JoeCo multi-track MADI recorder does just that, it's rock solid and lets you use whatever external drive you prefer
https://joeco.co.uk/bbr64-madi-joeco-multi-track-audio-recorder/

 

I tried googling capability of USB 2.0 in terms of multitrack rec, but didn't got far. One does not really need MADI or DANTE when not planning to exceed 32 channels, right? If we compare prices it's 300$ vs 1300$ in USB and MADI/DANTE versions of RME Digiface

How many channels can really handle USB 2.O, if we're talking about somewhat classic midrange 24-bit 48 khz recording?

 

Last edited: Sep 18, 2023

MADI is more of a convenience, because those optical cables can be MUCH longer than ADAT (quite important for venues with stagebox far away), and you need just one pair for 64 in/out while you need one ADAT cable for one-direction 8-channel pipe,
RME Digiface has only 4 ADAT pairs, so it's 32in/32out at 48kHz max.

USB 2.0 is designed for up to around 70in/70out reliably, hence why RME uses it on Madiface (single MADI IO) but not UFX III (MADI + other IO),
for direct multitrack recording, you want an SSD, not HDD or usb stick, but still 2.0 speeds would suffice with aforementioned channel count

 

also, another interesting option can be AoIP protocol, such as Dante and Ravenna, they should be able to go up to 128 channels on 1Gbe network, but they are really not "plug and play" and so I would still prefer long-known optical MADI unless more complex routing was required

 

@tzzsmk I can't really describe gratitude that I feel. Thank you, to you and all other posters who commented on this topic..

So, for the start I'm thinking about getting an EVO 16 in addition with 2x extender SP-8 (8i/8o each) which gets me a 24 channels. However, I might also replace EVO 16 with Digiface USB to get the maximum of 32 channels (Vs EVO's 24).

SP-8 seem to be dirt cheap for quality they deliver. The only issue is the gain knobs, which do not exist on this audio interface.



Gain is being set on this baby by pressing corresponding channel button and then tweaking the knob. Seems like a catastrophe in terms of setting up 30 mics at once. BUT, here comes smart-gain, which I thought to be somewhat useless before I saw a guy doing this:
1) he presses all 16 buttons of his 2x SP8, lighting them up
2) he presses da big green button and asks his band/orchestra to play their loudest part TOGETHER
3) voila - gain is set for every channel

The advantage of this method vs classic manual knobs tweaking is that orchestra, or band, achieves its maximum sound pressure level when they play all at once. So setting up every other microphone separately, by asking musicians to play one by one, may be actually worse than this method. This, and overall SP8 quality makes me think that's a good choice

 

Just found this video. LOL, this workflow, the easiness he working with. Looks just not comparable to mess which usually occurs when working in DAW with all this peccy software...

Maybe it's possible to make Reaper workflow look something like this, maybe it's not. Anyway, I've never seen a live mixing process before, maybe that's why it amazes me so much

P.S. Yes I know this is techincally a Digital Audio Workstation too, just a specialised for use with this specific model/series of mixers. Well, maybe simplicity is the highest virtue after all...

P.S.S. The only downside I'm seeing - the lack of physical contact with console. Just imagine how easier and faster this process could go. Especially with gates, comps and EQ's. Physical contact is really a different level

 

I don't think the importance of the above quote can be overstressed. Pretty much every recordist of classical music started with a small, minimalist setup because so much can be accomplished that way. Many remain purists throughout the career. It has nothing to do with one's ambitions, professional or not.

With an orchestra one doesn't get much in the way of a second chance. It's not a rock band, there's a limited number of repetitions, no overdubbing of single instruments, regardless of the number of spot mics, and very limited possibilities of fixing in the mix.

A complex multi-microphone multitrack orchestral recording is a colossal waste of time and money unless one has already properly mastered basic stereo techniques: ORTF, spaced omnis, Decca Tree etc., and got a firm grasp of the related fundamental concepts like stereophonic zoom. If for no other reason then because the most complex setup will still have to be built around and rely on the main stereo pair (or trio in case of a Decca Tree). It's only after that part is fully understood, and sufficient practical experience gained, that one can figure out whether any microphones should be added to the setup, what kind of microphones and where they should be placed.

 

DANTE is pretty much the standard now a days for pro work. Way cheaper then a Pro Tools or an Apogee system.

 

I tried to watch a video about it, it reminded me CISCO schooling which I left.

I just can't get it, so: for the medium live setup the 'killer-feature' is just having more of everything? Speed, channel amount, cabling efficiency. But all that comes for a price. It can actually be 4x $$ of default, non-Dante versions, and I'm talking about interface and converters...

Well, pro's are pro's. I hope to meet someone who will show me how he uses Dante and, more important, how I could use it. I knew that USA is a 'country of sects', but this thing as well as CISCO... Really reminds one, so to say.

I know that networking by itself is based upon real human communications, and it can't be another way around, because it wasn't given to us by gods of some type - no, humans invented protocols, all this sophisticated data streaming stuff, but not just humans, - a specialists (!) who dedicated all their lifes in exchange for money to their specialities. So, speciality guild is a sect, in one way or another. That's a basic institutional cell.

So yeah, I don't really see any reason why "the pro's" shouldn't be using Dante. But if there is a place, where simply are no pro's because people get appointed to a job based on family ties (so-called nepotism, like in China or Russia), then one can and should use whatever is most available to him. That's my modest opinion.

But Dante looks cool!

 

Last edited: Sep 19, 2023

Dude, honestly, nobody here is trying to piss on your fireworks. We're just warning you not to underestimate the complexities and nuanced challenges of negotiating a large-scale, real-time live music recording situation with (as @ptepper also very rightly noted) no option for a retake. Basically, if anything screws up, you may also first-hand experience a most unpleasant quantum-leap to a highly disagreeable nervous breakdown & relativistic loss of self-esteem/reputation/future work...

It's akin to the difference between being a competent 'captain' sat at home on a PC flight simulator and being the actual captain of a 747 jet airliner filled with hundreds of frightened people flying over mountains in a lashing storm with one of the engines on fire... honestly, the pressure of responsibility to be completely on top of all practical contingencies in the imperfect real world is not to be taken lightly.

Hey, I totally applaud the positive energy of your blue-sky outlook - innovation & verve does facilitate opportunity, no doubt. It also introduces higher client expectation. In any event, a stage full of prissy prima-donna muso's in a venue full of noisily disgruntled punters impatienty waiting for you to debug some unexpected software, hardware or cable routing glitch is something i promise you will never wish to experience even once. At that point your innovative dream may very well feel like a living nightmare from which you cannot escape.

Could you not perhaps locate an established live music venue (or studio specialising in orchestral recordings) and offer yourself (for at least a little while) as an assistant or somesuch, to see up-close the practical realities of this field of endeavour?

 

Last edited: Sep 19, 2023

What I was imagining as I read this is that the recording engineer of an orchestral performance (or really any kind of in the moment, live capture) only gets one chance to record that performance, like a person with a camera just by happenstance below that horrific flight and filming it...there are no re-takes.

 

That's why I'm here, after all.

I'm pretty amazed with your honesty and willingness to help, I really appreciate pointing out maybe the most important axioms of this business. I hope to become just as helpful as you.

 

timing and syncing isn't standard, discovery and connection isn't standard, configuration and monitoring isn't standard, security is nonexistent,

Dante is cool and people with zero knowledge on IP principles are jumping into it thinking it's just a different connector for AES/MADI and then complain nothing works

 

Just got a look on the Motu 816 stagebox. Correct me if I'm wrong: the point of this exact type of devices is to have them somewhere on- or near the stage, route everything to them and then just have one single network cable going to our mixing room, right?

P.S. So it's actually not the worst idea: get my 24 channel of preamps on stage too, and link via ADAT to my engineers room, to get rid of snakes? And also having a technician there would help if some problems with preamp occurs

 

Last edited: Sep 19, 2023

The maximum length of an ADAT cable is only 5 meters. For MADI it is 2 kilometers for fibre optic, coax it's 100 meters.

 

And CAT5 is 328 feet (basically same as coaxial). But that is only without repeater/switch type of networking devices; and it can be possible to go further.

The Midas unit I linked you early in this thread houses the preamps inside the stage box as well. Most of them do, and they are considered digital snakes. So you aren't getting rid of snakes for connectivity. Maybe a simple setup such as this might be an example on the lower end of this stuff for you to look at to get an idea of numbers for $ and for distances: https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/X32ExpPack--behringer-x32-digital-mixer-with-s32io-stage-box. Go on sweetwater site and search for digital snake.

The real question is did you hit the Powerball last night or are we all just waxing poetic still?

 

That really doesen't matter, does it?

I think we're just created some sufficient base for anyone who would run into same questions.

For me - I simply don't think it's an adeqaute decision to have a set of equipement this big without some regular concert hall where I'd mix'n'record.

Basically, I see now a bunch of branches of possible paths, and all thanks to you, all the posters and commenters... Maybe poetry isn't so bad from time to time?

 

Of course not, but you got me looking at some of the Allen+Heath stuff with no published prices on them.

 

Been watching Dante certification video-course (just like Cisco, but about audio and basically free), and I feel really impressed about this technology.

Is there any way to implement three- or two-way recording per USB (for the sake of stability)? I'm talking about DAW setups and what I mean is: when we have a mixer, it usually can record to some external storage (such as PC), and they also have internal storage. So if recording fails, we always have our back-ups safe.

That is good, but with live performance, as I imagine, it's much harder to do. Of course one could connect multiple cables, saving from power issues, from torn copper or other physical, but if our recording device fails - everything is over.

That's why most pro people choses mixing consoles; even if they are digital - they are usually safer, correct me if I'm wrong here. You'll never get a BSOD or a throttling issue, it simply has less components to fail.

And what is BIG pro of Dante is possibility to send any channel, anywhere. So we could possibly route signal from our preamplified stagebox to 3, 5, 10 different computers! All recording at once.

But dante gear costs 10x as much as default gear. When I could buy simple digital i/o setup (EVO16 + SP8, with digital gain control) consisting of 24 channels for as much as 1100 pounds, same 24 channel setup, but with dante, could cost me much, much more... I don't really undertstand why though.

So, a question is simple as that: is there any way to get our signal to 2+ computers at once, using regular, non dante gear? I know there are some more digital protocols such as MADI and Ravenna; I'd like to stick to adequate prices if that possible, because I'm a single individual for now ;)

 

there's a hard limit for unicast vs. multicast configuration of Dante network, also you need to designate Dante network clock master, PTP (v2) master and so on, not use greenet switches because they don't recognize traffic on IP layer 3 and fuck up your Dante audio streams etc...

no matter what kind of tech you choose, you need a switch, for IP-based stuff it's cheaper (Dante, Ravenna...) for optical MADI it's way more expensive but arguably much easier to setup

protocol is one thing, physical connection another thing, both Dante and Ravenna are IP based with few things similar and interoperable but you'd better not mix them both unless you absolutely have to,
MADI is primarily carried as direct optical signal, and in case of using CAT cables it does not make it real IP thingy either