ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Behringer X32  (Read 15723 times)

Hadi Dinata

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
  • Hearing is believing
Re: Behringer X32
« Reply #20 on: January 19, 2014, 12:24:55 am »

No.  While the X32 and S16 use shielded CAT5e, the signal is AES50 digital audio.  It is not packet-switched data and therefore using wireless access points or data switches will not work.

I don't know about using other controllers but the X32 can emulate the Mackie HUI.  Several independent software developers have written programs to allow use of other means of control, but whether or not Novation will work, I do not know.

Thank you for the answers Tim, i wonder Berry team would make make one ,it would be fun  ;D .im trying to test my control surface into x32,ill post here if it works .
Logged

Russell Ault

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 132
  • Edmonton, AB
Re: Behringer X32
« Reply #21 on: June 25, 2015, 01:18:01 pm »

A real hacked-together-looking setup, but surprisingly stable:

At FOH:

[BCF2000] --<USB>--> [Raspberry Pi] --<Cat5>--\
[talkback mic] --------------<XLR>-------------> [custom Ethernet/Audio adapter] --<Cat5 to stage>-->
[headphone amp] -------------<XLR>------------/


At Stage:

                                                      /--<Cat5>--> [wireless router] --<Cat5>--\
--<Cat5 from FOH>--> [custom Ethernet/Audio adapter] <--------------[talkback XLR]--------------> [X32 Rack]
                                                      \-------------[monitor TRS]--------------/


I use this setup more than any other these days (despite also owning a full-size X32) because it gives me a 16x8 digital mixer with a 300' house snake in a package that fits in my (absurdly small) car.

-Russ
Logged

James Paul

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68
Re: Behringer X32
« Reply #22 on: August 10, 2015, 09:15:27 pm »

A real hacked-together-looking setup, but surprisingly stable: -Russ

Hello, curious about this hacked setup. Might the rest of us be privy to some detailed info about the design, construct, and implementation of such if you might be so kind.  :)
Logged

Scott Holtzman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3266
    • River Delta Audio
Re: Behringer X32
« Reply #23 on: August 11, 2015, 01:26:41 am »

Hello, curious about this hacked setup. Might the rest of us be privy to some detailed info about the design, construct, and implementation of such if you might be so kind.  :)
He is using the Pi's to extend the midi from the remote surface.

Why not just use a iPad or a computer with a large touch screen @ FOH ??

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

Logged
Scott AKA "Skyking" Holtzman
River Delta Audio, Cleveland OH
www.riverdelta.rocks

James Paul

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68
Re: Behringer X32
« Reply #24 on: August 11, 2015, 02:52:44 am »

He is using the Pi's to extend the midi from the remote surface. Why not just use a iPad or a computer with a large touch screen @ FOH ??
Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Yes, an obvious best guess would be the BCF midi control via X32 ethernet remote port. This should leave 2 pairs and a possible shield available for the talkback mic and  cans amp. Russel has previously posted of preference/desire for tactile control.
I personally prefer WiFi remote mix controlfor most times and situations, but fully understand and appreciate any one`s desire or need for tactile control.
If into sharing, I thought there may be a possible pic, sketch, report from the field for the asking. One less cat5/6 cable run for an InstaSnake & X32 remote ethernet port FOH deployment piqued my curiosity and could warrant consideration for particular situations if practical.

Logged

Russell Ault

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 132
  • Edmonton, AB
Re: Behringer X32
« Reply #25 on: August 11, 2015, 09:07:19 am »

Yes, an obvious best guess would be the BCF midi control via X32 ethernet remote port. This should leave 2 pairs and a possible shield available for the talkback mic and  cans amp. Russel has previously posted of preference/desire for tactile control.
I personally prefer WiFi remote mix controlfor most times and situations, but fully understand and appreciate any one`s desire or need for tactile control.
If into sharing, I thought there may be a possible pic, sketch, report from the field for the asking. One less cat5/6 cable run for an InstaSnake & X32 remote ethernet port FOH deployment piqued my curiosity and could warrant consideration for particular situations if practical.

Your guess is pretty spot-on. The adapters aren't anything photo-worthy (they're literally built out of $20 worth of parts from Home Depot), but it does exactly what you're suggesting: 100Base-TX Ethernet and 2 XLR connectors (one male, one female) goes in, and a single 8P8C jack comes out with Ethernet on pins 1,2,3, and 6, and analogue audio on pins 4,5,7, and 8. Plug in a short patch cable and an EtherCon coupler, and it's almost road-worthy (and lets me use the hundreds of feet of shielded cat5e cable with EtherCons I built for AES50 snakes).

The RPi's software was designed to work with the v1 firmware the X32 Rack shipped with, so instead of simply shunting MIDI down the line (the original X32 MIDI specification was... well, it wasn't, really) it does bi-directional Open Sound Control translation. I don't see any reason it couldn't be done with X-Touch-style MIDI-over-Ethernet instead, but because of other projects I know the X32's OSC implementation pretty well, and I've found it to be thoroughly (if unofficially) documented. (Incidentally, I don't see any reason why my adapters wouldn't work with one of the X-Touch units in place of the BCF2000 and the RPi, although with a used BCF2000 going for very reasonable sums on eBay, my solution is almost certainly more cost-effective.)

A lot of the sound work I've been doing for the past couple of years is in the realm of vocal jazz or vocal a cappella, where I find I spend much of the show making constant, small adjustments to a lot of different channels, and where having tactile control surface (with tactile solo buttons) is almost a can't-live-without-it. Different situations call for different tools, though, and I probably wouldn't have bothered with all this if I was doing more traditional rock and roll. To be clear-though, a tablet is absolutely vital to this rig, as my BCF2000 is only setup for main LR channel faders (originally only DCAs), mutes, solos, and a couple of function buttons (mute groups, tap delay, talkback). Everything else (EQ, dynamics, aux mixes, etc.) has to be done from the tablet (which, incidentally, is why bi-directional translation for the BCF2000 is nice: I can wander around with the tablet during sound check, and the control surface will always be in sync with that I'm doing; it's also a neat party trick to demonstrate to the uninitiated :D ).

As for a report from the field, I've been using this rig for the past year or two, and it's the only mixer that I do one of my more popular clients on. They often get hired to do events where they're only doing sometimes as little as one song, and the ability to roll up with their IEM mixes (and more esoteric EQs for beat-boxing, etc.) setup and ready to go means a half-hour sound check becomes a possibility. It's definitely done a couple of shows with 500+ people in the house (and recently in a packed 1700 seat venue).

The only time I've ever run into trouble with it was a somewhat cobbled-together outdoor show where the BCF2000 wouldn't respond to any control signals from the X32, although mercifully it was still sending messages out. Of course, when I got home, I tested the system and everything worked fine again (and has worked fine since), so I'm operating under the assumption that the mains power at FOH (which consisted of a lot of crappy orange extension cables) was so under-volted that the BCF2000 wasn't getting enough power (which makes me thankful I wasn't trying to run an actual mixer out there!). Even so, the show came off just fine and, as I say, no issues when the BCF2000 is less than 200' from the nearest outlet and not sharing power with 12 amps worth of powered speaker.  :P
Logged

James Paul

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68
Re: Behringer X32
« Reply #26 on: August 11, 2015, 11:18:32 am »

Your guess is pretty spot-on.
As for a report from the field, I've been using this rig for the past year or two, and it's the only mixer that I do one of my more popular clients on.  :P
Well I thank you for sharing your Roll Your Own rig, as well as the accompanying field report. Necessity is whose momma ? :D
I would imagine this set-up of interest to more than a few users of similar platforms and scenarios. Quick now, http://www.uspto.gov/  :D
Logged

Vic Curtis

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
Re: Behringer X32
« Reply #27 on: September 02, 2015, 05:26:28 pm »

Hey Russell, that's quite an ingenious solution when working with a wired setup, which for critical gigs I think I would feel safer with. I had completely forgotten that there were two unused pairs in a standard ethernet connection. Definitely going to knock something up along those lines when I get time. Since I'll have a FOH PC for main X32-Rack control and a Stage PC for USB recording duties, I'm also going to experiment with streaming the monitor send to FOH and Talkback from FOH to stage over RTP connections on the ethernet. In theory this config should also work with a wireless FOH-Stage connection but I have yet to play with that. May even combine the two so I can use the two pairs for stereo monitor feed from Stage to FOH and use a stream to get talkback from FOH to Stage (any slight latency should be no issue for this).

Thank-you for putting the idea out there - been pondering the best way to solve this issue Cheers.

Vic
Logged

George Dougherty

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 717
Re: Behringer X32
« Reply #28 on: September 02, 2015, 11:38:25 pm »

Worth noting that the split pairs between network and audio may be fine for Ethernet but may not work well for AES50 (not certain there) and I know from experience would not work for passing Ultranet. I even corrected an accidental crossover cable someone had created to pass Ultranet that actually worked to some extent but had channels swapped in position at the P16.  It appeared to carry 4 channels of audio per pair on the cable.
Logged

Mac Kerr

  • Old enough to know better
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5359
  • Audio Plumber
Re: Behringer X32
« Reply #29 on: September 02, 2015, 11:46:05 pm »

Worth noting that the split pairs between network and audio may be fine for Ethernet but may not work well for AES50 (not certain there) and I know from experience would not work for passing Ultranet. I even corrected an accidental crossover cable someone had created to pass Ultranet that actually worked to some extent but had channels swapped in position at the P16.  It appeared to carry 4 channels of audio per pair on the cable.

And they won't work for GB Ethernet, which uses all 4 pairs, so no Dante. There are pretty specific conditions under which this works.

Mac
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.092 seconds with 16 queries.