AES50 Development

J

James Drake

Freshman
Jul 17, 2012
62
0
0
Hi,

Does anyone have any info about possible AES50 development by Behringer or anyone else?

It seems that all Midas/KT stuff is locked to 96k. The only other product I can find is the Lynx PCIe card which of course requires a computer to run.

I was about to get an X32, now thinking about all the other units they just announced. But it would be nice to know in the future that we will have some options to use alternative convertors or sync the mixers to external clocks.

If some kind of AES50 utility boxes were on the horizon like digital format convertors, or clock sync boxes etc then it would be really cool.

Or do we risk AES50 being a cool thing that doesn't develop?
 
Re: AES50 Development

Klark Teknik do the DN960 Klark Teknik | DN9650 which is a modular AES50 to/from DANTE, MADI, AVIOM, CobraNet, EtherSound convertor (they also do a dual version) also they do a compact (di box size) AES50 extender.
 
Re: AES50 Development

Daniel Levi said:
Klark Teknik do the DN960 Klark Teknik | DN9650 which is a modular AES50 to/from DANTE, MADI, AVIOM, CobraNet, EtherSound convertor (they also do a dual version) also they do a compact (di box size) AES50 extender.
Click to expand...
which is locked to 96k.

i had long discussions with them about it.

midas/kt locked their AES50 usage to 96k. the point of this box it to interface with the outside world and perform samplerate conversion when everyone else is not running 96k etc.

behringer decided to build their system so you can choose between 44.1 or 48 which is actually think is more flexible!
 
Re: AES50 Development

Does AES50 only support the transmission of a pre-amped signal? The reason I ask is that the S16's have built in pre-amps and surely it would have been cheaper to be able to transmit an 'un-pre-amp'd' signal to the X32 and use the X32 on board pre-amps - this would also mean that the S16 could have been configured to be a true mic splitter - splitting the signals before the pre-amp stage - am I right in thinking the even with the adat outs the on the S16 the signal is post pre-amp. I was looking at the idea of the Rack version for monitoring duties but I don't think that the signal can be tapped to feed this to have separate pre-amp controls at the FOH and the monitor stations. - Please correct me if I am wrong.
 
Re: AES50 Development

The preamps are soldered onto the back of the XLR connectors, the analog to digital convertors are directly after the preamp. The signal doesn't exist digitally until after being "pre-amped".

Chris
 
Re: AES50 Development

Chris Nixon said:
The preamps are soldered onto the back of the XLR connectors, the analog to digital convertors are directly after the preamp. The signal doesn't exist digitally until after being "pre-amped".

Chris
Click to expand...
Ah I see !- was just about to edit my post to ask if this actually was the reason - too low a signal resolution to convert to a digital format I suppose! behringers suggestion that the S16 can replace a rack of Mic splitters is therefore a bit misleading ( was either in the blurb or in one of the webinars as I recall).
 
Re: AES50 Development

The next question is re the configuration for say using the Rack for monitoring with a couple of S16's. I recall that to use two X32's ( with no S16's) for FOH and monitoring then the configuration would be - stage inputs to stage X32 and Aes50 to FOH - which would mean that the stage X32 had control over the Head amps! So with RACK - for the full 32 inputs - this could be done with the Rack plus 1 x S16 at the stage - I.e Rack local Inputs plus S16 ( sorry this all bunched up but can't seem to tab to a new line in the editor!!!!). To allow the FOH to be in control of the Head-amps then you would need 2 x cat5 cables from FOH to stage. _ So two S16's feeding the FOH X32 over one Cat and then another Cat from the FOH X32 to the Stage Rack monitoring position. However is there a way apart form the ADAT of sending the signal from the S16's to two consoles. Once the S16 are linked then AES59 A and B are used on the first S16 and AES50 port A on the second - can the stage Rack ( or other) tap the 32 channels form the second S16 AES50 port B? - or is the only way out using the adat? BTW on the behringer site the set-up configurations for the Rack and the Core illustrate monitoring duties and not FOH!
 
Last edited:
Re: AES50 Development

Nick Davis said:
behringers suggestion that the S16 can replace a rack of Mic splitters is therefore a bit misleading ( was either in the blurb or in one of the webinars as I recall).
Click to expand...

I would think most people with a modest grasp of AD-conversions understand that we are talking about a digital split with shared preamp gain, like most manufactureres offer as a cost-saving option.

For the AD converters to work satisfactory one needs to have the analog signals in the right ballpark first, which is why the operator needs to set the gains before the AD conversion.

The idea that you could route mic-level signals down a cat5 mult and use the preamps at FOH is, well, a little silly.

Not a big Behringer fan here, but taking a dig at them for false advertising is a little, oh I don't know, in this case...
 
Re: AES50 Development

I was thinking more about digital interface boxes, or clock sync boxes.

it's nice to know that the midas stage box runs at 48k but it doesn't really offer something the s16 doesn't
 
Re: AES50 Development

kristianjohnsen said:
I would think most people with a modest grasp of AD-conversions understand that we are talking about a digital split with shared preamp gain, like most manufactureres offer as a cost-saving option.

For the AD converters to work satisfactory one needs to have the analog signals in the right ballpark first, which is why the operator needs to set the gains before the AD conversion.

The idea that you could route mic-level signals down a cat5 mult and use the preamps at FOH is, well, a little silly.

Not a big Behringer fan here, but taking a dig at them for false advertising is a little, oh I don't know, in this case...
Click to expand...
Calm down - did not say false advertising just "a bit misleading" - and OK I do not know the Aes50 protocol - and as I realised after I made the first posting it would need the a/d conversion first. Now that was politely answered by the initial reply to my post more interested in my second question.
 
Top Bottom