There is the "Behringer POWERPLAY 16 P16-D ULTRANET Distributor". But I don't know if it can connect multiple X32. I suppose it just works in a single direction.
I've just tested networking, not done anything with it.
Be aware that tere are two RJ45 jacks.
One is for Behringer stuff, like the stage boxes and headphone monitoring boxes. It's not real ethernet. Two pairs make a 100 mbps ethernet connection, the other pairs transmit the audio clock.
The other RJ45 jack is a true ethernet port. I tried it connected to a MB Pro and recorded some channels. That worked, as expected. But I've never tried anything beyond that.
And the same confusion about the USB ports. One is for use as an interface, the other is to record to USB media.
Our X32's are used for live audio. Not much is recorded and besides the stage boxes, the network isn't used. But I have to warn every user again and again about the two ports, as nobody seems to read the manual. That's good, it means the user interface is simple enough to figure out. But these ports seem to bite a lot of people every time again.
__________________
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
I know you can do two x32s plus a stage snake like the s32 in a network, but can you put more x32s in than that? Can it go to a router or something?
AES50 is an OSI layer 1 protocol, meaning that it uses RJ45 connectors but signals have no ethernet packeting and no IP routing capability. It doesn't work across network switches. It's simply a point-to-point signal connection that happens to use the physical connectors also used by ethernet. However, devices disposing of two AES50 ports may provide fuctionality to be cascaded.
To add real audio-over-ip networking functionality to an X32 you have to fit it with a DANTE expansion card.
Ahh, thank you guys! I will have 4.328 trillion more questions soon.
What I really want to do is leave an S32 in our big room, but be able to have an X32 or X32 Rack in each room at the school able to access that snake, and if we do that monitoring system they sell with it, I guess some way to access the monitoring system as well
Most likely it will be only two rooms (hence two x32's), but could be more
I have no hands-on experience with AES50. However, I'm using Dante in my studio since 2015. Here are a few considerations that might help you choosing the optimal way to go:
If you decide to set up your configuration based on AES50, you should keep in mind that it will always be point-to-point. You may be able to split signals (to get signals to multiple receivers) but it will never be an audio network where you can freely route any sourece to any destination or where you can add new devices using existing infrastructure by simply plugging them to the network. Adding new equipment (with AES50) means that you will probably have to lay new cables in parallel to existing ones and buy new signal splitters. There comes a point where a real audio network will be much more efficient. At max, it would require a few additional cat6 cables (but no new lines) or a new network switch - in most cases not even that.
Using real audio networking right from the start facilites expansion whenever necessary. It's a no-brainer really. Main advantages are:
new devices can be added anytime by simply plugging them into the network switch
newly connected devices will be auto-discovered by all other devices within seconds
clocking is also done automatically without any user intervention (provided the device's clock matches that of the network)
you immediately enjoy limitless routing for all channels between all devices
any no. of computers that are connected to the network can record up to 64 channels of what is floating around on the network and can also play back up to 64 channels of audio into the network with Dante Virtual Soundcard installed
Dante Via software makes up to 32 channels of USB and Firewire audio interfaces connected to a articular computer accessible to any other Dante device on the network. In addition, up to 16 audio channels can be fed into the Dante network from various audio applications running on that computer (Reaper, Skype, media player, built-in mic, etc.)
any computer running free Dante Controller can make changes to the network routing - no need for hardware splitters and changes in cabling
you can easily bridge existing ADAT or MADI gear into a Dante network by adding an ADAT-/MADI-to-Dante bridge like the Ferrofish VERTO32/VERTO64
you can use the existing Dante ethernet cabling to expand functionality to MIDI-over-ethernet networking capability (by using the free CopperLan app). Route MIDI between any computer and also any attached USB/Firewire MIDI hardware device.
internet and other data traffic can peacefully coexist with Dante audio traffic sharing the same network infrastructure
you may use a single spare Dante audio channel to broadcast SMPTE/LTC timecode to transport-sync any no. of devices with sample accuracy
most Dante devices offer a redundancy port to prevent signal loss if one of the connections fails (this requires an independent second network to work properly)
You have to find out wether all these features make a difference in your scenario. I'm enjoying all these features every day and would never want to miss a single one of them.
Regarding the network-infrastructure, it might additionally be important that you can use the same cables and switches for Dante and for standard computer networking. By this all computers automatically are connected with all audio devices. I suppose if sharing the network infrastructure it is recommended to use GBit and switches that allow for "Priority of Service".
Such infrastructure in place, it makes a lot of sense to use a network server (e.g. a NAS box) to hold the files for all recording- / mixing- (and other) computers. So the computers themselves only need a small fast SSD for their local software, and all (recording rooms, mixing rooms, offices...) can access all data.
On top of this, I would use a second NAS to do a nightly backup of everything (preferably using "dirvish" on a Linux based NAS). With that you would have access to all (daily) versions of modified files in a back log of 14 days, and many older versions.
With Dante, dont I have to give up the X32's capabilities as audio interfaces for the computer?
You give up selecting it as the computer's USB audio interface but you will still be able to record its 32 channels - and even more.
There are two possibilities:
(best option) X32 is fitted with Dante expansion card. In this case, you don't select the X32 (USB) as the computer's audio interface. Instead, you install Dante Virtual Soundcard (DVS) on one or more computers (mac or pc alike) and select DVS as the computer's ASIO audio interface. As stated before, DVS provides up to 64 audio networking in/outs on any given computer via its internal NIC port. This means that you can record double the amount of the usual 32 audio channels coming from a single X32. In other words: You may record all those 32 channels of one X32 plus another 32 channels of whatever else is present on the network (like another 32 Dante audio channels of a second X32 equipped with Dante expansion or any other Dante source).
X32 is NOT fitted with a Dante expansion card but is connected to a computer via USB. In this case, you can install "Dante Via" on that computer. This would enable the computer to make up to 32 audio in/outs of the USB-connected X32 available on a Dante network. Dante Via can aggregate and propagate audio in/outs of connected USB and Firewire hardware interfaces into a Dante network. In this case, however, we could not speak of a real Dante network because there's no other Dante peer available on the network yet. You could add another computer running DVS to have such a peer. However, this would still not integrate the second X32 unless either it is fitted with a Dante expansion card or is connected to another computer which in turn is running Dante Via just like the first computer.
I hope I'm expressing myself clearly enough so that you can follow
You may PM me if you like.
There is someone who would buy all this for the school, but only if its the Midas version. Is there any downside to the M32/ DL32 instead of the X32/S32?
Does all the same stuff work for it? We'd want to use the ultranet or whatever monitoring stuff they make for it
There is someone who would buy all this for the school, but only if its the Midas version. Is there any downside to the M32/ DL32 instead of the X32/S32?
Does all the same stuff work for it? We'd want to use the ultranet or whatever monitoring stuff they make for it
as far as I can tell, M32/X32 are even using the same firmware, so the digital side is virtually identical. Midas is said to offer better analog circuitry and build quality which may justify its higher price. Regarding the use with Dante, both consoles work the same and you still have Ultranet capability separately on each console if this is the preferred monitoring system.
I recently spent a couple of weeks looking at Dante. I came to the conclusion it was the way to go going forward but to get optimal latency it requires investment in Dante hardware, not software. I'm currently selling off old gear to fund the conversion. I can't wait.
I recently spent a couple of weeks looking at Dante. I came to the conclusion it was the way to go going forward but to get optimal latency it requires investment in Dante hardware, not software. I'm currently selling off old gear to fund the conversion. I can't wait.
That's exactly what I did almost 4 years ago and I've never regretted making the transition. It makes sense if you have more than just one computer and an audio interface. I'm interconnecting two converters, two computers, two mixing consoles, three live rooms and sometimes one or two client's computers but it's also worth considering with smaller setups.
Once you enjoy all advantages of real audio networking you can't imagine doing it the old fashioned way (point-to-point). Depending on what gear you already have, you might not even need to sell it as there are Dante bridging devices available for 32 or even 64 channels of ADAT and MADI gear. Just add one of those and maybe a Dante accelerator card if you need very low latency (real-time live monitoring) and keep your Fireface or whatever ADAT converter.
OK, so they are supposed to learn not only to do recording and producing, but also live mixing. It's great that the Behringer/Midas stuff is available in both variants with very compatible features/handling.
How easy is it to set the routing and stuff from the computer? Is there some sort of control interface that works with the USB interface port? It seems like there's a lot of facilities stuff I'll need to set and doing it from the x32 rack front panel doesnt look like it would be much fun
I think what I'm looking at is an X32 rack in my control room, with an S32 snake feeding it
Also, for inside the control room, I'd like to plug two DI boxes into the X32's onboard mic pres, and also some external mic pres into the X32's onboard line inputs, which I think are the Aux inputs.
The we'd be using ultranet with two of those PDM boxes and the distribution thing for ultranet
Is this all doable? Does the X32 let you route this flexibly so all the things I;d like can go into the computer interface for recording?
That's exactly what I did almost 4 years ago and I've never regretted making the transition. It makes sense if you have more than just one computer and an audio interface. I'm interconnecting two converters, two computers, two mixing consoles, three live rooms and sometimes one or two client's computers but it's also worth considering with smaller setups.
Once you enjoy all advantages of real audio networking you can't imagine doing it the old fashioned way (point-to-point). Depending on what gear you already have, you might not even need to sell it as there are Dante bridging devices available for 32 or even 64 channels of ADAT and MADI gear. Just add one of those and maybe a Dante accelerator card if you need very low latency (real-time live monitoring) and keep your Fireface or whatever ADAT converter.
.
I'm not familiar with the bridging or accelerator. Can you tell me more about that. I have four ADAT 32 channel external interfaces. Unfortunately they will not aggregate so to get more than 32 channels from or into a single machine doesn't seem possible. I don't mind using more sound generators (computers) but I would still need a way to get at least 64 channels into reaper.
Wouldn't the bridging devices add latency? Yes I need low latency for real-time tracking.
I'm not familiar with the bridging or accelerator. Can you tell me more about that. I have four ADAT 32 channel external interfaces. Unfortunately they will not aggregate so to get more than 32 channels from or into a single machine doesn't seem possible. I don't mind using more sound generators (computers) but I would still need a way to get at least 64 channels into reaper.
Wouldn't the bridging devices add latency? Yes I need low latency for real-time tracking.
you can connect an ADAT-to-Dante bridging device (a little cigar box) to your ADAT gear and it will convert all those ADAT channels to Dante audio. For instance, the Ferrofish VERTO64 (https://ferrofish-usa.com/verto64_64...nte_converter/) has 8 ADAT in/outs, thus, providing 64 audio in/out channels in total to interface them with the Dante network. Once on the network, you can route all these channels to any other Dante networking device on the network or to any computer running Dante Virtual Soundcard (64 channels at max.). All network routing is carried out purely via software on a channel-by-channel basis with free "Dante Controller".
The Ferrofish VERTO 64MX does the same with MADI-to-Dante. Conversion between ADAT/MADI and Dante is of course bi-directional and only introduces very few sample of additional latency.
If you have several devices that connect via ADAT optical you can connect them all to a VERTO64 and have all those channels available on the Dante network. You can add as many VERTO's to a setup as you might need (2 in your case) to convert all existing ADAT channels to Dante (and vica versa, as stated before!).
Now, on the Dante side: If you don't need real-time monitoring, you may simply use Dante Virtual Soundcard to record up to 64 Dante audio channels from the network on a mac or a pc (or on several of them simultaneously, if they also run DVS). However, if low-latency real-time monitoring is required, you will have to fit the computer with a hardware Dante PCIe card (aka "Dante accelerator"). Such a card provides up to 128 audio in/outs to and from a Dante network at latencies down to 32 samples (depending on the specs/power of your computer). So, in your environment (four 32-i/o USB ADAT converters delivering 128 channels) you could feed all their ADAT signals into the Dante network using two VERTO64's and then grab all converted Dante channels with a single Dante PCIe accelerator card in one computer, making all these channels available simultaneously in Reaper with unperceivably low latency (if your computer is up to the appropriate specs)!
I'm using the "Ferrofish A32 Dante" as my main converter. This fabulous device converts 32 analog audio inputs, 32 ADAT inputs and 64 MADI inputs to Dante audio and I can then route up to 64 channels of all these sources to my main Win7 computer which is fitted with a Yamaha AIC128-D Dante PCIe card. This way, I'm aggregating all my analog gear as well as my ADAT gear into the Dante network and have all those channels available in Reaper where the AIC128-D is selected as ASIO interface with 128 in/outs. Imagine having every single source channel of your setup available at its own dedicated input in Reaper without latency!
It also works the other way round: With 128 Reaper output channels available, you can send any signal from Reaper back to any of your interfaces (thus, to any computer you like)! Once you have seen this in action for real you wouldn't wanna miss it ever again
Dante just blows away all point-to-point routing limitations we were dealing with naturally and which we accepted as a normality for decades.
Some of you folks may already know this video but for those who don't ...
What do you mean without latency? I was wondering how the Dante interface stacked up vs the USB interface...Last time I talked to motu, they said windows really wasn't quite perfect yet for ethernet audio on their setup but was getting there. I dont think it was dante but it was some sort of ethernet thing
What do you mean without latency? I was wondering how the Dante interface stacked up vs the USB interface...Last time I talked to motu, they said windows really wasn't quite perfect yet for ethernet audio on their setup but was getting there. I dont think it was dante but it was some sort of ethernet thing
I mean: without perceivable latency.
I'm using Dante since end of 2014 on a daily basis in a professional context in my studio and also lots of times on location (live recording, live sound, mostly both at the same time) and I've never experienced any issues/drop-outs/glitches. It's plug-and-play. It's desigend for serious PRO duties! It's no immature gadget! It's used in massive scenarios like stadiums and big events like ESC, World Cup's and Olympics. It might not be the optimal and reasonable choice for a home recordist.
I'm no IT expert. I'm simply connecting cables between my audio gear the same way I've always done before 2014. The only thing that has changed is the type and the amount of cables: it's cat6 now instead of TOSLINK, XLR, T-DIF, etc. and their no. has greatly decreased since I made the transition. Another minor difference: A network switch is now also part of the cabling. What did change and in large amounts: flexibility, stability, expandability, simplicity and felicity
There's still a whole lot of guessing going on with regard to Dante and audio-over-IP in general. That's an extremely weird thing for me to see because it seems that the majority of an entire industry (audio/recording/live sound) is either ignoring this revolutionary technique or is simply not getting it. I remember becoming aware for the first time of what this technique really means. It actually was an arkward moment, a mixture of disbelief, complete confusion, being stunned but I also felt sheer excitement slowly grasping the revolution that unfolded right before my eyes when I started to grasp what kind of impact AoIP could possibly have on me, my workflow and the future of my studio.
After writing countless threads and posts in different forums my impression is that (today, dec. 2018) not much has changed in the general perception of Dante (I'm mentioning Dante here only because that's what I'm using). I'm not affiliated with any AoIP manufacturer or Audinate! I'm just a normal audio engineer trying to report exciting experiences to fellow audio engineers/enthusiasts because it's my profession and also my passion to discuss audio-related subjects like these and I'd reckon that stories like this one would especially arouse interest of fellow-audio freaks. I'm earning no money with my reports! It's pure interest and fun.
For anyone interested and open-minded, I strongly recommend watching some kind of Dante demonstration live with his own eyes to get convinced that this really works. I can understand that one could think that there has to be a catch. It seems to be too good to be true, right? I have not come across a single catch in more than 3 years. I'm just enjoying the easiest and most convenient audio connection format I've ever used in my life, every day. It works so smooth that I forget the immense "audio action" that is going on behind the scenes in my studio: Over 160 audio channels are constantly floating around between devices, computers and rooms in the background. It's actually kinda sad that I'm not constantly thinking about it because it's such a stunning thing to think about. I remember the first few days. I could just sit there adding and removing little green check marks in Dante Controller just to hear audio playing and stopping as I clicked to prove that it's really what I'm hearing
I perfectly understand that people want to be sure before turning their studio inside out and blowing considerable money and that they might have demanding requirements to be fulfilled. There are quite a few substantial videos and online articles about Dante and AoIP in general. Study the Wikipedia AoIP comparison page. Read Audinate's audio networking FAQ and email them questions and last but not least: Search the Gearslutz and the Reaper forum for SonicAxiom's threads and posts about Dante You'll soon be a Dante expert and may also wanna enjoy this nice technique.
@pipelineaudio: Try to get your hands on a Dante hardware device to try for a few days, install the trial version of DVS and explore what you can do with it.
I don't get what the guy could possibly be talking about. In my experience, there's no such thing like "Windows isn't quite perfect yet for ethernet audio" (whatever he meant by saying this!?!?!). He just adds to the general confusion, very much like this arkward video:
(please don't watch this if you are seriously considering making the transition to Dante but rather if you enjoy incoherent and completely unprofessional presentations as well as the word "uhh(m)" plus lots of smacks!)
To work decently I suppose you should use Gigabit Ethernet. Today it's the perfectly usual standard, but some years ago it would have been costly.
If you want to share the cables with normal computer networking (which supposedly everybody will wan) you should use switches with QoS (just to be sure that no race condition might ever occur). I think the prices of those have been dropping recently.
AoIP needs considerably more sophisticated hardware (and software) than -say- AES 50. This used to result in costly systems, but this might leverage right now (or even already has).
BTW.: the Redundancy feature described in the video is really stunning !!
To work decently I suppose you should use Gigabit Ethernet. Today it's the perfectly usual standard, but some years ago it would have been costly.
You don't really need gbps. You do need an ethernet chipset that supports the right QOS settings for AVB. On MacOS, you don't need a driver. Dante can work with either their ethernet card, or, with a limited number of channels on every decent ethernet chipset. Of course, gbps is better. 100 mbps is only useful with one audio interface and one computer.
Quote:
If you want to share the cables with normal computer networking (which supposedly everybody will wan) you should use switches with QoS (just to be sure that no race condition might ever occur). I think the prices of those have been dropping recently.
What you need is the right QOS. Audio compliant. Not any QOS, so don't go by this acronym.
Quote:
AoIP needs considerably more sophisticated hardware (and software) than -say- AES 50. This used to result in costly systems, but this might leverage right now (or even already has).
Not really the hardware, but the software. All the Dante/AVB enabled switches/routers I've seen are nothing out of the ordinary. They're just low-end manageable switches with the right software. Again, a possible pitfall when buying. Don't go by model numbers, or how the case looks. But these switches are affordable, compared to a year ago. I haven't seen many on the second hand market yet, so buy new.
__________________
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
Man this is really confusing. I see the benefits, and they are amazing, but just how far do I have to go and what would I have to buy to get it as fast, safe, and reliable as just using the USB interface on the x32 itself ( I realize right off the bat round trip latency could be better on dante, but I mean it in all the other ways)
Man this is really confusing. I see the benefits, and they are amazing, but just how far do I have to go and what would I have to buy to get it as fast, safe, and reliable as just using the USB interface on the x32 itself ( I realize right off the bat round trip latency could be better on dante, but I mean it in all the other ways)
If getting all 128 input channels of the four 32-channel A/D converters into Reaper is a requirement (and also very low latency), this is quite
a considerable task regardless what transmission format will be used. However, AoIP will offer most flexibility and expandability.
You'd need 2 Dante expansion cards for the two consoles, 1 Dante PCIe accelerator card, 2 VERTO64's and one manageable Gigabit switch (10 ports or more). Here's a rough sketch:
Please verify and confirm if this is the actual setup or not.
With Dante hardware you can achieve very low latencies. In small networks like this (only one or two switch hops), you can probably set the internal Dante latency of all Dante devices to either minimum (0.15 ms) or the slightly higher 0.25 ms (this is what I'm doing). Conversion from analog to digital and from ADAT to Dante will only add a few samples of latency each. The largest amount of latency occurs in the daw. In the example shown, you'd select something like the Focusrite RedNet PCIe (or PCIe R) or the Yamaha AIC128-D as Reaper's ASIO device and enable all 128 inputs and the desired range of the 128 outputs. The card offers latency settings down to 32 samples. The appropriate value will depend on the processor and RAM available in the computer. Dante PCIe cards require a 16-lanes PCIe slot for proper operation!
Dante network clocking basically works without user intervention. The system automatically elects the best clock available on the network as its clock master. You can override this by selecting a preferred master device. The Dante network can also slave to an external clock (like one of the AD converters) but I'd recommend letting Dante be the master for all network devices and also the other digital stuff.
My main computer is "only" Intel i5 with 4 cores @ 2.7 GHz with 8 GB of RAM. I found 512 samples to be absolutely stable and glitch-free. For very time-critical real-time VST-playing/monitoring I sometimes change that setting to 256 samples, giving me the feeling of instant playing but usually 512 samples is absolutely fine, too. I'm usually adding quite a few fx plugins on top of the VST intrument while playing and monitoring it live (EQ, comp, reverb, delay, chorus, etc.) - still no glitches. Glitches occured on this computer as soon as I decreased ASIO latency to a value below 128 samples. I had to disable some of the added fx plugins during tracking to get rid of them. However, in practice, I don't need such a low latency.
As I don't know all requirements and use cases regarding your context, pipelineaudio, I can't comment any further atm.
Well, ideally, I just need the 32 channels, not 128.
I have a big room which will have an S32 or DL32 in it
I have a control room where I do most of my personal work, and I'll need to get from that snake into the computer, so I figured I'd have an X32 Rack or similar in there
I'll also want to use some of that ultranet stuff I think (though I saw some video where people were setting up on ipad without it)
The second issue is that inside the big room with the snake, there needs to be a second computer setup for teaching and it also needs access to that snake and hopefully to the ultranet monitoring.
Is there any way to get that snake into that computer without an x32 or dante hardware?
If not, and I just need the 32 channels, is it cheaper/easier to just add a second x32 or to go to some dante hardware?
How easy is it to set the routing and stuff from the computer? Is there some sort of control interface that works with the USB interface port? It seems like there's a lot of facilities stuff I'll need to set and doing it from the x32 rack front panel doesnt look like it would be much fun
I think what I'm looking at is an X32 rack in my control room, with an S32 snake feeding it
Also, for inside the control room, I'd like to plug two DI boxes into the X32's onboard mic pres, and also some external mic pres into the X32's onboard line inputs, which I think are the Aux inputs.
The we'd be using ultranet with two of those PDM boxes and the distribution thing for ultranet
Is this all doable? Does the X32 let you route this flexibly so all the things I;d like can go into the computer interface for recording?
This is still an issue for me as well...we’re probably buying a few x32 or m32 in the next few days but still a lot of confusion for me
I'd expect it too work, but I've never tested AES50, except with one monitor mixer.
I guess that's a question for the Behringer forum. It's annoyingly slow for me, but there's a lot of X32 owners on there and Behringer support is actively present.
A number of third parties are already making cards for the X32, but these are not easy to find via Google. Cymatic is one example. You can use a Cymatic recorder to record up to 24 channels, fi.
CSI is crafted to follow a workflow the user can define. Banking is supported to roll through the channels, and other mode switches are available e.g. to access the parameters of any plugin.
I dont see anything actually downloadable for that CSI thread, is there something actually done already for the X32? ALl I can find is Patrick's one. Is there some reason I can't just use the regular MIDI control from the M32 to REAPER through MIDI? This is all very confusing for me
I'm reading the docs for Patrick's X32Reaper thing. It seems like you would have to follow a pretty strict track setup and workflow, and it would be pretty tricky for someone like me who just adds and deletes tracks on a whim. It seems to require using buss tracks instead of folders, but maybe thats a good thing
X32 users, how to network?
Linear Mode
