Issue link: https://digital.copcomm.com/i/1277927
C A S Q U A R T E R L Y I S U M M E R 2 0 2 0 27 Devendra Cleary, CAS — Dante FOH Rig. — Preliminary Earwig Module Analog to earwig CAT6 To Sound Cart Dante Flow Analog Wireless Designer Main FOH Module Arrow Key PSC Peli Battery Lectrosonics IFB T4 Transmitters Shure ANI4OUT Dante Interface PSC Triple Play Lectrosonics DSQD with Dante Lectrosonics DSQD with Dante Lectrosonics DSQD with Dante Comtek BST-25s for Invisity Earwigs CONCLUSION My objective was to offer fair and balanced arguments for both sides of both issues. However, I can't help but formulate a personal preference, as well as realistic expectations for both. Would it be awesome to ditch the wireless talent lavs for boom only? For sure! Is it realistic and practical? No. Would it take tools away from the production sound mixer and have unintended consequences? Yes. Are creating workstations that allow for remoting the RF portion of our tools a good idea? Absolutely! Would keeping our workstations centralized still give us a perfectly fine abundance of physical distancing as well? Completely! But the option should remain in the hands of the practitioner. And, though adapting to change is challenging, it may not hurt to formalize a plan for splitting your production sound mixing workstation with a "Front of House" rig. Just keep all your options in front of you flexible and know you have the choice. I hope everyone gets back to work in the safest way possible. Practitioners who are reading this exist in a profession that requires them to be natural and trained problem solvers. There's no obstacle we can't overcome with a combination of common sense, logic, technology, and ingenuity. My preliminary Dante "Front of House" rig.