Round table: Rolling the dice with AV investments

Round table: Rolling the dice with innovation

Major projects come with high stakes. Whether it’s painfully tight timelines or clients expecting flawless execution, this round table brings together experts from the field to explore how best to maximise the long-term value of AV investments

The panel

• Adam Corrie, Co-founder & CEO, Sixty Frames

• Kyle Slaugh, Lighting and video department manager, Sound Image

• Markus Beyr, CEO, Attraktion!

Adam Corrie, Co-founder & CEO, Sixty Frames

Kyle Slaugh, Lighting and video department manager, Sound Image

Markus Beyr, CEO, Attraktion!

When you’re planning a large-scale AV installation or live show, what are the biggest risk factors – and how do you mitigate them early in the project?

Kyle Slaugh The biggest risk factor in large-scale AV installations and live shows is time, because the event has a hard start and most failures happen when there isn’t enough time to build, test and troubleshoot before the show. Late load-ins, delayed power/rigging, missing info and last-minute changes don’t just compress the schedule – they eliminate the buffer that prevents small issues from becoming public failures.

The best way to mitigate this early is to design solutions that can be built during prep, not with on-site invention. Build a solution that can be assembled, tested and labelled in advance: pre-configured racks, pre-programmed show files, standardised cable looms, redundant signal paths and verified playback/streaming templates. Then deploy on site as a controlled ‘connect and validate’ process instead of a full build.

Early mitigation also includes locking scope and content deadlines, creating clear patch documentation and signal flow, planning backups and scheduling non-negotiable rehearsal/line check time.

Time is the root risk, and the way to beat it is to engineer a system you can prepare, test and prove long before you roll into the venue.

Adam Corrie Risk is present from early in the design stages, and that typically begins with the scope. We often suggest a discovery phase or exercise to ensure all stakeholders have been consulted and everyone has a consistent understanding of the project requirements. On completion of a detailed design, a clear brief, schedule of works, timeline and bill of materials form the bulk of the contract.

During production, further risk can arise in the form of compatibility and interoperability gaps – particularly with larger and more complex audio-visual systems – although these are usually mitigated by comprehensive off-site testing or commissioning.

We try to stay agnostic when it comes to manufacturers, so that we can select substitutes for equipment that suddenly becomes unavailable for whatever reason. Exceptionally long lead times created problems for many audio-visual integrators after the Covid-19 pandemic and, prior to that, the emergence of cryptocurrencies created shortages of GPUs because they were needed for blockchain mining. Stock levels for AV hardware have largely returned to normal over the past few years. However, we are now seeing shortages of volatile memory owing to enormous demand from new AI data centres, which are anticipated to impact the cost and availability of equipment across the AV industry.

How do you evaluate whether emerging technologies are reliable enough for mission-critical environments?

Markus Beyr Testing is key, but you cannot test for an extended period without losing the innovative edge; you have to embrace a degree of risk. The key is to approach risks strategically: being prepared to step in and replace critical components at your own expense if they prove unreliable or to iterate and refine the solution until it meets the required standard of reliability.

Early-stage prototyping and phased rollouts can help identify weaknesses before full deployment, while strong supplier relationships ensure rapid support and replacements. Ultimately, building flexibility into both your project plan and technical architecture lets you respond swiftly to unforeseen challenges, so the project remains on track and the final installation delivers lasting value.

Adam Corrie Datasheets are great, but there’s no substitute for thorough R&D and getting hands-on with equipment. Developing good relationships with manufacturers, distributors and resellers can often open up access to product roadmaps, engineering samples and loan equipment for testing.

A proof-of-concept early on that rules out or confirms the potential suitability of a particular device can avoid painful discoveries later down the line. As installation is hugely beneficial and often highlights previously unknown or unknowable characteristics – things like real-world performance when it comes to heat dissipation and noise output.

"Time is the root risk, and the way to beat it is to engineer a system you can prepare, test and prove long before you roll into the venue"

A methodical approach to soak testing, both before installation and during final commissioning, is essential for any mission-critical deployment. We identify as many edge case scenarios as we can imagine, push the system to failure and document outcomes so that we can determine what is an acceptable limitation of the system versus what needs improving. It is a process that also feeds into acceptance testing, training and documentation.

Kyle Slaugh We stress test new tech during show prep as close to real-world conditions as possible: full signal load, long runtimes, power/network variability and failure scenarios. We are looking for stability over time, not just ‘it works once’.

But the truth is that the real test is always a real event, so we never make new technology the centre of the design on the first attempt. We introduce it as an additional experience to the overall design: in a non-critical role or with a proven fallback that is ready to take over should it fail. If it performs consistently in the field across multiple events, only then do we promote it to a primary design element and create a piece centre around the new technology.

What are the most overlooked logistical risks during installation?

Kyle Slaugh Environmental and venue changes are the most overlooked logistical risk because they can change everything – even when the technical plan is solid. Temperature, humidity, wind, dust, uneven power, limited rigging points, load-in paths or noise restrictions can all impact performance and safety. For outdoor or temporary installs, weather and ground conditions can force last-minute redesigns of cable runs, rigging and equipment placement.

Just as critical, and too often underestimated, are venue changes and new venue rules. Updated venue policies, load-in requirements, union labour restrictions, temporary structures or new limits on tape, cable routing and hanging points can create major on-site roadblocks. These issues don’t show up in a drawing, they show up during load-in, when time is already tight.

Mitigation starts early: detailed site surveys, building flexible cable and rigging plans, confirming venue rules in writing, using proper cable protection and planning alternate equipment locations and power strategies.

Markus Beyr It will widely differ depending on the specific venue. Humidity presents a significant risk in environments such as caves, where high humidity levels are more common. When mounting equipment on moving parts such as motion platforms, it is essential to take into account the equipment’s potential ability to absorb dynamic forces.

Adam Corrie In my experience, most installation risks come down to a poorly written or inadequate set of RAMS (Risk Assessment Method Statements) for the job, or a crew not taking the time to study them.

I spent several years working in art and design higher education, where both staff and students are using tools and equipment in workshops or show installations. Safe systems of work are essential in these demanding environments, where novice users are encouraged to learn new skills in a short space of time. Many of the RAMS I use to this day evolved from those originally written for university technical areas.

In live events, PPE is the norm – crew members expect to wear steel toes and high-visibility workwear for the duration of the job. Hard hats typically only come out if they are absolutely required (or the moment another crew member drops something from a height!)

"We stress test new tech during show prep as close to real-world conditions as possible. We’re looking for stability over time, not just ‘it works once’ "

For permanent installations, the culture around PPE can be challenging beyond the first fix. Once construction has concluded and the site has been handed over by the main contractor, audio-visual installation crews tend to take a more relaxed approach to safety and so enforcement can come across as pedantic.

Training and certification are also fundamental elements in reducing risk and can be mutually beneficial in terms of staff development: some of these include PASMA for erecting scaffold towers, IPAF for operating MEWPs and IOSH or NEBOSH for those who are particularly keen on health and safety as a discipline. Courses that cover PUWER 98 are hugely useful if the job requires any on-site or workshop fabrication involving power tools.

How do you educate clients about the risks of cutting corners?

Markus Beyr My favourite phrase for clients is ‘grass doesn’t grow faster if you pull it’. It serves as a straightforward reminder they can easily refer to when they need reassurance or guidance.

Kyle Slaugh We educate clients about the risks of cutting corners by translating technical shortcuts into real-world outcomes they care about: reliability, audience experience and cost. Instead of saying ‘this is best practice’, we explain what changes when a corner is cut, what fails first, how visible it will be and how hard (or expensive) it is to fix on site.

We typically walk clients through specific scenarios. We frame it as a risk trade-off: cutting corners might lower upfront costs, but it can increase the likelihood of delays, show-impacting failures, safety issues and last-minute labour or rental expenses.

Adam Corrie We tend to have very open conversations with clients about the value engineering process. As early as possible, we normalise discourse around trade-offs between cost, performance and availability, and we find this manages expectations most effectively.

Our design process also tends to separate out ‘must haves’ from ‘nice to haves’, allowing us to identify a minimum viable product we can validate any VE exercise against.

"Cutting corners might lower upfront costs, but it can increase the likelihood of delays, show-impacting failures, safety issues and last-minute labour or rental expenses"

It is best to avoid pretending that any technology is indestructible. We share our past experiences, both good and bad, and talk frankly about critical spares, MTBF, warranty options, repair processes, outages and system recovery scenarios.

We often encourage clients to speak to other organisations that operate similar systems. These candid conversations are useful for everyone – understanding what worked well and what didn’t, which bits they would do differently if they were starting again from scratch.

A lot of our work is centred around the design and build of virtual production or XR studios, where we are pointing a camera at an LED volume.

The volume is typically the big-ticket item in the project and often becomes the focus for making cost savings. The performance of an LED to the naked eye versus how it behaves on camera can vary wildly, so this has become one area where we work with manufacturers and strategic partners in order to arrange comparative evaluation tests for clients to assess performance for themselves.

How can AV vendors better support integrators and users to meaningfully reduce project uncertainty?

Adam Corrie We’re lucky that many of our audio-visual vendors already have comprehensive programmes of training days, product demonstrations and social events, and are exhibiting at big industry trade shows like ISE and IBC. These are often collaborative events that combine technologies from several manufacturers. We encourage our clients to attend too, as being involved in joint discussions with vendors and their integrators can help alleviate anxieties for the client – knowing that multiple parties are invested in both the successful delivery and long-term prospects of their project.

Kyle Slaugh AV vendors can reduce project uncertainty and improve long-term reliability by shifting support from ‘feature training’ to real-world, outcome-based solutions. The most impactful tools and training are hands-on, built around realistic workflows and focused on what actually fails in the field. Classroom theory helps, but doing it – building, configuring, troubleshooting, and recovering from errors – creates lasting confidence and muscle memory.

A huge accelerator is ‘train-the-trainer’ models; when technicians learn a new technology to teach others, it reinforces their own understanding and spreads consistent best practices across teams.

From an engineering standpoint, which design choices or system architectures offer the best reward in terms of scalability and future-proofing?

Adam Corrie In short – open standards, interoperability and minimising the reliance on proprietary technology. A good example for us is AVoIP. Matrix switchers are increasingly obsolete in our system designs, where we favour versatility and extensibility over tradition.

AVoIP isn’t new, but is going through a transformation. The industry’s coalescing around SMPTE 2110 as a set of standards expected to transform how audio, video and ancillary data are transported around a network. Despite the hype, adoption is slow and costs high. For now, we tend to favour existing standards like SDVoE and NDI but design an AV network topology and backplane that can be upgraded or extended to deploy SMPTE 2110.

"Classroom theory helps, but doing it – building, configuring, troubleshooting and recovering from errors – creates lasting confidence and muscle memory"

Irrespective of the AVoIP standard being proposed, it forces conversations with clients about structured cabling and sensible investment for future-proofing their premises. Things like specifying Cat 6/6A for all new copper installations and running dark fibre even when there’s no immediate requirement.

Kyle Slaugh From an engineering standpoint, the most rewarding design choices for scalability and future-proofing are the ones that maximise flexibility and resilience without adding unnecessary complexity. Selecting devices that have more flexible use cases and offer redundancies help stave off any complications we may run into.

This feature was first published in the Spring 2026 issue of LIVE.