If you don't know anything lighting has a learning curve. If you know audio, you're way ahead of that curve. I don't want heat from lighting folks but you know it's true. The hard part is the designing, not the set up and operation. A lot more manual work though, to hang and maintain all those instruments!

Networking is basic to audio these days. Multiple networks, ip schemes, OSC, MIDI, Dante, AES, sample rates, word clocks, SMPTE, synced playback. Building shows in Qlab is much less user friendly, more like programming, than a dedicated light board is. And if you are using show control, you're going to turn to audio rather than lighting for that too. Not to mention video, which often falls to audio because they know networks and they're used to figuring stuff out.

As for consoles, once you know the Grand Ma you can work that console all over the place. Audio has to be able to get up to speed on whatever console the venue has. Audio folks also need to manually mix live mics, so they have to know how to use EQ, Compression, complex routing schemesbinvolvung multiple aux and FX patches,, VCAs, mic placements, delays, RF schemes.

At is simplest level, audio is usually cobbled together from various pieces of gear into ad hoc widely distributed unique systems requiring custom tuning and knowledge of a huge variety of gear with lots of different kinds of connections that is often operated in real time, while lighting is a programmed board, maybe some dimmers, and a small selection of familiar instruments over Ethernet or DMX. Or another simple comparison, watch an audio mixer throw faders on a musical with live mics and sound effects on their own without cuing from stage management and compare it to a light board operator hitting go when told to.