• Kewl
  • ADAT user
  • Offline
  • From: Montreal, Canada
  • Registered: 2007-11-26
  • Posts: 10

Topic: Micstasy, DMC-842, ADI-642 & Digidesign 192 I/O

I have the following equipment here that I'm trying to make work together:
1 Micstasy
1 DMC-842
2 ADI-642
1 Digidesign 192 I/O into a PowerMac G5

The wordclock is coming out of the 192 I/O and distributed to the RME hardware.

We're not sure about the best way to connect all the MADI to the ADI-842 that's going into the 192 I/O via AES/EBU. I didn't spec that installation out, but it's my responsibility now to make it work... Personally, I think the we just need one ADI-642 in that setup.

So, what is the optimum interconnection scheme and can we leave out one ADI-642?

Thanks,

Daniel

Kewl's Website

  • Jeff
  • Jeff
  • Moderator
  • Offline
  • From: USA
  • Registered: 2007-05-21
  • Posts: 4,622

Re: Micstasy, DMC-842, ADI-642 & Digidesign 192 I/O

I'm not really sure what you're trying to accomplish... the 192 only has 8 channels of digital inputs, 16 if you have the digital I/O expansion card. That means you can only use 1 or 2 of these RME devices at a time.

Regards,
Jeff Petersen
Synthax Inc.

Jeff's Website

  • Kewl
  • ADAT user
  • Offline
  • From: Montreal, Canada
  • Registered: 2007-11-26
  • Posts: 10

Re: Micstasy, DMC-842, ADI-642 & Digidesign 192 I/O

Here goes:

The Micstasy is for the analog mics, the DMC-842 is for the digital mics. Both are going via MADI to the ADI-642, which would be used to select and route, with its matrix, any combination of eight analog and digital mics to the 192 I/O via AES/EBU.

So what is the best way to connect the MADI and do we need the second ADI-642?

Hope this is clearer,

Daniel

Kewl's Website

4 Reply by clAUDIO (edited by clAUDIO 2008-08-20 21:32:03)

  • From: Germany
  • Registered: 2007-05-09
  • Posts: 63

Re: Micstasy, DMC-842, ADI-642 & Digidesign 192 I/O

Hi Daniel,

you could connect Micstasy -> DMC-842 -> ADI-642 via MADI as "Daisy Chain" (optical or coaxial). Connected like that you can use the ADI-642 Matrix to select 8 channels out of 16 (coming from Micstasy and DMC) to send them to the 192 I/O. Please ensure that all devices are set to "External Wordclock" and the last device in your Wordclock chain is terminated.

Using this configuration you will need to set the Micstasys Device ID to 1 and the DMCs Device ID to 2 so that the 8 Micstasy channels will be routed to channel 1-8 of the MADI-Stream and the DMC-channels will be embedded in channel 9-16 of the MADI-Stream.

Nice to hear that you are using the DMC, by the way. :-)

Kind Regards,
Claudio

clAUDIO's Website

  • From: Germany
  • Registered: 2007-04-10
  • Posts: 9,568

Re: Micstasy, DMC-842, ADI-642 & Digidesign 192 I/O

Depending on the required distance between the G5 and the DMC/Micstasy, you could also clock the 642 from the 192, then connect MADI in a ring, i.e. from the 642 to the DMC (optical), then from the DMC to the Micstasy (optical or coax with a short BNC cable), and from there back to the 642 (optical, up to a distance of 2000m...). Here, the two preamps would be clocked to MADI ("OPTN") and only the 642 would sync to Word Clock (or even AES/EBU).
The three RME devices will normally be able to auto-negotiate their IDs, but you may want to set them up manually, as Claudio suggested.

Another advatage of this setup would be that you could use the DMCs DA converters for talback on the stage or wherever it is positioned. FWIW, you could even feed a PA that way...

You won't really need the second 642. Sell it and buy some really good optical cables... cool

Regards,
Daniel Fuchs
RME

Regards
Daniel Fuchs
RME

RME Support's Website

6 Reply by Kewl (edited by Kewl 2008-08-21 17:52:47)

  • Kewl
  • ADAT user
  • Offline
  • From: Montreal, Canada
  • Registered: 2007-11-26
  • Posts: 10

Re: Micstasy, DMC-842, ADI-642 & Digidesign 192 I/O

I actually tried both suggested connection schemes back in June, but all with coax only: that's probably why it didn't work...

The distance between the ADI-642 and the Digi 192 is short: they're on top of each other in the same control room rack mount. Same thing for the DMC and Mictasy: in the same rack mount, but this one is in the studio. The cables between both racks are long: from the control room ADI-642, they climb a wall, run through the ceiling, back down wall in the studio into a snake to the mobile rack mount where both mic pres are.

With Claudio suggested setup, I would need only one "really good" wink optical cable and with Daniel's, two optical cables: that's right? Aside from being more economical, what are drawbacks of Claudio's setup? What would be the improvements in Daniel's setup compared to Claudio's?

Thanks for the help and for confirming that the second ADI is superfluous...

- Daniel

Kewl's Website

  • From: Germany
  • Registered: 2007-04-10
  • Posts: 9,568

Re: Micstasy, DMC-842, ADI-642 & Digidesign 192 I/O

Long distances with coax cables can be problematic... Optical is better here.

Good cables like the one I suggested are bidirectional, they have two (or even four) independent fibres.

My setup is better, of course...  fryingpan :-D
With Claudio's, you would also need a long Word Clock connection from the 192 or 642 to the DMC and Micstasy. In my setup, the preamps simply sync to MADI.


Regards,
Daniel Fuchs
RME

Regards
Daniel Fuchs
RME

RME Support's Website

8 Reply by Kewl (edited by Kewl 2008-08-21 19:33:00)

  • Kewl
  • ADAT user
  • Offline
  • From: Montreal, Canada
  • Registered: 2007-11-26
  • Posts: 10

Re: Micstasy, DMC-842, ADI-642 & Digidesign 192 I/O

RME Support wrote:

With Claudio's, you would also need a long Word Clock connection from the 192 or 642 to the DMC and Micstacy

The coax are all ready installed... I have to inquire about the space left in the ceiling conduit for the supplemental optical cable. For your solution Daniel, this would be the cable of choice?

Thanks,

Daniel

Kewl's Website

  • From: Germany
  • Registered: 2007-04-10
  • Posts: 9,568

Re: Micstasy, DMC-842, ADI-642 & Digidesign 192 I/O

Yes, for a fixed installation this cable would be sufficient and well suited.

Regards,
Daniel Fuchs
RME

Regards
Daniel Fuchs
RME

RME Support's Website