, networking and control protocols for professional audio applications. In his current position, he is responsible for leading the product management team and technical marketing initiatives such as training programs, applications engineering and technical support for U.S. and Canada across all product groups.

We're going to collect your best questions and submit them to Marc for his answers. This should be a great opportunity to learn a little more about the industry, several of our most beloved brands, and the future of manufacturing for Pro Audio.

The format is thus:

  • Post your questions here. One question per post, please.
  • Posts with the most "likes" win. If you can't like a post, ask a friend to like it for you.
  • Those questions will be forwarded to Marc Lopez and his replies will be posted for further discussion.
It's fantastic that we get to do this again with another industry giant, we hope Yamaha gets lots of interesting questions and a great response to the direction they are taking their brand.
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

Yamaha digital mixers have always been ultra-reliable, and in the first half of the last decade Yamaha was dominant in pretty much every level of mixer. Fast forward 10 years and Yamaha products are still ultra-reliable, but the market is vastly different, with other manufacturers now dominant in the low and high ends. Any comments on this market change? Will Yamaha aggressively pursue the entire spectrum once again, or do you feel that targeting certain segments is a better business decision?
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

Marc.

It's great to see Yamaha participate like this, welcome!

Yamaha has to me always meant that you are buying mixers for the long run.
It makes sense from a business perspective and from a green planet perspective, even if it costs real money NOW.

Seeing you encourage M7CL-owners to ditch perfectly good mixers to buy a CL5, and seeing you release the QL1 and QL5 that are so close to the CL1 and CL3, with a Dugan automixer, at a much lower cost, is making me feel a little more apprehensive.

Is this a sign of Yamaha products no longer being made quite as much for the long haul?

Will the newer QL/CL/RIO-models still be relevant mixers 6-7 years down the line, like one has always been able to say for models like LS9, M7CL, PM5D, even the DM 1000 and DM 2000?




Oh, and yeah, I almost forgot: A PM1D replacement coming out any time soon? 8)~:cool:~:cool:
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

David Karol said:
Yamaha Commercial Audio has offered us an awesome opportunity for a moderated Q&A with Marc Lopez.

Marc Lopez is the Marketing Manager for Yamaha Commercial Audio Systems and has been with the company since 1997 in various roles that include product manager, applications support and R&D. With a long history of all things digital, Marc has an extensive background in digital formats, networking and control protocols for professional audio applications. In his current position, he is responsible for leading the product management team and technical marketing initiatives such as training programs, applications engineering and technical support for U.S. and Canada across all product Groups.
It's fantastic that we get to do this again with another industry giant, we hope Yamaha gets lots of interesting questions and a great response to the direction they are taking their brand.
Click to expand...


This is Marc, BTW, in an interview from 2010, although they did misspell his name:

2010 WFX - Interview Mark Lopez - Yamaha - YouTube
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

Yamaha has had both products with DSP/control in the surface: M7CL-ES, CL series, new QL series, etc., as well as a couple that used the remote-brain model: PM1D, DSP5D, DME. With digital networking starting to mature a little more, how do you see this evolving and what do you consider the optimal placement of certain components?

I.e., a current Yamaha system (please correct me if I'm wrong as I've not personally used CL-series and Rio), has the following general topology: Rio boxes perform analog pre-amp, A/D, D/A and publish to Dante. Some device "owns" the analog pre-amp gain. Other devices can subscribe to certain Dante channels, perform processing, and return the results to Rio boxes.

Do you believe this model is the end-goal, or is this a stepping stone to some different model - end devices such as microphones and speakers talking Dante directly, some mechanism of solving the shared pre-amp gain problem, etc.?
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

One criticism of digital audio is the latency that tends to accumulate. A distributed network where input channels are published and multiple devices can get the first copy - parallel processing of different systems - FOH, monitor world, broadcast - helps a bit, but there usually are still multiple devices in a chain - i.e. digital wireless mic -> digital snake -> mixer -> future digital IEM system. Is this being addressed in any way - different processing algorithms, higher sample rates, etc.?
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

Yamaha recently acquired Line-6. As a user of a number of Line6 wireless microphones, I both love them and hate them. When they work, they sound absolutely as good as a wire, however in my experience, the congested wifi band and the short wavelength of the 2.4Ghz signal seem to create occasional interference challenges that I haven't been able to fully solve.

Does Yamaha intend to continue in the wireless business, and if so, is there any hope that future wireless products will work better?
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

TJ Cornish said:
Does Yamaha intend to continue in the wireless business, and if so, is there any hope that future wireless products will work better?
Click to expand...

Yamaha also just acquired Revolabs which is another wireless company, albeit geared towards corporate meetings and presentations. Will we see a Yamaha branded wireless unit in the future or are they simply becoming part of Yamaha's diverse portfolio?
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

Hi Everyone,

Thank you for the warm welcome. Sorry for my late entry into the thread. I appreciate this opportunity from the moderators for this Q&A thread. I hope I can provide insightful answers to the questions being asked.

Yamaha always intends to be accessible to our customers - I hope this is well-demonstrated through our training programs, phone support, availability at trade shows, our Audioversity events, etc. I'm very happy to have the opportunity to communicate through yet another medium.

That said, I'll start answering some questions.

TJ Cornish said:
Yamaha digital mixers have always been ultra-reliable, and in the first half of the last decade Yamaha was dominant in pretty much every level of mixer. Fast forward 10 years and Yamaha products are still ultra-reliable, but the market is vastly different, with other manufacturers now dominant in the low and high ends. Any comments on this market change?
Click to expand...

Yamaha has a long history in the digital mixer business (27 years now!). While we felt we had some early advantages due to having an in-house DSP development group, we had anticipated many years ago that there would be several great options for digital mixing sooner than later. Our biggest challenge 10 years ago was more about getting a general acceptance of using a digital mixing platform vs. an analog desk. Along the way to achieve that goal, we built our company with the resources to provide a high level of support and consistent training programs. We feel that along with our reliability, build quality, and choice of tools included in the mixing tool belt, that Yamaha's support and training is an often over-looked feature of the product. And still today, the need for strong manufacturer support has not changed. So to directly address your question about the market change, we simply perceive today's challenges as a different challenge than yesterday's. But we are glad that the first conversation with customers is not about why a digital mixer may be a better tool for them than an analog console.

TJ Cornish said:
Will Yamaha aggressively pursue the entire spectrum once again, or do you feel that targeting certain segments is a better business decision?
Click to expand...

Along with our recent offerings, we will be pursuing the entire spectrum again.
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

Welcome Marc and I thank you for embracing an interactive medium (forum). Some here would like to collect the homework and have you grade and return it next week, really? I know my question will take some digging and careful response but I have patience.
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

kristianjohnsen said:
Marc.

It's great to see Yamaha participate like this, welcome!

Yamaha has to me always meant that you are buying mixers for the long run.
It makes sense from a business perspective and from a green planet perspective, even if it costs real money NOW.

Seeing you encourage M7CL-owners to ditch perfectly good mixers to buy a CL5, and seeing you release the QL1 and QL5 that are so close to the CL1 and CL3, with a Dugan automixer, at a much lower cost, is making me feel a little more apprehensive.

Is this a sign of Yamaha products no longer being made quite as much for the long haul?

Will the newer QL/CL/RIO-models still be relevant mixers 6-7 years down the line, like one has always been able to say for models like LS9, M7CL, PM5D, even the DM 1000 and DM 2000?
Click to expand...

Hi Kristian,

Thank you for the warm welcome.

Yamaha products will continue to be built for longevity. Reliability and build-quality are a fundamental philosophy for us. The digital mixers are still built in Japan to ensure a high level of manufacturing quality. Our engineering team does an outstanding job choosing robust power supplies, designing stable power distribution as well as performing accelerated environmental tests. There is some interesting reading on our website about this: Quality | About | Yamaha

We had a really great succession with PM1D (2001), DM2000 (2002), DM1000 (2003), PM5D (2004), M7CL (2005), and LS9 (2006). The only model that has been discontinued is PM1D due to a parts availability issue. We had to unexpectedly discontinue it in order to fulfill the 7-year post-discontinuation parts requirement. The other models are still very active in the industry, so we have no intention to discontinue them at this time. We also intend to keep QL/CL/R-Series (Rio units) around as long as the industry finds them useful and relevant. For some users, our product cycles are too long and they are urging us to refresh more frequently. Others are happy with the long lifespans of our products. In order to remain competitive, we've had to find a balance.

Regarding the perception that QL is closely featured to CL, differentiating between the two brothers may not easily be discerned from reading the brochures outside of the simple I/O and features comparison. CL has CentraLogic, Touch-and-Turn and Selected Channel operation, while QL has Touch-and Turn and Selected Channel. CL also has a Channel Encoder (inherited from PM5D), independent fader banks, expanded Selected Channel controls, external back up power supply capability, an additional MY-card slot and a hardware meterbridge. The additional hardware allows CL more flexibility in terms of both operation and expandability while still sharing a common DNA with QL that includes build quality, sound quality and built-in Dante networking. CL and QL will continue to evolve with software upgrades, but there will be some features that will be unique to CL because it has the expanded hardware and control. (By the way, CL will gain the Dugan Automixer in a software upgrade later this year, but not in V2 which is coming out later this spring). We're very proud of the newest member to our digital mixer family. As we start delivering units in the next few weeks, you will be able to easily see what differentiates these siblings when you get your hands on one.

kristianjohnsen said:
Oh, and yeah, I almost forgot: A PM1D replacement coming out any time soon? 8)~:cool:~:cool:
Click to expand...

I get asked this question a lot. :)~:)~:smile: The truthful answer is that we will release it when it is done. I am not trying to be facetious with this answer, but we feel strongly about not releasing a product until it is ready. Reliability, stability and quality are an absolute necessity for a high-end mixing product. We will not disappoint.
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

TJ Cornish said:
Yamaha has had both products with DSP/control in the surface: M7CL-ES, CL series, new QL series, etc., as well as a couple that used the remote-brain model: PM1D, DSP5D, DME. With digital networking starting to mature a little more, how do you see this evolving and what do you consider the optimal placement of certain components?

I.e., a current Yamaha system (please correct me if I'm wrong as I've not personally used CL-series and Rio), has the following general topology: Rio boxes perform analog pre-amp, A/D, D/A and publish to Dante. Some device "owns" the analog pre-amp gain. Other devices can subscribe to certain Dante channels, perform processing, and return the results to Rio boxes.
Click to expand...

I don't believe there is an optimal "one-size fits all" approach to a digital mixing system. Different applications/production levels/technical requirements have different needs. Yamaha historically has had three main classifications of mixing systems - modular (PM1D), remote I/O (CL, M7CL-ES) and all-in-one (PM5D, M7CL, LS9). There are some models that fit in more than one category - for example the new QL is an all-in-one that offers users to start with an analog snake and then progress to a network remote I/O system - or the option use both onboard and remote I/O.

With a modular system, the benefits are flexibility in topology or scale, module redundancy, potential for upgrades on certain components, etc. Modularity will typically result in a higher cost for the system, and flexibility typically results in complexity (requiring a higher skilled system tech/designer). A modular system will need to be specified and built for an particular application and decisions need to be made on how it will be packaged for deployment. System maintenance and troubleshooting becomes more complex since you have to now account for the integrity of the interconnect between the individual modules.

With a remote I/O system, cost goes down, flexibility of a modular system is somewhat reduced but you have the option for I/O placement that typically results in cost/efficiency/sound quality improvements (shorter analog runs, lighter truck pack, etc.). It's easier to specify/design a system than a modular system since you are essentially just deciding on how much I/O and where to place it.

An all-in-one system will be the least expensive of the three to produce (manufacturing efficiencies, SKU management, engineering time, etc). Less variables in the system means simpler to specify and package, and quicker to deploy and set up.

It may be very difficult to create a modular system that is inexpensive, although it is quite possible to produce a high-end all-in-one system, and I would argue whether that level of application would actually want the reduced flexibility.

TJ Cornish said:
I.e., a current Yamaha system (please correct me if I'm wrong as I've not personally used CL-series and Rio), has the following general topology: Rio boxes perform analog pre-amp, A/D, D/A and publish to Dante. Some device "owns" the analog pre-amp gain. Other devices can subscribe to certain Dante channels, perform processing, and return the results to Rio boxes.
Click to expand...
This is mostly correct - Up to 4 consoles on the network can have control of the pre-amp by default (nobody "owns" the preamp gain). This is typically not the best way to set up multiple consoles sharing the preamp. We have a very effective Gain Compensation system for shared I/O. For a good explanation of it, see these videos:

Yamaha CL Series Console: Head Amp Sharing with Gain Compensation

Yamaha CL Series Console: Head Amp Sharing with Gain Compensation: Practical Application

TJ Cornish said:
Do you believe this model is the end-goal, or is this a stepping stone to some different model - end devices such as microphones and speakers talking Dante directly, some mechanism of solving the shared pre-amp gain problem, etc.?
Click to expand...
This model seems to suit the current trends because of the wide selection of microphones available. Shure makes the ULX-D wireless receiver with Dante, and I can certainly imagine a Dante-based POE microphone or a powered speaker with a Dante port.
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

TJ Cornish said:
One criticism of digital audio is the latency that tends to accumulate. A distributed network where input channels are published and multiple devices can get the first copy - parallel processing of different systems - FOH, monitor world, broadcast - helps a bit, but there usually are still multiple devices in a chain - i.e. digital wireless mic -> digital snake -> mixer -> future digital IEM system. Is this being addressed in any way - different processing algorithms, higher sample rates, etc.?
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct about latency accumulation in digital devices and network transports. Digital processing just takes a certain amount of time, and typically the worst offenders are the A/D and D/A convertors because they require a relatively long time to achieve quality oversampling. There are many opinions about maximum acceptable latency through a system, and Yamaha's target is to keep latency Analog In to Analog Out of a mixer product to be less than 3ms - primarily for monitor mix applications.

So there are several ways to reduce latency, and you pointed out two - more efficient algorithms and higher sampling rates. Others we are always investigating are more efficient/higher power DSP, more efficient A/D and D/A conversion. One other thing that will improve latency is a smart network design. If there are too many hops on and off of a network for an audio path, latency will increase - i.e. stage box->network>input channel->insert out on network->insert device to network and back to mixer->mix channel insert out to network->insert device to network and back to mixer->mixer to network stagebox/amp (this is a rather extreme example, but you get the point…)

Also in particular for our Dante Products, a good understanding of how network topology corresponds to latency will allow you to set your latency lower than our default value of 1ms (which is a very "safe" latency value for Dante)
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

TJ Cornish said:
Yamaha recently acquired Line-6. As a user of a number of Line6 wireless microphones, I both love them and hate them. When they work, they sound absolutely as good as a wire, however in my experience, the congested wifi band and the short wavelength of the 2.4Ghz signal seem to create occasional interference challenges that I haven't been able to fully solve.

Does Yamaha intend to continue in the wireless business, and if so, is there any hope that future wireless products will work better?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, TJ, but I cannot answer this. Indeed Line 6 was recently acquired by Yamaha, but they are a separate wholly-owned subsidiary that will continue to run autonomously, so I am not the correct person to answer your questions. As seen with other Yamaha acquisitions, there may be future product that benefits from our collaboration.
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

Hi Marc. Thanks for your answers thus far. I have a personal pet peeve about a number of current Yamaha products - non-folding screens on the M7, CL-series, and QL series are very tall. While this presents a nice screen angle in use, it adds a tremendous amount of volume to the road case. We all appreciate the smaller size of the CL series compared to hulks like the 5D, but it would be nice if there was a way to not have to have a road case twice as tall as it otherwise would need to be except for the steep screen.

Before anyone jumps on me, yes, I understand that in many situations this isn't a factor and there may be cost and/or reliability reasons to make the screen fixed.
 
Re: Marc Lopez of Yamaha Commercial Audio Q&A

Hi Marc,

I am curious about the preamp design. With the QL sharing some of the features of the CL family, are the preamps similar? The QL series offers improved rack processing, so I am curious about any other sonic improvements as this product is clearly not a "race to the bottom" level mixer.

Also, kudos to Yamaha for introducing a product, with a manual and actual specs online and actually shipping the product AHEAD of the announced date!
 
Top Bottom