You are not logged in. Please login or register.
RME User Forum → MADI/AES Premium Line → ADI-8 QS Madi
How many ADI-8 QS's can I run off of one HDSPe MADI interface? Just trying to get my head around it compared to what I've been using which is AES.
Do I need a Master Clock for 3 MADI QS's . Is this no longer an issue. Do I simply daisy chain them together. Is there are visual images where I can see it?
Thanks!
Is it better to use BNC or fiber to and from the MADI interface and for connecting addition QS'?
Hi bigtree! Sounds like you are stepping up your sweet system yet again! 
I believe proper BNC will allow less theoretical jitter than optical, but RME's Steadyclock should negate any appreciable difference between the two. I'm using SC MADI Optical in my setup.
I'm not intimately familiar with MADI Ring configurations (my MADI setup is strictly 1:1), but I would have to assume you can use the full 64 Channel MADI capability. This should allow 8 ADI8-QS's in a MADI Ring. However, I believe the 2-3 sample MADI Interface delay would be additive in a MADI chain configuration - which could add as much as 16-18 samples of latency in each direction once you sync up all units (more than the QS's AD/DA converters impart themselves!).
If you are looking at the basic PCIe HDSPe MADI card without TotalMix FX (TM-FX), I might suggest using a second (or third?) HDSPe AES card to allow the additional I/O you are looking for. You won't have any of the MADI Chain latency issues, and all of your QS AD/DA's will align perfectly as far as I'm aware. The complexity of a multi-card PCIe system is a point of contention, but should behave well on a good MoBo with a proven BIOS.
However, as a recent MADIface-XT owner (and HUGE Fan-boy!), I can say TM-FX opened up a lot of potential in my mixerless setup, and I would not want to revert back to a Non TM-FX based RME setup (like the standard HDSPe MADI card). In your case, the PCIe MADI-FX sounds like the way to go.
With a MADI-FX, you can have three ADI8-QS's feeding the MADI-FX via MADI - and they will be sample-accurate. I believe the ADI8-QS is a snazzy unit, and should then allow you to route the MADI I/O to additional QS units over AES or ADAT (each MADI QS unit feeding a slave QS unit over AES/DB25 - Allowing for 48 I/O, even @ 192K!). These additional units will have the 2-3 sample delay (latency), but if you manage your channel assignments carefully, you can be mindful about where to assign tracks that require relative phase-coherency (Common mics on a single source, Parallel processing chains, etc).
Best of luck in your pending studio expansion plans! Sounds sweet. 
Hey thanks for all the info!
I feel like I'm going to kick myself now. I own 2 QS' and just sold my AES 32 for the madi PCIe. I just sold my 10M as it did nothing for me either. Hve an Orion here and its cool but not QS's.
I need a min of 24 DA.
Hey thanks for all the info!
I feel like I'm going to kick myself now. I own 2 QS' and just sold my AES 32 for the madi PCIe. I just sold my 10M as it did nothing for me either.
Not a huge deal IMO. How important is having all of your I/O sample-accurate? Are you doing a bunch of analog summing and/or using Hardware Inserts during mixdown in your DAW projects? The 2-3 sample per-unit delay incurred in a MADI Chain is not a huge deal if you manage your tracks accordingly. 24 I/O should be no sweat with your HDSPe MADI card using a MADI Chain with three MADI-Equipped QS'.
Hve an Orion here and its cool but not QS's.
Wow! That's a nice shout out to the quality of the QS IMO. I haven't had the opportunity to check out the Orion (or a QS for that matter!), so your real-world opinion makes the endless Orion Interweb hype seem like just that (hype).
I need a min of 24 DA.
In that case, I would really consider the MADI-FX PCIe card. It will allow three MADI-Equipped QS's (one QS to each of the MADI-FX's three MADI Ports: Two via Filer and One via BNC) for 24 I/O all the way to 192K. All 3 QS' will align well (might have a 1 sample discrepancy on the 3rd QS due to Fiber vs BNC), and you would get TotalMix-FX for further low-latency monitor-mix sweetness (TM-FX + the stupidly low-latency AD/DA converters in the QS will make for a jaw-dropping tracking setup IMNSHO).
The HDSPe MADI card holds its value well, so you should be able to flip it w/o taking any monetary hit. However, the PCIe MADI-FX card will be a good deal more than a used HDSPe MADI card (the MADI-FX holds its value even more then the HDSPe cards! And that's even IF you can find a used MADI-FX for sale!). I bit the bullet and purchased my first brand-new RME gear (the MADIface-XT + ARC) - Zero regrets. Additionally, RME's support is top notch, bar-none. Worth every penny.
Like other MADI devices (Micstasy etc.), the QS offers delay compensation for such setups. For DA chains, delay will need to be set to the max. value on the first device.
Regards
Daniel Fuchs
RME
To guarantee RME's unique low latency performance the card introduces a newly developed modular Hammerfall Pro Audio Core. The core processes three times as many channels as before, but actually reduces the system load and enables ultra-low latencies down to 32 samples.
If the QS is 12, but the interface is 32, how does this reflect?
Thanks again for all this info! You sound very knowledgeable with all this. You are helping me indeed.
I'm glad I bought the QS'. But, I bought this PCIe Madi card under that recommendation the the latency was the same as FX. I guess they didn't know lol.
regarding my DA set-up. I stem out to an console ( SPL Neos / Dangerous Master combo) and connect all analog gear there ( no round trip). I sum OTB and mixdown to a second capture DAW which is uncoupled from the tracking DAW. This avoids the clocking issues people are imposing on their DAW system via round trip. But, I am still faced with latency which is why we are all racing to find the best solution eh.
Regarding the Orion. Don't get me wrong, Its very cool.
But, I did comparisons with it some time back. It no doubt a sweet 1 rack box that sounds great for that pricel! USB works good too. I have however recently noticed some weird anomalies on tracks with it so, I don't trust it 100%. The sound is good enough but the QS is simply a better hybrid converter all round. QS sounds slightly sweeter (silkier maybe) hard to say. I have Lavry and Prism here too. They are all very very good. I use these for different app to my process..
We all need better sounding music and the Orion is a game changer to more affordable hybrid solutions. More affordable DA should stimulate the entire industry.
-----------------------
Daniel, thanks for chiming in here too! I suppose I should read the QS manual again now. I wasn't aware of the delay compensation but was using AES before which is straight forward. I'm now discovering new issues with Madi.
I'm also thinking about the DA M-32. . Would it be close to the QS spec, Daniel? I actually only need 8 in but 24 DA out.
How loud is the fan?
Finally got the madi cable and I've now been trying for hours to get totalmix and Madi to connect to the Orion32.
I can get it to sync with MADI but no track playback.
The Orion wants to stay on USB.
Anyone having success with the Orion 32 and Total Mix?
RME User Forum → MADI/AES Premium Line → ADI-8 QS Madi
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.