Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mac Kerr]

I have no personal experience but there are a lot of reports in the Q-Sys Facebook Group that Ubiquiti products are not up to snuff for networked audio & video.

I specify Cisco 350s for lower end projects and Extreme x440 or Cisco 3650s for larger single-switch projects.

In the install world where integrators may be looking ahead to merged audio and video over SMPTE 2110 networks, most switches we see in the field currently will not be usable. Audio and video over 2110 requires PTPv2 management, and if your switch doesn't support that it you can't use it. For Simple systems like Dante networks with some device control the Cisco 300/350 products are still at the top of the list for robust switches. These days they are pretty reasonably priced, even more reasonable if you are looking at refurb as big users move up to more powerful platforms.

For uses where I need PTPv2 (Riedel Bolero and IP intercom panels) I really like the Luminex switches Riedel recommends. They are pricey, but so is everthing else in that class.

Mac

[Ed Hall]

I was in the same position you are. I also bought some Dante gear to experiment and learn with while in this down time. I went with this TP Link switch. It’s managed via web page, has 16 ports with POE on 8 of them, QOS, and VLAN in 1/2 rack space. It’s not enterprise class, but it’s not given me any trouble in a little over three weeks.
I have 2 VLANs set up. One for control and one for Dante. It’s working like a charm so far.

[Tim Hite]

My thought is to swap the EdgeRouter for the Ubiquiti US-8-150W.  Is that a decent solution?  I know very little about managed versus unmanaged networks and what works best for the simple basic audio setup.  No Dante right now.  Any advice will be much appreciated!

Thanks,
-Jeff

I have the US8-150w in my home and it's worked well. I have the smaller 8 port in my workbox for my show network and it's worked well. The 150w has an internal power supply instead of a wall wart and I'll probably pick one up for my show rig when shows are a thing again. I've heard there's an issue with the US 16-150 power supply particular to that model.

I've been happy enough with UBNT performance and reliability. I haven't seen a need to jump up to Ruckus or Cisco. Reboots on show net aren't really an issue since it's generally unplugged.

I do like the UniFi Clound Key that runs the controller software for you and the USG firewall appliance has kept my networks safe when on the internet.

[Rob Spence]

In the install world where integrators may be looking ahead to merged audio and video over SMPTE 2110 networks, most switches we see in the field currently will not be usable. Audio and video over 2110 requires PTPv2 management, and if your switch doesn't support that it you can't use it. For Simple systems like Dante networks with some device control the Cisco 300/350 products are still at the top of the list for robust switches. These days they are pretty reasonably priced, even more reasonable if you are looking at refurb as big users move up to more powerful platforms.

For uses where I need PTPv2 (Riedel Bolero and IP intercom panels) I really like the Luminex switches Riedel recommends. They are pricey, but so is everthing else in that class.

Mac

Gee, wasn’t too long ago when “Simple systems, like Dante networks” wasn’t in the vocabulary 😁

[Jeff Lelko]

Thanks for all the input!  So a few follow-up questions...and please correct me if anything I say is incorrect.

...You'll still need a router in the chain to assign DHCP addresses to AP's and your other connections...

I was under the impression that this and DHCP wasn't needed so long as my devices had static IPs.  Is that not correct?  It seems that having DHCP is the overall consensus though.  Is that a function that lives within the switch, or will another piece of hardware be needed to achieve this?

...I'd suggest getting a 5-port (for use with the EdgeRouter) or 8-port (as a replacement) PoE switch that supports both 802.3af and 802.3at, which will help to reduce clutter. If there is even a small chance that you might someday want to use Dante, you basically need to get a managed switch, otherwise an unmanaged one will be fine.

I'm pretty sure this is what I'd like to do - get the 8-port as a replacement.  You bring up an interesting point about Dante though.  I have no intention of using that at the moment...but...reading through the Audinate site I see that Dante can coexist with other network traffic and non-audio devices.  Despite physically working, is it generally considered best practice to keep Dante on its own network or is it truly fine to run a multi-use network?

So, per Mac's response and others it seems like the Cisco 350 product line is the best choice for my application and needs.  Given that I need PoE+, is this the specific Cisco product that I'd need to buy?  Seeing as there's no mention of DHCP in the product description, is there something else I'd need to buy to have this capability or does this setting live in my WAP?

Thanks again!

 

[Scott Holtzman]

The specs on the  Ubiquiti US-8-150W actually look quite good. We've had good results with Cisco 300/350 series switches. You'll still need a router in the chain to assign DHCP addresses to AP's and your other connections. If you've had no issues with the Edgerouter, you could keep that and connect a switch to that for more I/O.

Routers have nothing to do with DHCP.  It has nothing to do with routing.  While routers do have a DHCP service as a convenience but only the smallest of networks use DHCP on a router.  In my house my DHCP server is running on a Linux server. 

[Russell Ault]

[...]
I was under the impression that this and DHCP wasn't needed so long as my devices had static IPs.  Is that not correct?  It seems that having DHCP is the overall consensus though.  Is that a function that lives within the switch, or will another piece of hardware be needed to achieve this?
[...]

You're impression is 100% correct; a DHCP server goes unused when everything has a static IP address. Of course, there are times when giving a static IP address can be a real pain, and DHCP solves that, which is why it is often recommended. I've done it both ways, and the times I haven't had DHCP I've typically come to regret it.

Switches typically don't have this function; devices with the word "router" in the product he often do (although, as Scott mentioned, it has nothing technically to do with Routing). Other devices can also provide this service (also as Scott mentioned), but the complexity of setup tends to be high, especially for temporary setups.

[...] You bring up an interesting point about Dante though.  I have no intention of using that at the moment...but...reading through the Audinate site I see that Dante can coexist with other network traffic and non-audio devices.  Despite physically working, is it generally considered best practice to keep Dante on its own network or is it truly fine to run a multi-use network?
[...]

From top to bottom, everything in Dante's design is there to share networks peaceful. As long as you aren't maxing out network links or dropping packets "environmentally" (or doing funky things with QoS) Dante does not care what else is on the network. Many Dante devices can only be controlled over their Dante ports, in which case network sharing is basically mandatory (at least with that control data).

Is it nice to keep Dante on separate switches/copper/fibre? Sure! Is it mandatory? Definitely not.

-Russ

[Jeff Lelko]

Thanks Russ, the details are much appreciated!  During my education on this idea I remembered being told back when buying my dLive to leave DHCP off.  A quick search seems to reveal a known issue with a certain version of the dLive's firmware, which is probably why I stuck with the static IPs and never gave it a second thought.  I can certainly see the appeal to having this though.  I'll have to dig deeper and see if A&H has resolved this, as losing control of my dLive during an event is obviously a dealbreaker! 

Either way, it looks like the Cisco 350 Series is the way to go here barring any other further input.  The 10 ports will be plenty for what I need and the PoE+ will help consolidate the other miscellaneous networking gear in my rack.  I'll certainly post back if I have any trouble getting things running, but thanks again for the help! 

[Scott Holtzman]

Thanks Russ, the details are much appreciated!  During my education on this idea I remembered being told back when buying my dLive to leave DHCP off.  A quick search seems to reveal a known issue with a certain version of the dLive's firmware, which is probably why I stuck with the static IPs and never gave it a second thought.  I can certainly see the appeal to having this though.  I'll have to dig deeper and see if A&H has resolved this, as losing control of my dLive during an event is obviously a dealbreaker! 

Either way, it looks like the Cisco 350 Series is the way to go here barring any other further input.  The 10 ports will be plenty for what I need and the PoE+ will help consolidate the other miscellaneous networking gear in my rack.  I'll certainly post back if I have any trouble getting things running, but thanks again for the help!

I really don't like the baby Cisco stuff.  I am sure it has gotten better but it's Cisco in name only.  Cisco's DNA is the IoS operating system and this switch is a Linksys design. Cisco bought Linksys years ago. 


If you can wait until I we can talk about the Cisco 3560CG-8PC-S I am sure that it will be less money too and it runs real IoS.
[/size][/color]
[/size]Here is some data in the interim  [/color][/size]https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/switches/catalyst-2960-c-series-switches/data_sheet_c78-639705.html[/color]

[MikeHarris]

Computer idiot here...most my clients must be too as we sell quite a few of the Yamaha $1000 switch. No Dante issues ever

[ProSoundWeb Community]