Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

D

Declan Slater

Sophomore
Aug 20, 2011
188
0
16
Looks interesting, 128 flexible inputs or outputs (you choose), 2 card slots (madi, waves, dante...), ipad/windows pc apps/software, works with existing reac snakeheads & M-48's. Great to see some nice DCA "spill" features and custom layers. Proposed ship is Feb, 2015.

Even has a nice ipad shelf built in... :)

Price point is TBA... of course...
 
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

Glenn Adams said:
24 bit?

nevermind
Click to expand...

It's 24/96kHz from in to out. All of their stage boxes are 96kHz. It's going to ship with more IO than a Soundcraft VI3000 and be less moo-lah. I think prelim MAP for two 24x16 stage boxes and the M5000 is going to be around $25k.
 
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

It looks good, there are recognisable elements from other parts of the RSS systems so hopefully it'll work out of the gate. I think it'll be a hard sell though, if Soundcraft or Midas had brought something like this out there probably would be several 10s of replys on this thread already, if they get the thing to work with minimal software or hard ware issues (going by past experience they should) I hope it brings them into the fold so to speak as some of their stuff is quite clever and in my experience very reliable but it always feels marginalised because Roland has struggled to establish themselves in the pro audio world I hope it's a success for them as they have tried pretty hard over the last decade or so.G
 
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

Brent Handy said:
It's 24/96kHz from in to out. All of their stage boxes are 96kHz. It's going to ship with more IO than a Soundcraft VI3000 and be less moo-lah. I think prelim MAP for two 24x16 stage boxes and the M5000 is going to be around $25k.
Click to expand...
It sure has some impressive features. Mid sized Yam and Midas consoles will have some competition.
 
Last edited:
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

Glenn Adams said:
It sure has some impressive features. Yam and mid Midas will have some competition.
Click to expand...

It's interesting to see that can do 96K and 48K also. That should really make for some interesting connection options, linking into other manufacturers equipment.

I heard that one system package they are considering, will have (2) S-2416 snake heads and the console for less than a CL5 (without it's extra $15K digital snake)...
 
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

I'd like to see the ability to lose graphics and gain FX.

Digico's ability to use many dynamic is hard to beat. Hopefully Roland will have another look.

31 band RTA? My phone has FFT.
 
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

This looks like a pretty competitive product, certainly in the features department. Price will determine how that translates though.

It certainly seems that they have really taken onboard the comments of users of the earlier 'M' consoles.

Unfortunately, the market is a tough one. And personally, I really can't be bothered with another interface standard. I know it will support Dante and MADI, but Roland's stageboxes are all REAC. And that is a bit dull.

I wish console manufacturers would pick an accepted standard. Either you want a true 'routerless' network standard, in which case its Dante/AES67/AVB (which will all amalgamate eventually), or you want a routed point-to-point protocol, in which case just go with MADI.
 
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

Chris Johnson said:
T
Unfortunately, the market is a tough one. And personally, I really can't be bothered with another interface standard. I know it will support Dante and MADI, but Roland's stageboxes are all REAC. And that is a bit dull.
Click to expand...

I don't understand what dull means. Does that mean reliable? If so, I agree. The fact Roland hasn't had to change anything related to REAC says a bunch.
 
Last edited:
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

Chris Johnson said:
I wish console manufacturers would pick an accepted standard. Either you want a true 'routerless' network standard, in which case its Dante/AES67/AVB (which will all amalgamate eventually), or you want a routed point-to-point protocol, in which case just go with MADI.
Click to expand...

Technically, AVB and MADI are ratified standards. Dante is not a standard. There will never be one protocol or one standard accepted by all, because humans like to one-up each other and there is no money in one standard fits all. Just developing the standard is a political nightmare (AVB).
 
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

Advertised "Mix-Minus" and 5.1 panning, so looks great for broadcasting...

I worked a lot with M's so finally they did Scribble Strips and divided faders to banks
 
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

Brent Handy said:
I don't understand what dull means. Does that mean reliable? If so, I agree. The fact Roland hasn't had to change anything related to REAC says a bunch.
Click to expand...

Well, it sort of does. Its a funny world we live in today where we consider that REAC is special because when it was released it worked properly...

I personally feel that the live sound world, completely unlike the broadcast world, suffers from a somewhat crazy mess of different digital transmission standards. Most of these exist purely as a way to protect sales of infrastructure elements, it seems.
Props to SSL for releasing a console that does all the 'mod cons' (96k, high channel counts down a single cable, etc...) but uses MADI and CWDM to do it.

REAC works fine, and does the job. But it offers no redundancy, and very low channel counts compared to other available, more common formats.

This is all IMO of course, I'll be getting a demo :)
 
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

Chris Johnson said:
Well, it sort of does. Its a funny world we live in today where we consider that REAC is special because when it was released it worked properly...

I personally feel that the live sound world, completely unlike the broadcast world, suffers from a somewhat crazy mess of different digital transmission standards. Most of these exist purely as a way to protect sales of infrastructure elements, it seems.
Props to SSL for releasing a console that does all the 'mod cons' (96k, high channel counts down a single cable, etc...) but uses MADI and CWDM to do it.

REAC works fine, and does the job. But it offers no redundancy, and very low channel counts compared to other available, more common formats.

This is all IMO of course, I'll be getting a demo :)
Click to expand...
Protectionism is one of those things that to a degree is a good thing - companies need to make money to stay in business and it took an investment to invent a new protocol, but too much of a good thing means that someone else will take over. There are a million examples of this - Betamax vs VHS, Sony Memory Stick vs. anything else, Cisco IP phone protocols vs. SIP, etc. Without cheap (and many said inferior) Ethernet, we wouldn't have the internet of today.

The production world is an interesting microcosm of the broader world. There are still a lot of proprietary devices that IMO are too expensive relative to consumer technology - sound consoles and lighting consoles being two examples. We are still stumbling around in areas that other industries have mastered simply due to the tiny size of the production industry. We will eventually get to the "Ethernet" of audio and my crystal ball says it will be a rev 2.0 of AVB/Dante that includes the current advantages but lowers the technical bar of entry. Until then, the choice seems to be a reliable but proprietary and usually simplistic system like REAC, A&H's DSnake or A-Net, or AES-50, or a powerful but expensive and complicated system like Dante.

Back in the day, my keyboard setup was almost exclusively Roland, and they had many other really innovative products like their hard disk recorders, and as far as I'm aware, the first mixing board with a digital snake in their VM-7200 system (circa 1999-2000). They've had a very Japanese approach to their products - lots of functions, but lots of menus. In some ways, Yamaha products have been in the same boat. It will be interesting to see how well they've learned from others with this product - what the price point will be, and how user-friendly. I found the previous M-480 line to be cool, but WAY too expensive for what it was.
 
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

I've never been a big Roland mixer fan, but this actually looks cool. We asked to have one Feb or so (first boat over) to spend time with.

It still has some of that Yamaha feel from what we talked about today with rep, but a lot better than the old M480 and down series.
 
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

There is no mention of effects. I did not notice any on all the media presented so far. Sure, a Waves port but nothing internal?
 
Re: Roland O.R.C.H.A Console (M-5000) discussion

Caleb Dick said:
It still has some of that Yamaha feel from what we talked about today with rep, but a lot better than the old M480 and down series.
Click to expand...

As a Yamaha console owner and not so much employee (which I am) I'm curious what this means?

Anyway - I got to see it in Copenhagen yesterday. If, for some reason, I had to switch to something else, I would give this one a good hard look. Seems like a good effort. Only, for me truck space saving is a very high priority, and in the same way the CL-consoles waste some space due to their shape, this console wastes a lot! Smaller than I thought from the pictures, though.

Glenn: 8 internal stereo FX as far as I understand.
 
Top Bottom