DANTE and HDX card Max I/O

[Picture Start]

I have tried a number of searches for what I'm looking for, as well as in the MTRX Studio manual, but things are still unclear. Forgive the question, which must be fairly rudimentary if you use this hardware every day. I don't yet own the HW, hence asking here:

If I have one MTRX Studio connected to one HDX card (both DigiLinks), does DANTE I/O connect to Pro Tools via the network connection, or via DigiLink?

And if the answer is "via DigiLink", then should I assume that DANTE and analogue channels must share the available 64 channels between them?

A common use case would be:
1. 16 channels of mic inputs (analogue INs)
2. 8 channels taken up by monitor outputs (analogue OUTs)

Would that leave me 56 channels left for possible DANTE OUTs (as well as 48 DANTE inputs)? Or can DANTE run independently, over the network, unconstrained by DigiLink?

[uptheoctave]

64 channels of Dante are separate from Digilink, but you cannot record more than 64 channels into Pro Tools using Digilink with the MTRX Studio.

For instance, you could expand the MTRX Studio with 64 channels of Dante IO but you couldn’t track those 64 channels in addition to the 16 analogue ins at the same time. You are limited to 64 channels. You patch Dante to Digilink in Dadman.

[RobertDorn]

1 HDX card and a MTRX studio will provide 64 channels of Digilink I/O . If you want to make a bus send in pro tools -for instance- and send that to a Dante device, yes , you should patch a digilink output (source) to a Dante input (destination) in DADman. (and connect that Dante channel in Dante Controller to the receiving device)

If you just want to route your computer audio with DVS or a Dante AVIO usb(c)device right into the MTRX, no, this won't involve a digilink port and can be patched right away in Dante Controller. You can then add your computer audio in DADman to a monitor profile - for instance -

Hopes this helps!

[Picture Start]

Thanks to both of you—it makes sense now. If I want to ensure 64 channels of DANTE, plus ADC/DAC use, I need a second HDX card and a second interface.

I think for a simple setup of monitoring a live recording, plus enough channels of DANTE to feed a foldback system, one card, one MTRX Studio should suffice.

Thanks again.

[RobertDorn]

Originally Posted by Picture Start

Thanks to both of you—it makes sense now. If I want to ensure 64 channels of DANTE, plus ADC/DAC use, I need a second HDX card and a second interface.

I think for a simple setup of monitoring a live recording, plus enough channels of DANTE to feed a foldback system, one card, one MTRX Studio should suffice so long as I'm happy to use the hybrid engine.

Thanks again.

You’re welcome. If you can describe how many channels you want to record simultaneously (and what kind of connection sources you use) and how many outputs you need simultaneously (also with what kind of connection) I could think along with you.

Keep in mind that, when using 1 HDX card as your playback engine, you can have max 64 inputs and max 64 outputs in Pro Tools, because that’s what the digilink I/O on 1 card provides. In DADman you could feed all 64 digilink outputs to 64 Dante channels if you would like/need to

[Picture Start]

Originally Posted by RobertDorn

You’re welcome. If you can describe how many channels you want to record simultaneously (and what kind of connection sources you use) and how many outputs you need simultaneously (also with what kind of connection) I could think along with you.

Keep in mind that, when using 1 HDX card as your playback engine, you can have max 64 inputs and max 64 outputs in Pro Tools, because that’s what the digilink I/O on 1 card provides. In DADman you could feed all 64 digilink outputs to 64 Dante channels if you would like/need to

Appreciated. My setup won't likely be very sophisticated, but it brought up the question of whether or not a second card was a good idea, and thinking about it now, I think it might be.

The needs are:

• 32 analogue inputs (for some mic lines, and extra for HW inserts, talkback)
• 32 analogue outputs (surround monitoring + HW inserts/occasional summing mixer use)
• Some DANTE for feeding headphone mixers. I figure 16-32 channels max.
• Somewhere in there, Mac sound routed to a fader in Pro Tools

The thought at the moment is for two MTRX Studios—this way all I/O is addressed by DADman, converter quality is the same, delays, unit redundancy, etc.

I could just squeak by with one HDX card (16 AD + 16 DANTE-per-MTRX Studio, per card port), but it might be better to add a second card and dedicate MTRX Studio #2 to DANTE concerns for recording, and then switch to analogue when needed. If I ever need more than 32ch of DANTE (get into ATMOS, etc), I'll be happy to have the second card, plus more DSP.

[LDS]

Unless you are planning on leveraging the additional mic preamps, additional Dante & ADAT I/O, etc of a second MTRX Studio, it seems like it would be pretty gratuitous. You do technically have enough available I/O within a single HDX card and single MTRX Studio to do what you need to do.

For stuff like routing Mac sound, you have a bunch of options that aren't dependent on digilink at all. Aux I/O for example will route sounds straight from MacOS or specific apps to faders in Pro Tools digitally. You can also route them via DVS/Dante straight into your MTRX Studio monitor profile, making them selectable as a monitoring source. No additional digilink I/O required.

If you do go with a second HDX card, perhaps consider just springing for an Avid HD I/O with 16 analogue in and 16 analogue out. They sound great, and would also be better suited to handle the 16 channels of hardware inserts as they automatically compensate for the insert delay. The DAD/MTRX interfaces don't. You need to configure the delay compensation manually. There are plenty of other third party digilink interfaces that spoof the HD I/O to make hardware inserts more seamless. Lynx Aurora, Aurora(n), Apogee Symphony, etc.

[Picture Start]

Originally Posted by LDS

Unless you are planning on leveraging the additional mic preamps, additional Dante & ADAT I/O, etc of a second MTRX Studio, it seems like it would be pretty gratuitous. You do technically have enough available I/O within a single HDX card and single MTRX Studio to do what you need to do.

You're right, I basically have enough. I would buy a used card (and I have a line on one for a very good price right now) if I pulled the trigger.

A second MTRX Studio is 5 grand, has a bunch of I/O that I might not really need. But if one dies, I can easily switch to the redundant one for 95% of my work, which can be done with one, with very little disruption. I totally take your point, however.

Originally Posted by LDS

For stuff like routing Mac sound, you have a bunch of options that aren't dependent on digilink at all. Aux I/O for example will route sounds straight from MacOS or specific apps to faders in Pro Tools digitally. You can also route them via DVS/Dante straight into your MTRX Studio monitor profile, making them selectable as a monitoring source. No additional digilink I/O required.

I would like the option to be able to play back anything in the Finder without Pro Tools needing to be open, and I have read that AVS is flaky. Maybe it's got better. But this might be the way.

Originally Posted by LDS

If you do go with a second HDX card, perhaps consider just springing for an Avid HD I/O with 16 analogue in and 16 analogue out. They sound great, and would also be better suited to handle the 16 channels of hardware inserts as they automatically compensate for the insert delay. The DAD/MTRX interfaces don't. You need to configure the delay compensation manually. There are plenty of other third party digilink interfaces that spoof the HD I/O to make hardware inserts more seamless. Lynx Aurora, Aurora(n), Apogee Symphony, etc.

Great minds. The HD I/O was my original idea and might still be the way to go, and would save a ton of money. The question is: Would the HD I/O only be addressable through the normal I/O Setup? I expect DADman wouldn't see it. I don't know what the combination of the two would be like to use, as a workflow. Also, my understanding is that the Auroras spoof, but need manual adjusting for time when used as HW inserts. Is that wrong?

A now-discontinued HD I/O would be supported for five years, which should be fine.

[Picture Start]

Originally Posted by LDS

There are plenty of other third party digilink interfaces that spoof the HD I/O to make hardware inserts more seamless. Lynx Aurora, Aurora(n), Apogee Symphony, etc.

Looking at the better of them, the Aurora(n) configured for 16x16 and DigiLink is 4,199. Symphony 2 is close to 6k. At that point, a second MTRX Studio is competitive and has all the benefits of DADman, flexibility of adding more DANTE and redundancy.

I'm less inclined to go in the Focusrite/RME-kind of direction. At that point, I think a 16x16 HD I/O would suit me fine for all the reasons you mention.

[uptheoctave]

I believe that if you use a second MTRX Studio connected to a second HDX card you cannot integrate both properly in DADMAN from a monitoring perspective in the way you can with the full MTRX and second Digilink/HDX cards.