ProSoundWeb Community
Church and H.O.W. – Forums for HOW Sound and AV - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Church and HOW Forums => Church Sound => Topic started by: John Fiorello on January 20, 2011, 03:30:10 PM
-
Sweet new forum setup :) I like it already!
Well, I've been out of the loop for a while, working on the upgrades to our facility, but I'm back (hopefully for good) with a question...
We're getting the iLive t112/48 system with the Aviom card. The aviom card also has 24 channels out via light pipe.
What I'd like to do is send those 24 channels over to a computer, out to a mixer, and then to our video feed for our recordings.
That part seems easy to me, just converting the light pipe to analog, plug into our old mixer (32ch yammy) and then take the main outs and send them to our recording device.
But here's what I'd ALSO like to do. I want to be able to record all 24 tracks at the same time so I can come back to the recorded service later, re-send the audio to each individual channel and let audio trainees learn how to mix the service (while not mixing in a live service).
In my head, that means that I need to assign each of the 24 channels to a single output, each output needs to go to each channel on the analog board, and then we listen to speakers coming off the main outs.
I figured that the Presonus Digimax FS http://www.presonus.com/products/Detail.aspx?ProductId=13 (http://www.presonus.com/products/Detail.aspx?ProductId=13) units (3 of them) would be what I need, and would be the best bang for the buck, but I could be wrong.
So my questions are the following:
1- is this hooked up right?
2- will the digimax do what I'm looking for it to do?
3- is there a better solution to accomplish what I'm trying to do?
As far as software goes, I was just assuming we'd use studioOne (lite version probably bundled with the digimax units) or cubase or something similar.
What say all you smart people?
Thanks!
JF
-
Sweet new forum setup :) I like it already!
We're getting the iLive t112/48 system with the Aviom card. The aviom card also has 24 channels out via light pipe.
What I'd like to do is send those 24 channels over to a computer, out to a mixer, and then to our video feed for our recordings.
But here's what I'd ALSO like to do. I want to be able to record all 24 tracks at the same time so I can come back to the recorded service later, re-send the audio to each individual channel and let audio trainees learn how to mix the service (while not mixing in a live service).
In my head, that means that I need to assign each of the 24 channels to a single output, each output needs to go to each channel on the analog board, and then we listen to speakers coming off the main outs.
I figured that the Presonus Digimax FS http://www.presonus.com/products/Detail.aspx?ProductId=13 (http://www.presonus.com/products/Detail.aspx?ProductId=13) units (3 of them) would be what I need, and would be the best bang for the buck, but I could be wrong.
I think that One (1) M-Audio Profire Lightbridge, which connects up to 32 channels to a computer with one < $500 box would be a far better value.
-
I think that One (1) M-Audio Profire Lightbridge, which connects up to 32 channels to a computer with one < $500 box would be a far better value.
Hi Arnold!
Right, I would need some sort of device to convert from light pipe to computer for the recording part, but then that audio needs to come back out analog (since I don't have light pipe inputs in my sound board).
So, if I used a lightbridge, I'd still want to mix on the desk live, and mix later from what I've recorded via multitrack.
Now, if this throws a wrench into the mix, I found out that the digimax fs units (which allowed us to get firewire to analog before and after the computer) have been discontinued by Presonus.
So, another option would be to record to protools 9 (no longer native) with some sort of interface that also gives direct outs/analog outs from the software. Maybe an apogee symphony type of thing, but hopefully cheaper (since we don't need quite that high of quality, just the functionality).
Any other ideas?
JF
-
Right, I would need some sort of device to convert from light pipe to computer for the recording part, but then that audio needs to come back out analog (since I don't have light pipe inputs in my sound board).
If I understand your config, you have an IDR-48 DSP chassis with has 24 analog outputs. How many of them are going to be used for the main system? I don't think that you will be using more than half of them for the main system itself. How many of the 24 analog outputs will be free for to output to the second mixer? I think that you have at least 8 analog outputs for routing to your second mixer.
You can obtain up to 16 analog outputs via the Aviom system using their AN-16. Normally most or all of the Aviom channels would be patched as direct outs from the iLive. Since the Aviom system is hooked in digitally, the AN-16 outputs are going to be about as good as outputs from the IDR 48.
You can also use optical splitters on the lightpipe outputs of the iLive M-MMO module. The second lightpipe from each ADAT output could be converted to analog using Behringer ADA 8000's, at about $250 per 8 channels.
So, if I used a lightbridge, I'd still want to mix on the desk live, and mix later from what I've recorded via multitrack.
I think that many of us would just make the second mix on the computer using DAW software, and forget about the second console unless the video mix has to be done in real time, concurrently. If you really need the second console, see the options I mentioned above.
-
You can obtain up to 16 analog outputs via the Aviom system using their AN-16. Normally most or all of the Aviom channels would be patched as direct outs from the iLive. Since the Aviom system is hooked in digitally, the AN-16 outputs are going to be about as good as outputs from the IDR 48.
Thanks Arnold. Yes, the idr48 has 24 outs, half (approx) are free for direct outs (we'll use 8 ). The Aviom card has 40 outs total. 16 will go to the aviom distro, the other 24 are heading to the broadcast feed.
So, the 24 adat plus the 8 analog are what we'll be receiving at the 2nd console. Our rep suggested that instead of trying to do outboard equipment, we should just purchase another control surface for the iLive.
It would run off the same DSP, and could use a MADI card to multi track to and from the DAW. Obviously, that option is the best, but it's also a bit pricey at just over 10k.
I'm kinda amazed that I can't find any outboard options that aren't either b*ringer or Apogee, seems like the two extremes...
And the b*ringer unit still doesn't get me to my DAW without another device accepting ADAT and analog inputs, right? It only gives me my D/A conversion and direct outs.
I'm doing some more searching tonight, I'll let you know what I find... I'm open to any other ideas though :)
JF
-
Hearback also makes some boxes that convert the hearback outputs to adat as well so you have those outputs you can use as well with the converter boxes which can give you a LOT of digital outs. Why not just take a couple of matrix outputs from the idr48 and use an editor session to mix them for the video.
On a second surface currently you can only connect one surface per idr. To use two surfaces you need to have at least 2 idr which then eliminates your mmo card because you would have to put an ethersound, madi, Rocknet, M-Ace or Dante when it becomes available into the B-slot.
-
which can give you a LOT of digital outs.
Thanks Kent! I hear what you're saying. But my issue isn't about a lack of outputs (I know I have enough), it's about being able to multitrack the different formats at the same time while also mixing them live.
If I was using all 32 channels via lightpipe or all 32 via analog, I think this would be a much easier setup.
Maybe that's how I should look at it. Take the 24 adat and convert to direct outs, then take all 32 and send them to an interface that gives me direct outs (like 4 firestudios or something)...
JF
-
Take the 24 adat and convert to direct outs, then take all 32 and send them to an interface that gives me direct outs (like 4 firestudios or something)...
Of course the caveat to that is what the latency difference will be between that straight signal and the adat conversion...
JF
-
I personally have not done this but, there are people that are doing this. A search of the iLive forms show this but, it is a good question one which I don't have an answer.
An ada8000 seems to be the most cost effective way to take the digital outputs(echoing Arnolds suggestion) of the idr for your video feed (You could use the hearback outputs with a converter so you will not tie up any of your other adat outputs. Just use an editor session to mix, send your other adat outputs to another computer to record. You are still going to be using a matrix like this but it will be assigned to the outputs of the ada8000.
There are some multi tracking programs that will allow connection to more than one audio device so you could install more than one sound card and route outputs to the second card to send to video. Then use a control surface that works with that software and you basically have a second console.
-
Thanks again Kent,
Help me understand what I'm missing. I can't seem to get it straight in my head. If I use the ada800 to do my d/a conversion for the live mixing, I still need to get the light pipe to the computer for recording, right? I would take the converted (direct outs) from the 8000 straight to the board for 24 of the 32 channels... how would I get the other 8 to the computer and the board?
Would I convert them to light pipe and then look for a light pipe card that takes 32 inputs?
Even if I had a 002 I wouldn't have enough adat inputs to accept 4 or 4 cables, right?
Are we saying that an A&H zed mixer or a presonus studio live (which doesn't have 32 channels) is the only option along with the ada8000's to get all 32 channels to analog?
JF
-
Let's see if I can summarize this correctly. You are purchasing an iLive t112/48 system with the M-MMO card for the iDR-48 MixRack. You want to have 12-16 analog outputs for the house system, 32 analog outputs to a dedicated audio-for-video mixer, 16 channels to an Aviom system and 24 outputs to a PC for recording. Is that a valid summary?
Since you are getting a 48 input console and only talking about 24 channels to the recording, 32 channels for the video mix and 16 channels to the Aviom then I assume those are being sent some variety of inputs and mixes. This may be an important consideration as it would explain why splitting the analog mic signals to FOH and video apparently isn't an option. Then again, maybe splitting 24 of the analog inputs along with 8 analog outputs from the iDR-48 would suffice for the video feeds.
My first thought was to get a second iDR-48 rack. That would give you a total of 48 analog outputs, so that covers the 32 for video plus 16 for house sound. The M-MMO card in either rack would then support the recording and Aviom. Or you could use an Aviom card in one MixRack for the Aviom system and a Dante card in the other MixRack to run direct do a computer using the Dante Virtual Soundcard license that comes with the Dante interface card (thus needing no special card in the computer).
Edit: I realized that you actually want 32 outputs to the video mixer, so edited accordingly.
-
And the b*ringer unit still doesn't get me to my DAW without another device accepting ADAT and analog inputs, right? It only
The Behringer ADA 8000 does 8 line/mic analog inputs to ADAT, *and* ADAT to 8 line outputs. It does both A/D, D/A, multiplex to ADAT, and demultiplex from ADAT.
-
The Behringer ADA 8000 does 8 line/mic analog inputs to ADAT, *and* ADAT to 8 line outputs. It does both A/D, D/A, multiplex to ADAT, and demultiplex from ADAT.
The M-MMO card provides only ADAT out, no ADAT in, so what would you connect the ADAT out of the ADA 8000 to? And since the ADAT In signals do not pass to the ADAT Out on the ADA 8000, with the analog outputs going to the video feeds how does audio get to the recording computer?
I actually missed the issue of playback from the computer earlier. Recording and playing back 24 channels means also needing 24 inputs to the iLive. The M-MMO card has no inputs, so 24 channel playback would require 24 analog inputs to the iLive system or a different interface card in a second MixRack. It's not a cheap solution but a second iDR rack could provide a system with sufficient analog outputs for both the house system and video feeds while an M-MMO card in one rack could address the Aviom sends and a Dante or MADI card in the second mix rack could take care of the recording inputs and outputs. If you also used the analog outputs on the work surface then an iDR-32 might suffice, if not then probably a second iDR-48.
Another option might be to consider if you could use a standard Aviom I/O box, split 16 mic inputs to the video console and iDR-48, split 8 mics to the iDR-48, video console and Aviom system inputs and then maybe 8 analog outputs on the iLive to video mixer and Aviom system inputs. Then you could put a MADI or Dante card in the MixRack for recording.
-
Since I failed to read closely the first time here is the response I should have made.
You have no digital in with the MMO card so with the idr48 and the MMO card you would have to have 32 analog channels open to return signal from the computer for playback which you could get with a couple of XDR but, then that nixes the MMO card since you would have to replace it with an ACE card. The only solution I see working would be a dual rack setup which takes the port b from the first mix rack into port a of the second then fit the b port in the second rack with the MMO card. This means you will have to gain share and you will not be able to use 2 ilive surfaces until the firmware allows but, it gives you enough analog inputs from your computer and digital outputs for your computer. You could then use the hearback outputs(with converters) with some ada8000s to get analog to your analog console. This setup would not allow the use of a dante, ethersound or rocknet card for direct recording to a computer.
Really it sounds like you need an IDR10 but, it is a whole lot more money.
-
The M-MMO card provides only ADAT out, no ADAT in, so what would you connect the ADAT out of the ADA 8000 to? And since the ADAT In signals do not pass to the ADAT Out on the ADA 8000, with the analog outputs going to the video feeds
All true. I was just fleshing out what the ADA8000 does. I see only the output side of the ADA8000 being used in this application.
how does audio get to the recording computer?
Please note my prior discusison of the M-Audio Lightbridge.
I actually missed the issue of playback from the computer earlier. Recording and playing back 24 channels means also needing 24 inputs to the iLive.
Playing back all 24 channels to mix offline seems like an expensive time waster. The most time-effective and and lowest cost way to do offline mixing of computer files is to use DAW sofware. It also yields the highest possible quality when it avoids additional analog to/from digital conversions. The downside for people who are not already competent with a DAW is that they have a learning curve ahead of them.
IMO being able to mix effectively on a DAW is a canonical skill for anybody who thinks they have sufficient breadth and depth in audio production.
-
This setup would not allow the use of a dante, ethersound or rocknet card for direct recording to a computer.
The slot in the 'Master' iDR would indeed currently need to have an ACE card to connect to the 'Slave' rack, so with two iDR racks there would be only one open slot and that would probably need the M-MMO card to have the Aviom connection. I guess an option to that would be to use split or dedicated analog outputs for the Aviom, in which case a MADI or Dante card could be used in the second rack for the computer.
I am still a bit confused by the channel counts and what would be going where. With the iDR48 planned you have 48 analog inputs. You plan on running 16 channels to Aviom, which is common and would typically be some combination of directs and mixes. However, you also seem to plan to run 32 channels to video and 24 channels to a computer for multi-channel recording and playback. If teh system has 48 inputs then typically those feeds would include all 48 inputs and maybe some other mixes. Are you actually going to have 48 inputs to the system or will there be only 24 or 32 inputs to the system? That could impact some of the possible approaches.
-
I am still a bit confused by the channel counts and what would be going where.
Thanks Brad! I apologize for not being clear, let me sketch out a quick drawing to show what I'm thinking.
Let's see if I can summarize this correctly. You are purchasing an iLive t112/48 system with the M-MMO card for the iDR-48 MixRack. You want to have 12-16 analog outputs for the house system, 32 analog outputs to a dedicated audio-for-video mixer, 16 channels to an Aviom system and 24 outputs to a PC for recording. Is that a valid summary?
Close, we're looking for the 16 channels via aviom card to the stage, and then 32 channels to the broadcast mixer for recording and training later via playback (from the daw). The aviom card gives us 24 of the 32 we need for recording (in addition to the 16 for the stage), the other 8 would be taken from the IDR 48 (which has a total of 24 analog outs).
A simpler way would be to say "I have an iLive IDR48 with the aviom card, how do I get 32 channels to a DAW for recording and then to another surface for mixdown (on Sunday and during the week)?
IMO being able to mix effectively on a DAW is a canonical skill for anybody who thinks they have sufficient breadth and depth in audio production.
I understand what you're saying Arnold, but the main purpose for the DAW is so we can train our volunteers to learn how to mix what we actually use on Sundays but do it when the band isn't there and it's not a service. Yes, if I was recording just to master later I could use just the software and be done with it, but that's not my goal.
One other thing to keep in mind, if we went with the separate surface and madi card, the IDR 48 only has 48 physical inputs but the DSP can run 64x48.
JF
-
Rough Sketch
JF
-
In terms of your question in your sketch, the iDR racks only support one other ACE device, so if you add a second work surface or second iDR rack then the slot in the 'Master" iDR-48 would need to be an ACE card rather than ther M-MMO card shown.
One concern I would have with the configuration shown is that the recording and especially the video feeds would have multiple layers of gain and routing before the actual devices. It should also be noted that the concept sketched would not support the 'playback' channels from the computer as the only inputs to the iLive-T system are the 48 analog inputs.
I probably was not clear before but you show 48 inputs to the system from the stage and only 32 channels to recording and video. Can you explain what signals are going to the video and recording channels? If there are 24 or 32 or whatever number of stage inputs that would always be routed to video and recording then maybe those could be split in the analog world prior to the iDR-48, thus reducing the number of channels that the iLive-T system needs to send to those destinations. For example, if there were 24 stage inputs that are always used then those could be split to the iDR-48, the video console and 3 inexpensive interfaces for recording. Then the iLive-T system would only need to support 8 additonal channels to the video and recording systems, which if they are the same signals could also be physically split.
The bottom line is that your application is beyond what the iLive-T systems were primarily intended to support. When you think about it you are effectively looking at a system with 80 inputs (48 stage plus 32 playback) and 60 to 64 outputs (12 to 16 house, 16 Aviom and 32 split to the video mix and recording computer). There are certainly some options to support this with an iLive-T system, however they would likely involve either multiple iDR MixRacks or analog signal splitting outside the iLive system.
-
Thanks Brad!
That's a great idea that I hadn't thought of. Because of the size of our old board (32) we were planning on doing some bussing and some patching to get the 32 depending on what type of service was taking place, but if we just tap all 48 channels prior to the IDR, we can send them all to the control room and just patch what we need before the interfaces.
Then we're all analog anyway, which makes interfaces much cheaper, and it's not super complicated.
Of course, after thinking about the extra control surface, it's hard to go back to analog :( but it's definitely the cheaper option which makes it much more accessible in the mean time and we can always add it later. You're right about probably needing an XDR in order to add the MADI card because of the # of card slots. I did forget that the surface has its own outputs too, which will make it easier to hook up in the future.
Here's a video of Graham White doing what I wanted to do: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUkmkOo-LlM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUkmkOo-LlM)
Thanks for your help!! Do you recommend an xlr splitter for 48 channels?
JF
-
For example, if there were 24 stage inputs that are always used then those could be split to the iDR-48...
Ok, 1 more question on the split idea. What will that do for phantom power? Will that cause problems? Will only 1 device be able to provide phantom power? Will that cause weird loads? Will I need to have phantom power on at both locations or will that blow up a mic :) ?
JF
-
If you can work a madi/rocknet/dante card in some how you will have a bi-directional feed to and from the computer. The issue then becomes how to feed the analog mixer and aviom system (if one exists since one is not shown in the drawing). Getting to the analog mixer you would need to use the appropriate D/A and networking gear if you use something besides the madi which will be expensive or like brad says just use an analog splitter for your production feeds
Connect your spliters with the through side to the console so you can use phantom from the main console only.(that's the way I would do it)
-
There are three basic ways to split mics. You could do a simple direct split, simply 'Y'ing the mics to all three systems (FOH, broadcast and recording). Or you could use transformer splits with a direct and as many isolated outputs as required. Both of these are passive processes while the third option uses active devices. The advantage of active mic split devices is that they are the preamp and thus you distribute line level signals rather than mic level signals. The advantage of passive splits is that it keeps all the connected systems independent in terms of preamps and gain. With passive splits someone adjusting the preamp trim for a channel will not affect the other mixes while active splits, be it dedicated devices or within digital mixers, have the preamp before the split and thus any changes to that affect all mixes (some digital mixing systems may compensate for this by applying offseting digital gain to the other signals). With three systems, and especially if one or more of them is located some distance from the others or may be on different power, then I generally prefer to use transformer splits.
For a direct output and two isolated outputs I often use http://www.jensen-transformers.com/datashts/dinms3p.pdf (http://www.jensen-transformers.com/datashts/dinms3p.pdf) or http://www.jensen-transformers.com/datashts/dinms4p.pdf (http://www.jensen-transformers.com/datashts/dinms4p.pdf). With the 3P version you have to parallel wire the input and direct output to the same terminals while with the 4P there are dedicated direct outputs. These mount to DIN rail meaning they can be mounted in a large NEMA box or inside a rack or whatever.
Whirlwind (http://whirlwindusa.com/catalog/snakes-splitters-and-multiwiring-systems/splitters/spc82-spc83-rack-mount-splitters (http://whirlwindusa.com/catalog/snakes-splitters-and-multiwiring-systems/splitters/spc82-spc83-rack-mount-splitters)), Radial Engineering (http://www.radialeng.com/re-8ox.htm (http://www.radialeng.com/re-8ox.htm)) and Wireworks (http://www.wireworks.com/Departments/Products/Microphone-Splitters/RackMount-XLR-IO.aspx (http://www.wireworks.com/Departments/Products/Microphone-Splitters/RackMount-XLR-IO.aspx)) all offer rack mount splitters using Jensen transformers, typically with 8 channels per device. Radial Engineering, ProCo and others offer similar devices with other transformers.
Radial Engineering also makes an 'install' version of the 8 channel splitter, http://www.frontendaudio.com/Radial-CX8-Contractor-8-Channel-Mic-Splitter-p/9999-02702.htm (http://www.frontendaudio.com/Radial-CX8-Contractor-8-Channel-Mic-Splitter-p/9999-02702.htm). And Whirlwind, Ramtech and probbaly others will make custom splitters of as many channels as you want using Jensen, Lundahl or whatever transformers you prefer.
I typically use splitters that have one direct output, which as Kent suggested goes to the main console and provides phantom power, and as many transformer isolated outputs as needed. Another option in terms of phantom power is to provide a dedicated 48VDC phantom power source to the input side of the splits, if you look at the Jensen DIN-MS transformers referenced above you will note they have connections for just that purpose. If there is no one console that will always be used and able to provide phantom for all of the mics then that may be a good option.
It should be noted that passive microphone splitters with high quality transformers are not inexpensive, probably around $125 to $150+ per channel for a three way split, and that due to the number of connections involved they can be rather labor intensive to install.
-
Thanks Kent and Brad!
I really appreciate the input. I looked at those Jensen splitters yesterday (found them on a gearslutz link) and I appreciate the input about where the phantom power comes from.
At our meeting with the architects tomorrow we're going to add the 2nd control surface with the cards and XDR as an alternate in case some bids come in lower. I just found out today that a good size chunk of the electrical budget was over estimated on hardware, so we may be able to free up the money for what I think is the best solution. If not, we'll probably go with the active split option.
Thanks again for all your help guys!
JF
-
Thanks Kent and Brad!
I really appreciate the input. I looked at those Jensen splitters yesterday (found them on a gearslutz link) and I appreciate the input about where the phantom power comes from.
At our meeting with the architects tomorrow we're going to add the 2nd control surface with the cards and XDR as an alternate in case some bids come in lower. I just found out today that a good size chunk of the electrical budget was over estimated on hardware, so we may be able to free up the money for what I think is the best solution. If not, we'll probably go with the active split option.
Thanks again for all your help guys!
JF
If you are looking at multiple iLive consoles, or a mixed environment of iLive and Yamaha or Soundcraft/Studer digital consoles you may want to look at the Rocknet Interface cards (http://www.riedel.net/AudioSolutions/RockNet300Modules/ConsoleInterfaces/tabid/510/language/en-US/Default.aspx) for all of those consoles. They would allow you to wire everything together on a Rocknet network loop, and have a facsimile of independent gain control for each console. With Rocknet, 1 console is defined as the master and all others (up to eight) are slaves. The master has actual control over the analog mic pre, and the slaves have control of a digital gain control within Rocknet. When the master makes a change, a reciprocal change is made in all the slaves so that there is no apparent change at the slaves. When a slave makes a change it is only to the network outputs feeding that console's inputs.
Mac
-
They would allow you to wire everything together on a Rocknet network loop, and have a facsimile of independent gain control for each console.
Thanks for the link, Mac! I'm checking it out right now. Do I understand correctly that if I use one of these cards to a network, I would still still need an XDR to have both the aviom card AND the MADI card? Or does this allow me to run the Rocknet as a separate network that replaces the A-net protocol that the IDR and control surfaces would run on?
JF
-
You can't use the rocknet card if you use an xdr because you need an ACE card in the idr48 to connect to the xdr. The XDR only has one B port option so it basically replaces the B slot you filled with the ACE card. No matter how you slice it your one port short. The only way to get more ports is to step up to the idr10 which is modular and a lot more money. The MMO card is taking up the only spare port you get. To go with any other card you have to ditch the MMO card which you can't do if you are using Aioms with it unless you take your aviom signals from analog sources not digital. The Rocknet and other cards make it easier getting sound in and out of the computer but, completely takes away your aviom card.
Hope I cleared that up.
-
you need an ACE card in the idr48 to connect to the xdr.
Thanks Kent! I was wondering if the Rocknet replaced the Ace card (port A) or could only be installed in port b.
Thanks for clearing that up!
JF
-
If you are looking at multiple iLive consoles, or a mixed environment of iLive and Yamaha or Soundcraft/Studer digital consoles you may want to look at the Rocknet Interface cards (http://www.riedel.net/AudioSolutions/RockNet300Modules/ConsoleInterfaces/tabid/510/language/en-US/Default.aspx) for all of those consoles. They would allow you to wire everything together on a Rocknet network loop, and have a facsimile of independent gain control for each console.
A possible competitive solution would be Dante over CAT5. Dante is supported by Yamaha (MY16-AUD) and will be supported by the iLive in 2011 if press releases are any guide. Research may turn up more info about other vendors. Dante runs over standard ethernet wiring and is compatible with standard ethernet hardware such as switches and routers. There's even a Dante interface for computer recording that needs no additional hardware, just the ethernet port on your PC!
-
Kent pretty well summed up the basic issue, the iDR-16/32/48/64 and XDR all have one ACE port and one open slot. The main work surface will require the ACE port on the main iDR rack, so that leaves one slot for another ACE device (an expansion rack or second work surface) or for a MMO, MADI, Dante, Rocknet or EtherSound module, but only for any one of those. And if you have an expansion rack then that would use its ACE port to connect to the main rack and only have one slot.
So if you added an expansion rack and a second work surface then all the ACE ports and slots would be used for the rack and work surface communications with no slots available for MMO, MADI, Dante, Rocknet or EtherSound modules. That means that all conectivity would have to be analog. So 48 house inputs and 32 computer playback inputs for 70 inputs. And 12-16 house outputs, 16 Aviom outputs, four broadcast outputs and 32 recording outputs for a total of 64-68 outputs. The output count dictates at least two iDR-64 racks or equivalent and the channel counts mean perhaps getting a bit creative in terms of keeping within the 64 channel bus structure, for example not having the 48 house inputs and 32 playback outputs all available at the same time. You'd also need an Aviom input box and four 8 channel audio I/O interfaces to get the analog signals into and out of the Aviom and recording systems.
Looking at your sketch and counting up the I/O made me realize that you show 48 stage inputs but no local FOH inputs. No CD player or video program audio or talkback mic or anything like that. Are those included in the 48 channels or might there actually be more than 48 inputs required for the house? And would all such inputs be addressed via I/O at the work surface or might more than 48 inputs be required at the rack(s)?
Mac, with the iLive-T having only one slot in the racks and none in the work surfaces, which are llimited to communicating to a rack via ACE, would the Rocknet approach still work? I think that may be one of the areas where this system seems sort of beyond the intended application of the iLive-T and into more of an iLive application. If you were to move to the iLive series then the ability to have cards in the rack and work surface as well as an MMO card rather than module might open up some other options.
-
Looking at your sketch and counting up the I/O made me realize that you show 48 stage inputs but no local FOH inputs. No CD player or video program audio or talkback mic or anything like that. Are those included in the 48 channels or might there actually be more than 48 inputs required for the house?
Thanks Brad, sorry that the sketch wasn't super detailed, you're definitely right that we're at the edge of what the T series was meant for.
The stage has 48 analog jacks running to the IDR (to a local patchbay, then to the IDR), the control surface (T112) has an additional 8 inputs that will receive the wireless mics. You guys already know, but for people just reading this thread, the IDR can use 64 inputs on the DSP, but the IDR rack comes in 3 or 4 sizes for physical inputs. So we're using the 48 physical inputs, but the 8 inputs on the control surface don't count against the 48 on the IDR.
That being said, we're not using all 48 inputs on the stage at the same time, so we'll definitely have some wiggle room. We're only using about 32 per service (between the stage and the wireless mics), the extra jacks are because of the physical changes that we have between services.
In our case, the IDR will reside where all our copper terminates (audio room) while the surface will be on the main floor. The 2nd surface (and XDR) will live in the control room which is across the hall from the audio room.
So 48 house inputs and 32 computer playback inputs for 70 inputs.
You're right on with this. Thankfully we're not using all 48 stage inputs at once or we would definitely need another IDR. If I understand it correctly, we can keep the iLive system with 2 IDR's and 128x64 architecture, right now we're just trying to keep in all in 1 box.
Typically, we'll only be bumping all 64 inputs on Christmas and Easter, in which case we still have the option to sub-group what we have to... The rest of the year, we'll be pretty comfortable around 52-54 channels or so :)
A possible competitive solution would be Dante over CAT5.
I'm hearing awesome things about the Dante card...but the conversation I had with our A&H Ohio rep said that the card wouldn't be out for the iLive for some time (rumor mill? more delays? no one knows?).
We have a big meeting today with the architects, so if everything goes well we'll see all our questions answered and we can move on to all the install problems :) BTW, we're going with Delany speakers (which is cool because PSW church forums was the first place I every heard the name Tom Delany).
-
I'm hearing awesome things about the Dante card...but the conversation I had with our A&H Ohio rep said that the card wouldn't be out for the iLive for some time (rumor mill? more delays? no one knows?).
I went to the iLive site today and guess what... the dante card was listed on the front page :) I guess it's available now :)
JF
-
BTW, we're going with Delany speakers (which is cool because PSW church forums was the first place I every heard the name Tom Delany).
Do you mean Delany or Danley? I haven't heard of Delany speakers.
-
Do you mean Delany or Danley? I haven't heard of Delany speakers.
Sorry, I was typing fast. Danley :)
JF
-
You can't use 2 surfaces with a single rack and an xdr. The only way to use 2 surfaces is with 2 idr's in split rack mode(w which again wipes out your MMO card. 2 surfaces is out of the equation with an idr and the xdr. You can use almost as many computer run editors as you would need though.
-
Ok, a better idea hit me last night when I couldn't sleep...
What if we only sent our multi track I/O to the main iLive in the sanctuary? We could still send a broadcast feed to the control room live, but that would consist of the simple D/A conversion.
If we're trying to give people the chance mix the full setup when the band isn't there, why not let them do that in the main room anyway? That's got to make this system easier to setup, right? Then we could either split out the aviom outputs from the dante 64, or run the MADI card with the IDR 64 and run all 16 out of the 32 physical outs.
The MADI card has to sets of outputs, right? So can I do my D/A conversion off the second output to the analog board?
JF
-
*TWO sets of inputs.
Sorry. :)
So I found 2 different madi to analog converters that could take the second feed from the MADI card to go to our analog mixer. The RME ADI-6432 http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_adi_6432.php (http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_adi_6432.php) and the Euphonix MA-703. http://www.euphonix.com/pro/post/aes-ebu-madi.php (http://www.euphonix.com/pro/post/aes-ebu-madi.php)
Are there any others I should be aware of? The RME sounds like the better solution and is readily available (but it's a bit more money, and AES/EBU outs).
JF
-
*TWO sets of inputs.
Sorry. :)
So I found 2 different madi to analog converters that could take the second feed from the MADI card to go to our analog mixer. The RME ADI-6432 http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_adi_6432.php (http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_adi_6432.php) and the Euphonix MA-703. http://www.euphonix.com/pro/post/aes-ebu-madi.php (http://www.euphonix.com/pro/post/aes-ebu-madi.php)
Are there any others I should be aware of? The RME sounds like the better solution and is readily available (but it's a bit more money, and AES/EBU outs).
JF
Here's a Whirlwind product (http://whirlwindusa.com/catalog/digital-audio-networking/io-modules/pxp-protocol-exchange-platform) for getting Dante into Aviom although I have no idea if it's still vaporware like the A&H seems to be so far and for what it's worth the Dante card(A&H) has been delayed at least a couple times already. That would get you the recording bi-directional to the T112 with the virtual soundcard and a feed to the Aviom (not sure how it's addressed yet) system. There's possibly even (or will be) a Dante to analog interface that could then feed your Broadcast mixer if you wanted that rather than a hard split. It all just takes some green. ;)
Just some thoughts. I don't know anything about the Whirlwind product yet.
Scott
-
A few thoughts...
Taking the Aviom outs likely won't work for a full multi-track since typically you send a drum submix, vocal submix, etc. to the Aviom to fit all the inputs into the Aviom mixer and keep everyone from having to build their own mix. That means you actually get less than 24 individual channels out of the Aviom card (I'm assuming they're digital splits of the Aviom input out of the iLive. You'd need more analog outputs from the XDR to get what you want in that case.
With the slot limit, there won't be a way to add a second work surface and an interface card to get the signals out. Either you use a second surface and take an analog split prior to the inputs, or you do without the second surface and go digital from there.
If you want MADI to analog from RME you want the M-32 DA, not the ADI-6432. 32 channel line out from either a MADI or 4xADAT input source.
If you're doing an interface fed by ADAT or something, put your interface in the middle. ADAT/MADI into the interface, DSP routing straight to the ADAT/MADI outputs to your D/A unit then on to the analog console for broadcast mixdown. Multi-track all the inputs via the interface inputs.
If you do analog splits, you could also run everything through a patchbay and allow you to take analog outputs from the computer setup and patch them into the inputs on the iLive rack. With the MADI setup you'd feed MADI from the iLive to the MADI bus, pick it up with a MADI interface for multi-track and pull it off with the M-32 DA for the console. When you want to playback, you put your channels back onto the MADI bus from the interface and patch the M-32 outputs into the iLive inputs. With TightVNC or something similar you could remote control the recording computer and leave it onstage near the iLive rack.
It's a slightly different world than the analog console, but you could also consider Software Audio Console fed via MADI for the broadcast feed. With that setup you could also track any of the inputs into the MADI interface either with a second recording app like Cubase, Reaper, Nuendo, or with the sister product, Software Audio Workstation. With inclusion of the M-32 DA still you could playback the recorded tracks into the iLive.
If you really wanted to go crazy then, you could consider replacing the whole iLive setup with Software Audio Console and Software Audio Workstation, Aphex 188 remote preamps, Appsys 64 channel ADAT over CAT5 units, the Aviom 16-channel ADAT/Analog input unit and a 3M 20-finger touchscreen. 3M has a 32" model coming out that would make a great virtual control surface.
SAC/SAW interfaces via a virtual audio bus for both recording and playback so you can multi-track and then turn it around for a virtual sound check or training. The broadcast feed would still be its own independent virtual console out of the 25 that are available.
Not everyone takes to a virtual console right away, but all my trainees have and the young studio guys I've worked with lately absolutely love all the control and versatility. It's worth considering if you haven't pulled the trigger on the iLive yet, but it comes with its own set of considerations as well. Preamp control in the system I outlined is via external software rather than built-in to the console. Unless you buy a turnkey system that really adds to the cost you don't have a one stop support option outside of the developer and the online community. With a fully virtual touchscreen work surface you have to be more careful about where you place your hands... May or may not be a good fit for your situation.
-
Thanks for the replies Scott and George! I appreciate the input.
Here's a Whirlwind product for getting Dante into Aviom although I have no idea if it's still vaporware like the A&H seems to be so far and for what it's worth the Dante card(A&H) has been delayed at least a couple times already.
You're definitely right about this, Scott. I did see that unit. But I think I have an even easier solution. (see below)
Taking the Aviom outs likely won't work for a full multi-track since typically you send a drum submix, vocal submix, etc. to the Aviom to fit all the inputs into the Aviom mixer and keep everyone from having to build their own mix. That means you actually get less than 24 individual channels out of the Aviom card (I'm assuming they're digital splits of the Aviom input out of the iLive.
George, the Aviom card has a total of 40 outputs (24 adat and 16 A-NET), not 24 (AFAIK), so that shouldn't be a problem, but here's my latest solution (and the cleanest too, I believe)...
(would the ADI-6432 work? I was thinking that instead of the M-32 because it was $1,500 cheaper [but the channel count is better])
The new solution:
-
(http://)
-
The adi6432 is a digital format converter not an digital to analog converter. You would have to have the M-32 or like device.
Depending on how many outputs you need to feed your video equipment you could just buy a second idr and use the software editor program to mix down the video feed on. If I remember right the idr16 is about 5k (at Full Compass) which gives you a 16 inputs and 8 outputs in the production room as well as a second madi card which would allow you to move the recording computer to the production room. This would give you the full idr and foh console inputs in the production room. Later on if money allows you could put in a second iLive console in if you wanted to.
-
The adi6432 is a digital format converter not an digital to analog converter. You would have to have the M-32 or like device.
And if you used the RME M-32 DA for the broadcast mix that would provide 32 analog audio output channels, so you would then probably not need the 4 analog outputs from the iDR.
If the Dante card is available then a similar concept would seem to be a Dante card in the iDR, a simple network switch, the Dante Virtual Soundcard in the recording PC and something like two of the Focusrite RedNet2 boxes. While that eliminates the interface at the recording computer, the Focusrite boxes are new and from what I can tell, expensive (not real surprising). A bit outside the box but you could also probably use a Peavey NION n3 - Dante unit loaded with 32 channels of analog outputs and configured to pass the Dante signals to the outputs as the interface to the broadcast console. It might be an odd choice as just an interface but because the n3 is a processor you could also do things like inserting gates, compressors, levelers and graphic and/or parametric EQ in the paths.
Depending on how many outputs you need to feed your video equipment you could just buy a second idr and use the software editor program to mix down the video feed on. If I remember right the idr16 is about 5k (at Full Compass) which gives you a 16 inputs and 8 outputs in the production room as well as a second madi card which would allow you to move the recording computer to the production room. This would give you the full idr and foh console inputs in the production room. Later on if money allows you could put in a second iLive console in if you wanted to.
Would adding an iDR-16 allow a second MADI card or would the card in the iDR-48 need to be be an ACE card to connect the iDR-16? Either way, it would seem to allow moving the MADI connectivity to the production area and add additional analog I/O, if that justifies the cost.
-
And if you used the RME M-32 DA for the broadcast mix that would provide 32 analog audio output channels, so you would then probably not need the 4 analog outputs from the iDR.
If the Dante card is available then a similar concept would seem to be a Dante card in the iDR, a simple network switch, the Dante Virtual Soundcard in the recording PC and something like two of the Focusrite RedNet2 boxes. While that eliminates the interface at the recording computer, the Focusrite boxes are new and from what I can tell, expensive (not real surprising). A bit outside the box but you could also probably use a Peavey NION n3 - Dante unit loaded with 32 channels of analog outputs and configured to pass the Dante signals to the outputs as the interface to the broadcast console. It might be an odd choice as just an interface but because the n3 is a processor you could also do things like inserting gates, compressors, levelers and graphic and/or parametric EQ in the paths.
Would adding an iDR-16 allow a second MADI card or would the card in the iDR-48 need to be be an ACE card to connect the iDR-16? Either way, it would seem to allow moving the MADI connectivity to the production area and add additional analog I/O, if that justifies the cost.
Ok first on the Dante, It till not be available till around march according to what the A&H people are saying in their forums.
In split rack mode you would connect from port B to port B so you would be going from madi to madi, rocknet to rocknet, ace to ace or dante to dante whenever it is available. Split rack mode gives you basically 2 independent systems that can share with each other. Dual rack mode basically just expands a single system which would necessitate an ace card in your main IDR port B. It remains a single system even with a second rack.
-
The adi6432 is a digital format converter not an digital to analog converter. You would have to have the M-32 or like device.
Depending on how many outputs you need to feed your video equipment you could just buy a second idr and use the software editor program to mix down the video feed on. If I remember right the idr16 is about 5k (at Full Compass) which gives you a 16 inputs and 8 outputs in the production room as well as a second madi card which would allow you to move the recording computer to the production room. This would give you the full idr and foh console inputs in the production room. Later on if money allows you could put in a second iLive console in if you wanted to.
Exactly, not sure where John got the idea the 6432 would work to interface with an analog board.
If that works, that seems like the cleanest way and most advantageous with the outs at back of house. The MADI card and a MADI interface in the recording computer should give up to 64 channels of record and 64 channels of virtually patchable playback into the mix rack for training and practice.
-
Exactly, not sure where John got the idea the 6432 would work to interface with an analog board.
Hi Guys!
George, you're right, I'm not sure where I got the idea for the 6432 either, I must have been looking at too many documents and products at once :-[
I feel pretty comfortable with the setup above, the consultants said they'll look at the madi option versus the dante option a bit closer to see what works best for our situation (we're not ripping up the place until may, so timing on the card isn't an issue).
But with the price of the RME D/A close to $1k less than the IDR 16, I think it's the more attractive option 'cause it does what we want it to do.
Thanks again guys, you've been a great help!
JF
-
If the price is only $1K different, I'd be very inclined to go MADI with the second rack and a software editor to control a video broadcast mix. If you went MADI out, and if the software editor for a video mix didn't work well, you could still pickup a SAC license or use a live capable and do your video mix in that with separate control from the mix rack. Going the DA route would require more wiring and effort to do playback into the iLive.
If you decided to use SAC or another live capable studio app for the video mix, latency required on the Dante virtual soundcard could be an issue. 128ms is the lowest it will go and it may step on the CPU for mixing unless you up the latency from there. I'd much rather have an actual hardware interface for MADI in that case.
With either MADI or Dante you could probably have a template setup on the rack to repatch all the channels to the playback inputs rather than patching everything on an analog patchbay. Latency for playback and training into the iLive shouldn't be a worry. In that case either would work.
-
Being that the iLive has been expanding its midi capabilities you could probably set up and I have heard of people using a Mackie controller to control an iLive system through midi. Just another option. They also just released their Ipad app which can pretty much fully control the mix rack as well.
What we do is this we have a computer running the editor in our production room but, we also have a pl6 with important channels, mutes, scene recalls and the such programed to it for quick easy physical access to some of the more vital things. You could even use 2 or 3 of these to give most of the channels you need physical faders for a fraction of the cost of a console.
-
What we do is this we have a computer running the editor in our production room but, we also have a pl6 with important channels, mutes, scene recalls and the such programed to it for quick easy physical access to some of the more vital things. You could even use 2 or 3 of these to give most of the channels you need physical faders for a fraction of the cost of a console.
I've typically also had a PL remote as part of iLive and iLive-T systems. They can often serve as the mixer control for small meetings and events that require just limited control of a couple of mics and a master volume. The remotes are pretty simple to program from the console so you don't necessarily have to permanently assign specific inputs to them, it only takes a couple of minutes to change the assignments. You can even disconnect the console and run solely off the PL once it is programmed.
-
Yeah, we're planning on getting a few of those PL-anet units... 1 for the choir director so she can mix her own foldback levels (with a limiter of course :) ) and one for the pastor/facilities people to use for the few mics used during a funeral or presentation.
It's a cool idea.
Kent, I'm gonna think on that one for a bit :)
JF
-
We just got the iPad app. It is full featured enough to use on a console-less system and much easier to use than the editor(with a mouse).
-
We just got the iPad app. It is full featured enough to use on a console-less system and much easier to use than the editor(with a mouse).
Yep, we're gonna do something similar. Man, I can't wait for the audio guys to set monitors while being on stage and hearing what the musician actually hears!!! That's worth its weight in gold :)
JF
-
I thought I would note that the iPad ap does not do system configuration so you would still need an editor or surface to do that.
-
I thought I would note that the iPad ap does not do system configuration so you would still need an editor or surface to do that.
Yep, I was just talking about output level and eq, which the app does do.
Thanks!
JF