Breaking the Input Channel Barrier - DANTE, MADI, ADAT - devices and solutions!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 лип 2024
- I am on a quest to update my studio to have more than 24 channels of recording inputs available. Here are the findings of this journey and how you can get up to 512 input channels...
0:00 Introduction & Motivation
1:48 Requirements
4:38 ADAT
5:32 MADI
6:30 Audio over Ethernet (AoP)
8:40 Dante
11:16 Input Channel Barriers: USB, Thunderbolt, Ethernet, ...
16:28 Input Channels: 24
17:05 Input Channels: 32
18:35 Input Channels: 64
21:14 Input Channels: 128 and more
21:48 What I did... and Plan B
Loopop video: • Too much gear? Try a d...
Integrating Hardware Synthesizers in Bitwig Studio: • Integrating Hardware S...
ES-8: • Expert Sleepers ES 8 B...
I have 104 channel of simultaneous input using AVB between MOTU interfaces and then another 24 inputs via ADAT input into the MOTU interfaces. At 48khz sample rate it all works wonderfully.
Great information and you did a lot of research...Well done.
Philip
NYC Area
Thanks for this video. I am looking forward to more on this topic. There is very little information about setups like this, but more people are posting about it now.
My own experience... First thing to realize is compromise is necessary. Even Dante and huge sums of money will not guarantee the perfect setup. Cost is probably priority #1 for most. I gave up on > 48KHz audio, and I also gave up on this being cheap. But what is cheap? Getting 32+ channels into a computer is not cheap period, but some solutions are cheaper. Think about it in terms of cost per channel, and make sure you have expandability.
ADAT - for > 24 channels, just don't go there. Most the stuff that does > 24 channels with ADAT are very expensive (because they are also high end). It is the least versatile method. Expandability is very limited and ADAT cables are short, so you can't span across a room or to a separate room. AVB, MADI, or Dante are where to look. Ethernet cables are cheap and allow 100m distances between boxes with no latency penalty.
Audio interface vs. Mixer - get past the idea of using an audio interface (unless you have lots of money to spend on high end interfaces). The best cost per channel comes from a mixer with network expansion (Dante, AVB, etc.), and that works as an audio interface over USB. Most these use USB 2 which is enough, but may have issues on some computers.
Dante is probably the best solution but expensive. Loopop just did a great video on this - he went with Dante, but wow, expensive! Also, wow, so many options! Dante has the least compromises, most versatile, and most popular for professionals, but that is also why it is so expensive.
I don't know much about MADI, so I won't comment. I assume most what I say below about AVB applies to MADI.
I chose to go with Presonus and AVB. The cost per port was much less than Dante and even the > 24 channel ADAT setups. Presonus is about the same as Behringer and other mid range studio/stage mixer setups. It can work completely independently for live play (no computer if you want), but hook to a computer for 64 in/64 out channels (though on some computers you may have to reduce this down to 34x34 due to USB issues). Because they are USB class compliant, I can also use my Presonus mixers as an audio interface for my iPad (think iPad as an FX processor or virtual Synth bank) while using a different computer on a separate Presonus mixer as the master computer (DAW, etc.), connecting the mixers together via AVB.
I started with a Presonus StudioLive 32R rack mixer ($1800, 32 in/16 out, 34x34 or 64x64 I/O over USB to my computer). You can add another 32in/16out channels with a stagebox (Presonus NSB32.16, $1300 or the NSB16.8, 16 ins, 8 outs, $900) or another 32R mixer (or 24R, or 16R). There are limitations beyond 40 channels (you can only mix 40 channels on these boxes), but there is a 64x64 routing matrix which gives you options to change which 40 channels you mix. You can mix 76 channels on a Presonus StudioLive 64S console. A 64S with a NSB32.16 stagebox gives you 64ins/32 outs, all mixable, but this console is huge and about $4000. Still much cheaper vs. a similar Dante setup. I wish they made a 64R rack mixer (like a 64S, but rack mount, not a console). One box would give you 64/32 I/O for probably $3000. But doesn't exist.
Instead of a stagebox, I went with a 2nd 32R rack mixer (bought used for $1200). I can configure my 64 in/32 out setup in a multitude of ways to enable mixing different sets of instruments, mics, FX sends, etc. I never use all these inputs at once, but I can physically connect everything (e.g. 64 mono or 32 stereo devices) and not have to swap cables. I set up profiles to select and route instrument groups based on what I plan to do (just swap profiles). No I don't have that much gear, but a couple multi-out drum machines can use up inputs fast!
For example, since the 2nd 32R is also a mixer, I can connect a multi-out drum machine into it, using onboard or outboard FX per channel, then send the mix on a single channel to my first 32R mixer to send to the computer. Or I can configure (without moving cables), all the drum outs to go to the computer directly from the 2nd 32R to the 1st 32R to the computer if I want. All this is done with a quick profile change. This is what I mean by compromises. I can't bring all 64 channels into my computer, but I can re-arrange things virtually _without_ swapping cables. If you really want all 64 channels into your DAW, the 64S mixer console can do that as I said previously.
Recently, I bought a Presonus StudioLive 32SC mixer console (16 in/10 out, 17 motorized sliders, $1800 new, $1000-$1500 used) and an AVB network router. A downside of AVB is you can't use it on standard network routers where Dante works on your normal network. I connected all 3 of them together (32SC as the master, plus the two 32R's), and using profiles, I have access to more I/O then I will ever use. The iPad/computer app for controlling the 32R does everything the console does, but sometimes physical sliders and buttons is better. The same app can control the 32SC as well, so the app on an iPad is the most convenient UI.
There isn't much information on UA-cam about these stage/studio mixer setups. That is why I wrote all this. More people are posting videos though. When I bought my first 32R mixer, I had to figure this all out on my own and I am still learning and trying configurations.
I chose Presonus but Behringer can do mostly the same. The Presonus 32R has 32 in/16 out and 40 mix channels, and 64x64 or 34x34 I/O to the computer. The equivalent Behrigner X32 Rack mixer has better built in FX and their rack mixer has a touch screen (as well as an iPad/computer app for control). But it has only 16 in/8 out and I believe 25 mix channels (? no more than 40 for sure so no better than the 32R), and 32x32 I/O to the computer. So Presonus is cheaper per channel (including adding stageboxes, etc.). I prefer the smaller Presonus 32R rack mixer (no screen) and using an iPad. I wish the Presonus had better onboard FX, though. I would go with Dante if money didn't matter, but the cost of this setup using Dante would probably be 2-3x the price.
Last note on AVB. MacOS natively supports AVB. Presumably, you could route a pair of 32R mixers directly to MacOS into your DAW. Doing so requires an AVB router and a dedicated Ethernet port on your Mac to the AVB router (e.g. using Wifi or a 2nd Ethernet port for your normal internet traffic). Or you could hook a 32R mixer directly to your Mac's Ethernet port with a single cable, no router. You would still need to control the mixers from the app, but you would get 64 in/32 out with that setup. Unfortunately, I have heard mixed results on this. I haven't tried it yet. Dante is likely more reliable for this. See Loopop's recent video.
Thanks for sharing your insights witch match 100% with mine. I also looked closely into the Presonus/Behringer solutions but they are just take up too much space. A friend of mine is also running a similar setup with 2 Behringer X32 into a RME UFX III. Yes, I saw the Loopop video, which I mentioned in my video as well (and linked in the description). This actually made me go down this research rabbithole 😂
Note that AES50 is not an audio networking standard or protocol! It's just a regular digital multichannel point-to-point audio format like USB or MADI that only happens to use RJ-45 connectors. You cannot connect AES50 cables to network switches to share signals between multiple AES50 sources and destinations! For real audio networking, you need a OSI Layer-3-capable audio-over-IP protocol like Ravenna, AVB or Dante.
Yes, thanks for the clarification. I did not dive too deep into these things, the topic was already pretty broad.
Great stuff to look into, I follow your search with great interest.
Thank you for this posting. I have been on this search for 20’years. So many abandoned “standards” …
If I had a billion & I would buy up audient and make Dante open source….
😂
Hey thanks for documenting your journey and experiments it really helps. 🙏
Even im not anywhere near the needs you describing, I really like the detail and the high quality information of this video. I think you should take the part 12:55 with the Channel Barriers and release it as an additional Video. That would stop a lot false information flowing around. Thank you for that intense research and work ! 🌻
Thanks for the kind words, Odo!
good info....Im putting the marian madi and dante in a pcie thunderbolt chassis.....with the ferrofish and yamaha dante stage box.. :) will let you know the performance..
Interesting! Would like to hear how good such chassis work!
Not to mention TADA, DAIM and TANDE
Thank you for this video, you are the only one on youtube that has done this type of a video, there is another one from some years ago but we are in 2023. I think it would be best if you try out the Dante or MADI and see first how accurate the latency is compensated on several Bitwig channels at the same time, meaning is Dante or MADI doing an excellent job sending and receiving the audio and all the midi parts stay tight ? I have been skeptical of that, so always stayed with PCIe AES card 16 in and out. I am also a stickler about converters, tried many of them, I stick with Burl, Mytek, RME, stay away from Antelope stuff and older Lynx, the newer ones are good but too expensive. I also ditched the ES-8 and just went the ADAT ES-3 and ES-6. One way to future proof yourself and keep it cheaper than MADI, is just going with RME RayDAT PCIe you get your 32 ins and outs and you can connect bunch of those behringers or try out different conveters and maybe in the future you might want higher end stuff that ADAT option will give you that opportunity. You can also run multiple RME Pcie Cards on the same machine and the best thing is that no one can compete with almost zero latency of the RME, its the tightest system, if you dont like their converters then just get only the interface and pair it with whatever you want. I know you are not Mac person, but you could buy a MAC PRO 2012 tower that has 4 PCIe slots and put bunch of stuff in there, Bitwig runs on Mojave still, that would save you tons on PCIe enclosure if you want a new Mac etc(this is what I end up doing). The other option is to with SSL Big Six has 16 in and outs and bunch of flawless routing and summing, it wont be enough but men it works nicely with Cubase and Bitwig and with Akai samplers in USB class compliant mode. Sorry for the long comment but you have done so much for us with your scripts we owe to you. Thank you Sir!!
Thanks, for the detailed answer! You are now the 2nd who mentions that RME devices can be combined on the same computer, that's clearly something to look into as well.
I'm running a RME UFX+ with a FerroFish 16 connected via Madi and an Audient ASP880 connected via ADAT. Windows 11 PC.
Yes, great and solid setup!
A guy on the Reaper forum mentioned using a Dante 128 PCIe card on the main studio computer. He would then get his clients to install Dante Soundcard on their machines.
The client plugs into a switch at the studio, he then mixes the clients projects *live as they stream from the clients machine into the main computer.
Oh, wow, that's an interesting application! Do you know which PCIe card he uses?
Yamaha AIC128-D if I remember correctly
I think this was another comment from the same guy "My very special, revolutionary service for my clients: they can shine in bringing their own PC or MAC (regardless) with their own projects recorded in their own DAW (whatever they are using), simply connect their computer to my control room network via a cat5 cable and can mix their projects right off of their own DAW into my analog gear! No need to export/transfer/convert any project data into my studio pc - just real plug-and-mix!"
His UA-cam: ua-cam.com/video/w4sbdXRTFng/v-deo.html
@@IncorrectDisposal Thanks!
So IIRC, DVS is limited to 32/32 @ 96 kHz, so hopefully you knew that (RME Digiface Dante has the same limitation). The only way I can recall that supports more than that is the Dante PCIe cards which were discontinued (unless there is a replacement I haven’t looked at it in awhile, but the first party and Yamaha, FocusRite, etc. ones I remember looking at were discontinued). Also, it wasn’t clear from the video or maybe I missed it, but looking up that Ferrofish unit, it only had MIDI capabilities over USB, so all your audio ingress has to be through DVS or RME Digiface ($$$). Just know that Audinate isn’t very good about providing quick driver updates, especially on macOS. I have used a lot of Dante, it is a good system. Just pricey.
The most complex setup I’ve seen is using MADI over fiber into a Digico Quantum 338, then coaxial MADI into AuviTran Audio Toolbox, then Dante out of that into an AVID Pro Tools MTRX Studio, then Digilink out of that into a Pro Tools HDX PCIe card in a Mac Pro, then return path is the same. That same place is also using Those AuviTran Audio toolboxes to convert MADI to AVB since that’s what their amps support, so everything is digital from the source all the way to the destination. The Pro Tools rig is for recording and broadcast mix.
Thanks for the hints! Yes, I am aware of the limitations. I look into possible alternatives to DVS at the very end of the video.
i have madiface USB plugged into Ferrofish Pulse 16 Madi. Attached to the Pulse (via ADAT) is Cranbourne ADAT500 (8ch), RME ADI-8 into an API lunch box (8ch), my old Babyface (8ch adat, used as monitor controller), , and Audient Evo SP8. I have enough channels of outboard to know that i don't need it all. lol.
Nice setup! And good to hear that the Madiface works fine!
@@mossgraber yeah - RME FTW
I recommend you to have a look at motu avb interfaces and presonus avb mixers. cheers
Yes, I did that as well. MOTU is mentioned in the Ethernet section and Presonus in the 32 channel section.
Sorry, i meant to test/try these devices in practice and not only by research.. I would also mention that Audinante belongs to Yamaha, it's the most expensive (taxing all manufacturers when adding the protocol). It's the most established protocol due to different reasons but not necessary the best networking protocol either. It has big constraints and problems aside of price too. Did you know that motu interfaces and presonus mixers work well together via avb? cheers @@mossgraber
@@pangea2003 Yes, their licensing is not on the cheap side. I plan to rant about this in the next video 😁 Where did you get the info that Audinate belongs to Yamaha? Couldn't find anything about it.
I would be curious as to any issues you run into when using this setup. I ended up trying to go the AVB route, as I had a Presonus mixer, and frankly couldn't get it stable. It would either fail to send audio, or the audio was so bit reduced it sound like chip tunes. A follow up video of your experience in setting it up and discuss your impressions of it would be awesome.
That‘s the plan 😀
To answer one of your questions: “Why would someone need more Outputs than Inputs?” I had to laugh!
My first interface was an 8-channel I/O 16-bit 44.1/48k only, a ProTools Project system in 1996.
In those days, the DAW didn’t have many useful features and or plugins, and nobody was thinking to work entirely in the box.
Almost everyone used the DAW to replace the Multitrack Tape Machine, and that fed into an Analog Console.
So most of these years I’ve been asking the opposite question:
“Why the hell do I need 32-inputs, I’ll never track that much at once? What I need is 64-Outputs or more, so I can spill Everything into my board.”
I’m pretty sure Digidesign sold way more outputs for the 888s and 192s, and Apogee sold way more DA-16s than AD-16s.
I now use a pair of Presonus Quantum 4848s for 64-channels of conversion I/O and another 32-channels (16 in 96k) on ADAT.
Ah, good comment! I knew there was a use-case! 🤣 I know there are some studios still working like this.But do you still see these requirements nowadays?
I think Many people still mix in Analog or Hybrid, so I don't know about "requirement" but having as many D/A Converters as possible is very much still a preference for a lot of mixers.
And SSL, Neve, RND, API, Audient, Trident and others are still making and selling Analog Consoles, so....
I also think you brushed past using Digital Consoles and Stage Boxes to get high I/O counts. I think that IS the most cost effective and logical way nowadays.
Most Digital Consoles have a USB port and show up on your computer just like any other interface. Plus they come with Low Latency monitoring and effects in addition to their on board mixing engines, that can be used for tons of utilitarian functions, and free up the CPU on your main DAW for more creative stuff.
In addition to that, most of them can take a Dante Card (and others) allowing you to route anything anywhere.
If starting from scratch it'd be hard to justify Not going the Digital Console route.
@@G_handleYou are right, I did not look too deep into the mixing consoles. While they are very interesting, I pretty quickly ruled them out due to their size (even the rack versions are pretty clunky).
@mossgraber I hear you, you did say that in the video. However a couple of thoughts:
A) The size of most rack units is nearly identical to a normal interface due to the physical size of the connectors themselves, and because they're intended for "Live" sound, they usually provide all XLRs or TRSs. You can only get 16 Neutrik XLR connectors across a 1U jack panel for example.
An interface can be 1U and have 32-channels, but on DB-25s. You then have to, as you mentioned, buy or build DB-25 to XLR, TRS, or Patchbay cables yourself, which like you said is a "Hidden Cost", but it's also a hidden Size/Real Estate cost. Especially if you then terminate the DB-25s into jack panels anyway. The Digital Mixers are Already ready to go.
B) Nearly all Digital Mixers use "Digital Stage Boxes" as well, and some have a 1U rack Mixer with little "local" I/O, but allow Many channels to move across single Ethernet cables to wherever you need them. In a Live setting you may have "Drops" at FOH as well as Left, Right, and Rear Stage, and at another Monitor Mixer, and at another Broadcast Mixer, And at say a Press Bridge for the Media.
In the Studio this same Digital Distribution system can be extremely useful to run simple Ethernet cables to wherever you need I/O.
C) The Digital Mixer route is expandable, meaning that you can buy the pieces you need now and add on to that down the road when the needs or funds arise.
D) If you're Recording other artists in your studio, don't forget that Digital Mixers provide pretty elegant and flexible Headphone Monitor Mix functionality.
There are Many high end Analog Recording Studios that have added say a Behringer Digital Mixer just to use for feeding thier P16 personal Monitor Mixers. This is a great system and gets gives everyone a custom version of whatever they want.
E) Lastly. I love what you are doing, providing some much value to our community! I want to Thank You directly!!!
I do think though that maybe not now, but you should also think about how a Digital Mixer is reaaallly just an Audio Interface, with its own DSP engine, aaand usually a built in Midi Control Surface!
You are the King of Midi Control Surfaces.
Over the years we've convinced many of the Digital Mixer manufacturers to let us have a "DAW Controller" mode on thier boards....but most are not very good.
But that's where you come in.
Intercepting the Midi between the Board and the DAW, and making it behave.
Imagine a session where at the press of a button, your Control Surface really does go back and forth between Console and DAW...seamlessly.
Im toying with rme usb digiface with various adat ada kit. Its a bit vague whether multiple rmes can share the same driver in windows..
That would surprise me a lot and did not read anything about such a possibility so far.
@@mossgraber If all units are fed with a synchronous clock, i.e. all units show Sync in their Settings dialog, all channels can be used at once. This is especially easy to use under ASIO, as the ASIO driver presents all units as one.
@@0richbikeAre you talking about 1 Digiface with 4 synchronized ADATs or several e.g. Digifaces devices connected to USB? If the later is the case where I can I read about this?
I reckon the ferrofish is better if you can afford it;-)
@@mossgraber finally got it to paste
>48k . Why? Discuss;-)
Because you can? 😂 It is more in the nice to have area but something I am curious about to test.
Because you can. Fair play...
Personally I think the whole 96/192 thing is just marketing. 48 gives you a niqist of 24 ....no one can hear that high. And you need twice+ CPU and storage. Vst oversampling can be handy...
Be interested to see what you find out. Cheers
@@0richbike I totally agree with you! But let's see or better hear 😁
When it comes to 32+ channels into a computer, the first thing you should give up is > 48KHz (unless you can spend a LOT of money). As a pro, I can understand wanting 96KHz, but for a home/personal studio, or budget pro studio, it just doesn't make economic sense. Certainly not for live playing.
It is also an "economy of scale" issue for the companies making gear to support 96/192KHz. The cost of the IC's and other components to achieve this bandwidth causes the cost to multiply as well.