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).
