MADI core audio interface recommendation

[scenaria]

Thanks for the advice.

I did call sonnet and they confirmed 100% compatibility. The latest pro tools update is a game changer for me. Allowing the increase In IO. Up until this week I was prepared to move over to HDX to get the IO count which started to really add up. $2k plus some fiber to coax boxes and I can run 3 channels of MADI tx and rx . Thanks again, excited to get it going

[Darryl Ramm]

Beautiful. I must say I just love RME gear (and esp drivers/software quality, updates and support) and I just like MADI. Something about those RME Germans and their engineering culture. I expect you will be very happy with this. Yes the whole large IO count on Digilink I/O was just brain dead and I expect really harming Avid (vs. the apparent short term revenue from HDX sales). Great move by Avid to open up the IO on Ultimate.

[scenaria]

Prob more happy with this than the Capricorn itself 😂 but I just love the workflow on the cap and with MADI integration it’s sure to a pretty fun setup.

[scenaria]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Beautiful. I must say I just love RME gear (and esp drivers/software quality, updates and support) and I just like MADI. Something about those RME Germans and their engineering culture. I expect you will be very happy with this.

On a different note. In your experience running the original MADI protocol at 56 44.1/48 do you know what kind of latency is produced? Kinda curious if I can get creative and push the caps aux sends over MADI into PT time based plugins and then back into console without too much latency

[BScout]

Originally Posted by scenaria

On a different note. In your experience running the original MADI protocol at 56 44.1/48 do you know what kind of latency is produced? Kinda curious if I can get creative and push the caps aux sends over MADI into PT time based plugins and then back into console without too much latency

That will be determined by the buffer you set the RME card to.
Also, almost any PT plugin is going to put latency in for its own processing.

(Also whether running the 56 or 64 channel standards has no difference in latency. The 56 existed first where the remaining 8 were used as redundancy/safety. Then all the makers realized they didn't need that safety and could use the 8 instead for more channels. That's why it changed.)

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by scenaria

On a different note. In your experience running the original MADI protocol at 56 44.1/48 do you know what kind of latency is produced? Kinda curious if I can get creative and push the caps aux sends over MADI into PT time based plugins and then back into console without too much latency

Yes you likely can. Your real world experience here will be determined by how good your computer is, how well setup and how well behaved your plugins are with Pro Tools and how small an IO buffer you can reliably run at. (all the stuff that HDX with DSP plugins laughs at).

The RME MADI PCIe latency itself is not the issue, their high quality drivers helping you run at low IO buffer size helps. And who knows what the latency is on the console converter and MADI side. You might be able to find specs but I'd be just measuring some RTL times and start playing around.

BTW if you want to just host real-time plugins for you live mix sessions Pro Tools might not be the best choice. RME posted this video recently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQ95oc6zO3w. I just liked them talking about the idea of doing this (without a full DAW for live work). But then of course if you want to simultaneously record to Pro Tools... uh maybe not.