Are there any that use the TCP/IP protocols?
Standard Ethernet (ie: TCP/IP or UDP/IP) isn't really suited to streaming anything (audio, video, etc). Data packets can arrive in any order, and there is no real QoS (Quality of Service) functionality. There's a good reason that non-IP protocols are in use in the audio world such as AES, Dante, etc. Can you stream audio over IP? Sure, it's done all the time, but it's lossy and not suited to production audio.
Hi folks,I've seen a lot of the chatter on this board of digital snakes - and learned quite a bit i.e., just because it runs over CAT5 cable does not mean it is a standard, routable 100 base t or other TCP/IP protocol. That was an eye opener, and not all digital snakes are interoperable, or able to interface directly with digital consoles.That said, I have not seen any discussion on the quality of the A-D converters (or D-A).That would seem to be a primary concern for a quality signal to the board. Once digital, I can see the huge benefits for transport over CAT5 - size, weight, continued accuracy over distance, noise, etc.So, any difference between brands? Are they all using the same chip? Are there any that use the TCP/IP protocols?Really curious,frank
I believe the Midas and Behringer protocol - AES50 is Ethernet layer 1 compatible, but not layer 2 compatible. A&H's options - both for iLive and the GLD are Ethernet layer 2 compliant, and so can be switched and trunked. Ethersound is of course ethernet based, but has largely been replaced by Dante, which is layer 2 and layer 3 compliant, but benefits from AVB-aware equipment for routing and QoS. Cobranet is also ethernet based.
I stand corrected, but I will point out that Layer 1 is NOT IP. It simply means that they can use the same physical cabling (but not co-exist). Layer 2 is getting there, but is not TCP/IP. Dante, on the other hand, appears to be the real deal (I haven't had any Dante experience). How does it fare in a routed environment?On a side note, the use of the OSI layered network model while common is technically incorrect in the TCP/IP world. The "layers" between the two models do not line up precisely.
I stand corrected, but I will point out that Layer 1 is NOT IP. It simply means that they can use the same physical cabling (but not co-exist).
Page created in 0.084 seconds with 23 queries.