The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Madi vs Dante in studio aplication Audio Interfaces
Old 15th September 2018
  #1
Gear Nut
Madi vs Dante in studio aplication

After getting advices from the forums I finally choose to purchase the SPL Madison 16X16 ADA converter with this RME MADI card.

From what I understand MADI will foster I/O with very low latency and with the Madison good tone I will be good. I am buying it because Apogee Symphony MKII doesn't support good connectivity with PC on windows. However, they said that DANTE is coming.

Could someone explain what is the difference between MADI and DANTE? As Apogee is implementaing DANTE can we conclude that DANTE is better than MADI? For a 16 to 32 channel studio on PC/Window?

Thank you all,

Dan
Old 15th September 2018
  #2
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanTheMan06 View Post
... However, they said that DANTE is coming.

Could someone explain what is the difference between MADI and DANTE? As Apogee is implementaing DANTE can we conclude that DANTE is better than MADI? For a 16 to 32 channel studio on PC/Window?
...
I'm surprised that I'm the first one here. Okay, here we go:

MADI is a point-to-point, unidirectional protocol that carries a clock and time 'buckets' that contain the channel information all on one coax or fiber optic link. MADI has been done by some vendors on twisted pair cable; I just repaired a cable for a Soundcraft MADI digital snake. The key concept is that MADI is time-division multiplexing based on carrying the clock and data/music (and MIDI) in specific time intervals created by the clock; and the link protocol is not Ethernet of any sort. (I just mention this because sometimes people see Cat5E or Cat6 cable and instantly assume it's Ethernet.)

DANTE is a networked protocol that works over standard Ethernet LAN switches. It is flexible in the topologies that can be created, inherently bi-directional, and because it's standard, will work over normal twisted pair and fiber optic Ethenet network links. It does not transport MIDI. Clock information is distributed from an 'elected' clock within the Dante subnet, and all data/music packets maintain synchronization at their destination via the time stamped packets.

MADI is going in/out of your computer via a PCIe or USB adapter. Dante is going in/out of your computer via PCIe, USB, or a Dante Virtual Soundcard using your standard Ethernet adapter, or on Dante Via which 'tunnels' a regular ASIO USB/Firewire interface onto the Ethernet adapter of the computer.

MADI topology with multiple source rooms, or multiple destination rooms are created with MADI Router boxes, or splitter/merge function boxes. Dante topology with multiple rooms is created with normal Ethernet cables/switches and the source/destination matrix defined/managed in the free Dante Controller software.

The Dante Virtual Soundcard software is 64in/64out. The Dante PCIe card is 128in/128out. There are Dante boxes of all sorts with channel counts of 2, 4, 8, 32, bi-directional, in-only, out-only, etc.

I'll stop here. I hope that give you enough information to explore the differences in more detail. As more people arrive at this thread you'll get more aspects of the two technologies presented to you.

By the way, thank you for not using the word "best" in the title of the thread.
Old 18th September 2018
  #3
Gear Nut
Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGary View Post
I'm surprised that I'm the first one here.

I hope that give you enough information to explore the differences in more detail. As more people arrive at this thread you'll get more aspects of the two technologies presented to you.
Thank you very much for all the information. It is helpful and interesting. I am surpsie that you are the only one who answered. Are these protocols so exotic?

If you have two set-up, same PC computer on Window10, same DAW, same A/D/A etc. but one with MADI on PCI and the other with DANTE on PCI which one will allow for more hi-frequency channels? The fastest with lowest latency?

Thank

Dan

Last edited by DanTheMan06; 18th September 2018 at 03:25 PM.. Reason: add info-question
Old 18th September 2018
  #4
Lives for gear
 
octatonic's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanTheMan06 View Post
Thank you very much for all the information. It is helpful and interesting. I am surpsie that you are the only one who answered. Are these protocols so exotic?

If you have two set-up, same PC computer on Window10, same DAW, same A/D/A etc. but one with MADI on PCI and the other with DANTE on PCI which one will allow for more hi-frequency channels? The fastest with lowest latency?

Thank

Dan
MediaGary has nailed it.

Dante comes with an administrative overhead than many musician/engineers will grate at having to manage.
I have a Dante network but I have a previous background in IT networking so it works for me.

You can't compare protocols in the way you are suggesting.
Some implementations of the same protocol will be better than other implementations of the other protocol. It is just a protocol, how out is implemented can yield very difficult results.

Dante is more 'now' though and companies that were fully invested in MADI are now shifting to (or at least investing in) Dante (SSL, RME and others).

You could probably save a bundle by buying used and going for MADI as people dump MADI for Dante.
Also there are MADI to Dante converters, such as Focusrite RedNet D64R.
Old 18th September 2018
  #5
Lives for gear
 

...what previous posters mentioned.

i got a madi setup here - which was very expensive back in the day! it still works, there is a lot of choice of equipment now and some used but excellent gear can be found for ridiculous prices these days. it's still pretty much standard in broadcast although it slowly (but surely?) gets replaced by network protocols - not necessarily dante though!

when doing live work, i still prefer madi over dante, especially in hectic situations: madi either works or it doesn't. if not, it's due to a piece of gear or the cable while with dante... - possibly no problem for an it tech yet i've come across far too many situation where multiple experienced engineers couldn't get that damn network going after replacing (or expanding on) gear...

have a look at the latest rme interfaces: they got both madi and dante in one box!
Old 18th September 2018
  #6
Gear Nut
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah View Post
...what previous posters mentioned.

have a look at the latest rme interfaces: they got both madi and dante in one box!
I will check the latest RME interfaces although they were not my first choice. As MADI and DANTE are protocols and are, to some extent, hardware independant it shouldn't be too difficult/expensive to offer both on a single A\D\A. Too bad it is not more frequent.

One thing I like about MADI is that it carry MIDI and DANTE doesn't. I like to have my MIDI equipment on my current interface all the time it is very useful.

Dan
Old 18th September 2018
  #7
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanTheMan06 View Post
I will check the latest RME interfaces although they were not my first choice. As MADI and DANTE are protocols and are, to some extent, hardware independant it shouldn't be too difficult/expensive to offer both on a single A\D\A. Too bad it is not more frequent.

One thing I like about MADI is that it carry MIDI and DANTE doesn't. I like to have my MIDI equipment on my current interface all the time it is very useful.

Dan
i was mentioning rme cause their latest interfaces could save you from buying a dedicated converter, but they don't have adda converters which can be driven off both madi and dante. there are some products which have multiple slots for different cards: studer, stagetec, lawo, merging, possibly dad, maybe grace? and yes, midi over madi (over large distances) is quite useful! i'm using some rme gear to enable this...
Old 18th September 2018
  #8
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanTheMan06 View Post
... One thing I like about MADI is that it carry MIDI and DANTE doesn't. I like to have my MIDI equipment on my current interface all the time it is very useful.
....
While MIDI over MADI is desirable, it only makes sense to do that when the source/destination is physically far enough to demand a MADI link between. I'm just cautioning against having the 'tail wag the dog'.

For example, in my studio, the MIDI in/out the DAW computer is on a Roland UM-3G 3-port MIDI device, while the audio is transported on the Dante Virtual Soundcard. One of the DAW MIDI destinations is the Midas M32 mixer for Mackie Control emulation. Whereas the USB port of the M32 was able to do MIDI and audio concurrently, going to Dante demanded a different physical transport for MIDI.

Since the distances involved were all under 15 feet, no special considerations beyond normal MIDI cables were required. If this is a live event with a stagebox 'way over there, and you need to get MIDI to/from where your recording/control equipment is, then MADI is handy for that.

I'm glad some other people showed up here.
Old 19th September 2018
  #9
Here for the gear
 

I'm really glad this thread popped up because I've been going back and forth myself as to whether or not I should invest in Madi or Dante moving forward.

I'm in the process of building a studio space behind my house and am planning on moving from UAD Apollos for AD/DA to a Burl Mothership. As part of that switch I've been having fits trying to decide which interface protocol to implement with my imac/macbook.

Everything I've read in this thread seems to support the notion that for a smaller installation with relatively straightforward wiring needs Madi is still a more headache free format that gives up nothing to Dante where extreme channel counts and elaborate connectivity are not required.

As far as future proofing goes it would seem that a product like the RME Digiface Dante which affords the ability to integrate 64 channels of Dante and 64 channels of Madi simaltaneously would alleviate any immediate concerns about connectivity if Madi drops off a cliff popularity wise.

Also lower latencies seem to be more easily achieved via Madi without the need for a dedicated PCI/e solution, which is a boon for those of us without towers or trashcans to throw them into. (Maybe I'm wrong about that though?)

Obviously the headache of needing a IT background in order to troubleshoot Dante, as has already been mentioned, seems like reason enough to avoid it unless it's advantages are undeniable in one's particular situation.
Old 19th September 2018
  #10
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Lang View Post
....
Also lower latencies seem to be more easily achieved via Madi without the need for a dedicated PCI/e solution, which is a boon for those of us without towers or trashcans to throw them into. (Maybe I'm wrong about that though?)

Obviously the headache of needing a IT background in order to troubleshoot Dante, as has already been mentioned, seems like reason enough to avoid it unless it's advantages are undeniable in one's particular situation....
I have been doing a little Internet shopping in a tangentially related matter, and as far as I have seen, it's a relatively short list of ways to get MADI in/out of a computer.

RME has the field covered with a PCIe HDSPe MADI, the MADIface USB and XT solutions, and the FireFace UFX, in addition the new Dante/MADI USB interface.

The MOTU M64 is USB, as is the DiGiCo UB-MADI, and I *think* you can populate a Lynx Aurora with USB and MADI LT adapters to get in/out of a non-PCIe computer. The SPL Madicon, and the Antelope Orion32 also can do it. I guess the Avid Pro Tools HD MADI solutions should be on the list too.

Did I miss any? Of these contenders, I know only the RME has distinguished itself for its low-latency USB solutions. I know nothing of the others, but they all face the latency performance deficit compared to PCIe.
Old 19th September 2018
  #11
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGary View Post
I have been doing a little Internet shopping in a tangentially related matter, and as far as I have seen, it's a relatively short list of ways to get MADI in/out of a computer...

...Did I miss any? Of these contenders, I know only the RME has distinguished itself for its low-latency USB solutions. I know nothing of the others, but they all face the latency performance deficit compared to PCIe.
ssl had two pcie-cards (madixtreme64 and 128) and directout two usb-interfaces (exbox and ma2chbox) which used madi from/to pc - all out of production afaik, but these cards/interfaces still run smoothly and can be found for not much money.
Old 19th September 2018
  #12
Gear Maniac
 
mworkman's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGary View Post
I have been doing a little Internet shopping in a tangentially related matter, and as far as I have seen, it's a relatively short list of ways to get MADI in/out of a computer.

RME has the field covered with a PCIe HDSPe MADI, the MADIface USB and XT solutions, and the FireFace UFX, in addition the new Dante/MADI USB interface.

The MOTU M64 is USB, as is the DiGiCo UB-MADI, and I *think* you can populate a Lynx Aurora with USB and MADI LT adapters to get in/out of a non-PCIe computer. The SPL Madicon, and the Antelope Orion32 also can do it. I guess the Avid Pro Tools HD MADI solutions should be on the list too.

Did I miss any? Of these contenders, I know only the RME has distinguished itself for its low-latency USB solutions. I know nothing of the others, but they all face the latency performance deficit compared to PCIe.
Doesn't Ferrofish have some MADI products?
Old 20th September 2018
  #13
Gear Head
 
ntpjl's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGary View Post
I have been doing a little Internet shopping in a tangentially related matter, and as far as I have seen, it's a relatively short list of ways to get MADI in/out of a computer.

RME has the field covered with a PCIe HDSPe MADI, the MADIface USB and XT solutions, and the FireFace UFX, in addition the new Dante/MADI USB interface.

The MOTU M64 is USB, as is the DiGiCo UB-MADI, and I *think* you can populate a Lynx Aurora with USB and MADI LT adapters to get in/out of a non-PCIe computer. The SPL Madicon, and the Antelope Orion32 also can do it. I guess the Avid Pro Tools HD MADI solutions should be on the list too.

Did I miss any? Of these contenders, I know only the RME has distinguished itself for its low-latency USB solutions. I know nothing of the others, but they all face the latency performance deficit compared to PCIe.
You missed this one:

MARIAN Professional Line: Seraph M2

This card even supports sample rates up to 384 kHz, suitable for use with our AX32 converter. It doesn't mention that on the product page, but it's mentioned here:

Marian: News
Old 20th September 2018
  #14
Lives for gear
 
octatonic's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Lang View Post
Obviously the headache of needing a IT background in order to troubleshoot Dante, as has already been mentioned, seems like reason enough to avoid it unless it's advantages are undeniable in one's particular situation.
OK, let me qualify what I meant there.
Having a background in IT would certainly help, but it isn't mandatory.

Dante does have an administrative element to it.
Some people can cope with that and some cannot.

I'd suggest people be honest about what sort of person they are.
If you are the sort who really likes to get into the nuts and bolts of things then it probably won't be a problem.

I used to work for an audio company supporting their Dante products and some of their customers simply were not interested in understanding what IGMP snooping was, or really having an understanding of DHCP and IP networking.
I had a lot of complaints along the lines of 'why can't it just 'work''.

Well, it is a complex and capable technology that differs a bit from point to point audio like MADI, or even analogue.

The issue was almost never related to hardware or a problem with the protocol- it was down the the end user being the sort of person who doesn't want to really learn how it works.

I also had loads of complaints such as 'why can't I have wifi on when using Dante'.
<sigh>
There was a certain lack of acceptance of some aspects of Dante and this was more pronounced at the hobbiest level.

Sometimes it was just down to a sense of entitlement and 'why can't the manufacturer make it easier for me?'.
Those people after better off with something simpler.

Some cool things about Dante.
I have a two room studio at the moment- what I have connecting the two rooms is two ethernet cables- that is it.

I have some IO in both rooms and can send anything from Room A to Room B.

I also have a few synths on the other side of room A to where I have all the IO.
Normally I'd have to run a load of cables to connect the synths to my interface.
With Dante I just have to run one ethernet cable to the other side of the room and plug all the synths into an IO device (in this instance a Focusrite A16R.)

This is all on a converged network that has data, audio and video running on it at once.
I have 64 channels of IO and it uses a tiny fraction of the available bandwidth.
I could expand it up to hundreds of channels if I could afford it and it wouldn't impact the network much at all.

Also, the great thing about Dante is its scalability.

That said, if you don't need it then you don't need it.
I wouldn't get into Dante just for the fun of it- I actually had a use for it and knew I'd be able to cope with the IP aspects.
Old 22nd September 2018
  #15
Here for the gear
 

Thanks for your thoughts on Dante Octatonic - very interesting.

This thread has promped me to think more critically about my own needs and the available options beyond Dante and Madi. I'm looking more closely at Soundgrid in my particular case since I plan on moving to a Burl Mothership.

At least on Mac it would seem to be a real boon to not then have to add an additional third party interface between the Mothership and the computer. Slightly off topic i know. Just an observation.
Old 22nd September 2018
  #16
Gear Nut
Quote:
Originally Posted by octatonic View Post
That said, if you don't need it then you don't need it.
I wouldn't get into Dante just for the fun of it- I actually had a use for it and knew I'd be able to cope with the IP aspects.
Apogee for their Symphony MK II is supposed to released DANTE instead of Thunderbolt3 or MADI.

Do yu think that it is possible to make the IP aspect very transparent and as easy as MADI or TB?

Dan
Old 22nd September 2018
  #17
Lives for gear
 
octatonic's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanTheMan06 View Post
Apogee for their Symphony MK II is supposed to released DANTE instead of Thunderbolt3 or MADI.

Do yu think that it is possible to make the IP aspect very transparent and as easy as MADI or TB?

Dan
If they are using Dante then they will use Dante Controller, in order to interface with other Dante equipment, which looks like this:



It isn't difficult but it isn't especially intuitive either.

Will be interesting to see how Apogee implement their Dante card.
Hopefully Apogee will have some sort of hardware monitoring.
Old 22nd September 2018
  #18
Gear Maniac
Here is some info from Audinate's website on the subject of latency in Dante. If you want to minimize latency in Dante, then I would suggest not using Dante Virtual Soundcard, and would instead suggest using a hardware Dante interface with good driver and software support (eg RME Digiface Dante).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audinate_Dante_Support_FAQ
(link to source of this quoted material)

While the Dante Virtual Soundcard generally exhibits higher latency than Dante hardware devices, {network latency} performance is not compromised by the addition of a Dante Virtual Soundcard device to the network. This is because Dante does not require latency to be a single value for the whole network.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audinate_Dante_Support_FAQ
(link to source of this quoted material)

Latency can be configured to be different between different devices in the same network, and does not have to be the same for all connections on the network. Dante allows you to configure low latency connections for critical audio paths, while at the same time running higher latency connections for a broadcast or recording feed where latency is less critical.

It is important to note that in order to achieve consistent system latency, the latency imposed by different processors on the network should also be taken into account. Dante has no control over the latency of devices such as consoles or speaker processors, and these devices require a certain amount of latency to fulfill their respective functions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audinate_Dante_Support_FAQ
(link to source of this quoted material)

The Dante Latency drop-down menu allows you to set the device latency (time before playout). A Dante device receiving audio from Dante Virtual Soundcard will use this value (unless the receiving device only supports higher latencies). The latency compensates primarily for computer scheduling jitter, as well as delay variations encountered in the network.

Supported values are: 4ms, 6ms, 10ms

Latencies above 4ms are not supported at sample rates of 176.4 kHz or 192 kHz when transmitting to hardware devices running Dante firmware v3.7.x or earlier. In order to enable these latency settings for the higher sample rates, upgrade your Dante device firmware to v3.8.x or above. Please contact your device manufacturer for information about Dante firmware upgrades. As a rule of thumb, 4ms can be used where Dante Virtual Soundcard is running on a high-spec computer with low scheduling jitter.

Computers with poor scheduling performance may need to use the 10ms Dante Latency setting.

Note: If the Dante Latency setting is set too low to compensate for network delay variation and computer scheduling jitter, there is a risk of intermittent loss of audio.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audinate_Dante_Support_FAQ
(link to source of this quoted material)

Dante latency is deterministic; that is, it is not dependent upon circumstances but instead well known and consistent within the system all of the time.

Each Dante receiver introduces a specific, user-adjustable amount of latency before playing out audio to account for any delay variation in the network or end device, and this guarantees that all devices play out in perfect sync. Dante Controller sets this latency per device, and the value selected should be based on the size of the network. Some examples are shown below:

1 switch hop (very small network): 0.15ms
3 switch hops (small network): 0.25ms
5 switch hops (medium network): 0.5ms
10 switch hops (large network): 1ms
+10 switch hops (very large network): 5ms
Old 2 weeks ago
  #19
Gear Nut
Are all ethernet connectors compatible with DANTE?

Hi!

Thank you for all the explanations. While I almost bought the SPL Madison with a RME MADI card, I decided at the last minute to go with the Lynx Aurora(n) on DANTE. I will get my Lynx next friday (nov 30)

Are all ethernet connexions compatible with DANTE? Are all ethernet cables the same?

How can I know if my ethernet connexion will support the DANTE from my LYNX?

I have a first generation Hewlett-Packard PC-I7 at 3.4 Ghz on Window 10.

Thank you,

Dan
Old 2 weeks ago
  #20
Lives for gear
 
octatonic's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanTheMan06 View Post
Hi!

Thank you for all the explanations. While I almost bought the SPL Madison with a RME MADI card, I decided at the last minute to go with the Lynx Aurora(n) on DANTE. I will get my Lynx next friday (nov 30)

Are all ethernet connexions compatible with DANTE? Are all ethernet cables the same?

How can I know if my ethernet connexion will support the DANTE from my LYNX?

I have a first generation Hewlett-Packard PC-I7 at 3.4 Ghz on Window 10.

Thank you,

Dan
Are you planning on connecting your computer directly to the Lynx and using Dante Virtual Soundcard?

If so then do consider getting a Focusrite/SSL/Yamaha Dante PCIe Card.
You will get much lower latency- DVS is fine up to a point- I use it from time to time but I wouldn't want to have to run my studio off it.

I would also suggest getting a small ethernet switch if you want to have an internet connection running at the same time- you won't be able to have Wifi running at the same time.

"Are all ethernet connexions compatible with DANTE? Are all ethernet cables the same?"

Sort of.

Without getting too complicated- there are some ways to use an ethernet connection that is not compatible with Dante or even regular computers (for example my Kii Three monitors have ethernet ports for digital connection).
The way you are going to be using Dante pretty much any CAT 5e or 6 cable will work, the only exception would be a 'cross cable' but they are not very common anymore.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #21
Gear Nut
 

When using a switch with Dante ensure it meets the stated requirements (see Dante website). A consumer level all in one device is not likely to include the QOS, etc. features needed by Dante. On the other hand, inexpensive Netgear (and other) switches seem to work fine for simple networks.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #22
Lives for gear
 
octatonic's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by zjrt02 View Post
When using a switch with Dante ensure it meets the stated requirements (see Dante website). A consumer level all in one device is not likely to include the QOS, etc. features needed by Dante. On the other hand, inexpensive Netgear (and other) switches seem to work fine for simple networks.
Just to clarify.

QoS is usually not needed in small installations.
64 channels of Dante is going to use a tiny amount of available bandwidth- for instance 64 channels at 24/48 is 74mbits/s.
I've never had a customer have dropouts running a couple of devices into a computer with that configuration.
Netgear GS108 or a simple unmanaged switch without EEE is fine.

Those of us running more complex Dante installations with multiple rooms (like myself) needs to set up QoS lanes but the large majority of home to small installation users are fine without them.

Audinate's recommendations tend to err on the conservative side of things because they are used to large multi-room installations, or concert halls and the like.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #23
Gear Nut
Quote:
Originally Posted by octatonic View Post
Are you planning on connecting your computer directly to the Lynx and using Dante Virtual Soundcard?

If so then do consider getting a Focusrite/SSL/Yamaha Dante PCIe Card.
You will get much lower latency- DVS is fine up to a point- I use it from time to time but I wouldn't want to have to run my studio off it.

I would also suggest getting a small ethernet switch if you want to have an internet connection running at the same time- you won't be able to have Wifi running at the same time.
.
I am planning to connect directly to my computer. As it will be ''directly in'' the computer I was assuming it will be as fast as a PCI card. Also, DANTE is a protocol so why do we need extra hardware to support it, an ethernet connexion being already present?

I am surprised to learn that I will not be able to run my wi-fi!!! When I am working my internet is often running, I have communication with clients, audio sample exchanged etc. all the time. These days we are multitasking...

These two things means more $$$ to spend for top notch installation...

Hopefull my decision to go with the Lynx was the right one! I chose the Lynx because the last version of the Aurora is more recent technology and because Dante seems to be growing.

Dan
Old 2 weeks ago
  #24
Lives for gear
 
octatonic's Avatar
Right.
Taking it point by point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanTheMan06 View Post
I am planning to connect directly to my computer. As it will be ''directly in'' the computer I was assuming it will be as fast as a PCI card. Also, DANTE is a protocol so why do we need extra hardware to support it, an ethernet connexion being already present?
DVS adds at least 4ms of latency each way (in and out) of the computer.
By the time you add buffer to this you are looking at 10ms roundtrip latency but most people will end up with 12ms or more once sessions start to get large.
It was never meant to be an ultra low latency solution.

There is a huge difference between using a 'virtual' soundcard and using a dedicated ethernet based audio card.
The fact that you do not know this means you probably haven't adequately researched Dante and AoIP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanTheMan06 View Post
I am surprised to learn that I will not be able to run my wi-fi!!! When I am working my internet is often running, I have communication with clients, audio sample exchanged etc. all the time. These days we are multitasking...
Audinate say you have to have wifi turned off on their website here: Can Dante operate over a Wi-Fi network? | Audinate

and in various other places on their website.

This doesn't mean you cannot be on the internet- you can- you just need to run an ethernet cable form your switch to the internet router.
If they are not in the same room then use a power line adapter, like I do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanTheMan06 View Post
These two things means more $$$ to spend for top notch installation...
Sure.
Do you want to have a minimum of 10ms roundtrip latency, or a minimum of 4ms roundtrip latency?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanTheMan06 View Post
Hopefull my decision to go with the Lynx was the right one! I chose the Lynx because the last version of the Aurora is more recent technology and because Dante seems to be growing.

Dan
I think you have almost certainly rushed this decision and if you need to have wifi on and insist on using DVS to monitor live tracks then I'd say you are headed for disappointment.

Dante is a brilliant piece of technology- my entire studio runs off it- I have two rooms connected over two ethernet cables (one primary and one backup) and it never goes down on me. I have the internet available on all my studio computers and all of the computers are using dedicated audio cards.

Who is your dealer?
I'd be going back to them to ask a few more questions about what you are getting into.
Dante isn't hard, provided you have a base level of technical ability.

Back when I worked for <particular audio company that makes Dante products> doing tech support I saw a lot of people like yourself who bought a Dante solution and ended up pulling their hair out because they didn't really understand what they had got into and were not prepared to accept the workflow.

Last edited by octatonic; 2 weeks ago at 02:48 PM..
Old 2 weeks ago
  #25
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by octatonic View Post
Just to clarify.

QoS is usually not needed in small installations. ,,,
.
That's true and maybe stating QoS was a bit confusing. My main point is that SOHO all-in-one router/switches don't work well with Dante.

The reason for a switch is you almost always will want to plug something else in later and the switch makes it easy. IMHO Dante is NOT intended as a replacement for MADI but is designed for networked audio. When used on a network with only two endpoints then it may look and feel like a MADI replacement.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #26
Gear Nut
Quote:
Originally Posted by octatonic View Post

The fact that you do not know this means you probably haven't adequately researched Dante and AoIP.
I am supposed to get the unit on friday but....it is no paid yet....Thank you guys GearSlutz is a good place to be!

Dan
Old 2 weeks ago
  #27
Lives for gear
 
octatonic's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by zjrt02 View Post
That's true and maybe stating QoS was a bit confusing. My main point is that SOHO all-in-one router/switches don't work well with Dante.

The reason for a switch is you almost always will want to plug something else in later and the switch makes it easy. IMHO Dante is NOT intended as a replacement for MADI but is designed for networked audio. When used on a network with only two endpoints then it may look and feel like a MADI replacement.
I broadly agree with both points.

The GS108 is a good fit for most users because it has more ports than they need, doesn't have EEE and is essentially plug and play.

I don't think Dante of a replacement for MADI but it is in many ways its successor, because it address the main issue that people with large MADI installations had, which is routing.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump