Log in
Register
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Featured content
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
News
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Features
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to thread
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Junior Varsity
M32R question
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Robert Lofgren" data-source="post: 149120" data-attributes="member: 2447"><p>Re: M32R question</p><p></p><p></p><p>The hardware is identical aside from the obvious different preamp/output sections and faders.</p><p></p><p>The hardware is capable of running 96k but according to a statement from Behringer way back the channel count and fx would need to be reduced to half of the channels due to available dsp power and they were not sure if this was the way to go. Given technical limitations of the platform I'd assume that the ultranet and aes50 would suffer as well.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Robert Lofgren, post: 149120, member: 2447"] Re: M32R question The hardware is identical aside from the obvious different preamp/output sections and faders. The hardware is capable of running 96k but according to a statement from Behringer way back the channel count and fx would need to be reduced to half of the channels due to available dsp power and they were not sure if this was the way to go. Given technical limitations of the platform I'd assume that the ultranet and aes50 would suffer as well. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Junior Varsity
M32R question
Top
Bottom
Sign-up
or
log in
to join the discussion today!
