ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Another Dante Question  (Read 662 times)

Jonathan Hiemberg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 280
Another Dante Question
« on: February 22, 2019, 01:00:12 pm »

There's been a few threads recently that have touched on the issues of Dante robustness and redundancy. I've asked over on those threads and gotten some good advice.


We are installing a system with redundant Dante networks on data-center grade switches. All Powersoft X and T amps.


The main advantage for Dante for us is for future flexibility: We can add devices anywhere in the facility for inputs or outputs for recording - or whatever magical future devices are in the pipeline.


My main question regards Dante to the amplifiers. Our mix rack (dLive) is inches away from the amp rack. This is a permanent install, there will be no touring acts coming through.


Specifically: What would be the advantage of running Dante the 3' from the dLive to the Powersoft rack versus analog lines? There are no failure modes in the XLR other than physical (which would be the same with networking cables). I've got more than enough physical outs on the dLive for all of our mix & matrix needs.


It seems that using Dante as my signal transport to the amps invites the (probably very small) possibility of failure. A switch dies. A Dante card goes on the fritz and connects A & B networks. Those issues aren't a big deal if it's just a Dante in/out box for an auxiliary device - but when it's your amp rack that's a real problem.


I'm sure others have worked through this before: What are the advantages of using Dante to my amplifiers in this situation?
Logged

Phillip Ivan Pietruschka

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
Re: Another Dante Question
« Reply #1 on: February 22, 2019, 05:23:14 pm »

There's been a few threads recently that have touched on the issues of Dante robustness and redundancy. I've asked over on those threads and gotten some good advice.


We are installing a system with redundant Dante networks on data-center grade switches. All Powersoft X and T amps.


The main advantage for Dante for us is for future flexibility: We can add devices anywhere in the facility for inputs or outputs for recording - or whatever magical future devices are in the pipeline.


My main question regards Dante to the amplifiers. Our mix rack (dLive) is inches away from the amp rack. This is a permanent install, there will be no touring acts coming through.


Specifically: What would be the advantage of running Dante the 3' from the dLive to the Powersoft rack versus analog lines? There are no failure modes in the XLR other than physical (which would be the same with networking cables). I've got more than enough physical outs on the dLive for all of our mix & matrix needs.


It seems that using Dante as my signal transport to the amps invites the (probably very small) possibility of failure. A switch dies. A Dante card goes on the fritz and connects A & B networks. Those issues aren't a big deal if it's just a Dante in/out box for an auxiliary device - but when it's your amp rack that's a real problem.


I'm sure others have worked through this before: What are the advantages of using Dante to my amplifiers in this situation?

The advantages are:
(1) Fullly digital signal path to ensure optimal fidelity and freedom from potential sources of noise and interference.
(2) Flexibility to adapt to future requirements (when the dlive moves, or a different console or dsp is used, or something left field is necessary).
(3) Simplification of cabling inside racks. Freeing space, and reducing install costs. With the amps in question you will be installing data cabling for control and monitoring anyway. The above is doubly true if your install would include patchbays or krone walls (or both) for the installed analog interconnects.
(4) Consistent management platform for most or entire system (DC / DDM).


I think (3) & (4) are much more compelling than (1) given the likelihood of unresolvable noise problems on a short interconnect with professional equipment is very low.

Edit to add: the two biggest down sides I see are the increased risk profile (vs analog interconnects, due to configuration errors or switch failure (unlikely)) and increased system complexity. However in the context of an infrastructure where Dante and other IP systems are highly intergrated both of these are insignificant. As far as the risk of the dante module itself failing, is this any higher than an analog output (or input) card failing? Given that often a device's control interface is accessed via the dante NIC, even if you weren't using the dante audio, in many cases you would have serious issues anyway, in the case of module failure - I believe that would be the case with the powersoft amps (though I haven't used them).
« Last Edit: February 22, 2019, 11:23:37 pm by Phillip Ivan Pietruschka »
Logged

David Sturzenbecher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1687
  • So. Dak.
    • Sturz Audio
Re: Another Dante Question
« Reply #2 on: February 22, 2019, 09:17:31 pm »


We are installing a system with redundant Dante networks on data-center grade switches. All Powersoft X and T amps.



You might want to check out PG5 of this document
https://www.powersoft-audio.com/en/docman/1396-application-note-dantesetup-rack-amps/file

The T series doesn't do redundant mode.
Logged
Audio Systems Design Engineer
Daktronics, Inc.
CTS-D, CTS-I
AES Full Member

Erik Jerde

  • Classic LAB
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 964
Re: Another Dante Question
« Reply #3 on: February 23, 2019, 08:30:19 am »

At least on the X series amps you could wire up both and set analog as the backup path to Dante.  I'm not sure if T series supports redundant inputs.
Logged

Helge A Bentsen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 889
  • Oslo, Norway.
Re: Another Dante Question
« Reply #4 on: February 23, 2019, 09:17:45 am »

At least on the X series amps you could wire up both and set analog as the backup path to Dante.  I'm not sure if T series supports redundant inputs.

They do.
Same DSP/software platform.
Logged

Jonathan Hiemberg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 280
Re: Another Dante Question
« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2019, 10:23:29 am »

You might want to check out PG5 of this document
https://www.powersoft-audio.com/en/docman/1396-application-note-dantesetup-rack-amps/file

The T series doesn't do redundant mode.


Thanks for the heads up.


So - it makes sense to set up Dante A as main signal transport, with analog as backup. That does remove the concern mentioned in other threads (as well as the Powersoft documentation) of the A & B networks inadvertently getting connected.

Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Another Dante Question
« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2019, 10:23:29 am »


Pages: [1]   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.044 seconds with 22 queries.