Focusrite REDNet

[mourip]

2 hours ago, Tand said:

 

Lots of info here.  https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-diyrs-cookbook.781268/page-70#post-13417165

 

My Rednet 16 R measured 7 v as seen in my picture. No idea why the 16 R differs from the standard 16 AES but as mourip says, be sure to measure yours when/if doing the convert.

 

The 16 R works perfectly with the LPS-1 and it has the best sound I ever had. I used to have Berkeley usb/spdif converter with Regen, Curious usb and JS-2. The Rednet 16 R, LPS-1 and Mutec combo is really something 

 

 

 

I have a voltage regulator coming from eBay that others have recommended. I will add it inside my D16 and bump up the input voltage by .7 volts to accommodate the regulator dropout voltage. I will report back :-)

[Tand]

On 24.11.2017 at 11:04 AM, caliaripaolo said:

 

Thank you,

sorry but I do not understand: "So instead of 2 manually changes (1 mac and 1 Rednet) you only need to do 1.."

Do you mean that each time changes the rate into the player, you have to manually change the rate ? and where you have to?

 

 

Yes, you have to manually change it as far as I know. This is done in Dante Controller.

 

I am using Mac.

 

[mourip]

5 hours ago, Tand said:

 

Yes, you have to manually change it as far as I know. This is done in Dante Controller.

 

I am using Mac.

 

 

Here is another data point. Using a Windows Server 2012R2 with JRMC once you have Rednet Control and JRMC configured it will(should) work automatically. I have previously found it to be balky and a bit unpredictable however I have not tried it again since Focusrite recently updated RC and issues a firmware update. Currently I just let JRMC upsample everything to 192K using Sox and I am very happy with the SQ. My DAC is an Yggy and is limited to 24/192.

[ferenc]

It is very interesting development:

 

Audinate releases Dante IP Core for Xilinx FPGAs

A single FPGA may now host both product software and Dante audio networking

PORTLAND, OR. Dec. 13, 2017 — Audinate, developer of the industry-leading Dante® media networking technology, has announced the availability of Dante IP Core, a soft IP solution for audio manufacturers. It allows OEMs working with FPGA-based designs to add Dante audio connectivity to AV products at a lower cost and with greater flexibility than ever before.

Development teams can save time, reduce BOM costs and minimize their internal footprint by using a single FPGA to implement both product applications and Dante audio networking. Dante IP Core efficiently runs alongside OEM product applications such as ASRC, audio encryption, and signal processing on a range of Xilinx FPGAs, providing channel counts up to 512x512 with ultra-low latency and sub-microsecond synchronization.

Dante IP Core reduces the marginal costs of incorporating Dante in FPGA-based products, offering OEMs greater flexibility in aligning product families. Dante IP Core runs on the widely used Xilinx family of FPGAs. and provides all the interfaces required to be a fully functional Dante endpoint, including SiLabs clock synthesis, serial and parallel audio, DDR2 and SRAM, and a variety of standard control interfaces including UART, SPI and I2C.

“Dante IP Core gives savvy manufacturers something they’ve been requesting for a long time.,” says Chris Ware, Senior VP of Engineering at Audinate. “By integrating Dante IP into FPGA based product designs, they can save costs, reduce board space, and more easily manage thermal constraints while adding features their customers demand.”

Audinate is now a member of the Xilinx Alliance Program, a global community of qualified vendors that offers IP cores, tools and support for system designers who are developing innovative products using Xilinx FPGAs.

Dante IP Core is available for the Xilinx Spartan 6 family of FPGAs. Support for the Artix 7 FPGA is expected Q1 2018. Contact your Audinate representative for information about other platforms. For additional information please visit  http://www.audinate.com/dante-ip-core.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Very cool. 

[mourip]

4 hours ago, ferenc said:

It is very interesting development:

 

Audinate releases Dante IP Core for Xilinx FPGAs

 

 

This could be the real breakthrough for AOIP.

 

 I hope that Schiit Audio looks into it. An Yggy with integrated Dante\AOIP would be killer.

[ferenc]

6 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Very cool. 

 

 Keep an eye of it please

[ismewor]

Ethernet Audio is great. because it is much better layer all together than USB. but it just needs the manufacturer start looking at it and start to support.

[Miska]

8 hours ago, mourip said:

This could be the real breakthrough for AOIP.

 

Dante is more for pro-audio. For audiophile use it can be tricky one because it distributes clock over ethernet for the purpose of synchronizing multiple A/D and D/A converters and other devices. And Dante doesn't support DSD or PCM sampling rates above 192 kHz. Ravenna which is variant of practically same protocol (AES67) does support DSD and high rate PCM.

 

For audiophile use, clock-less protocols where DAC always has the master clock are easier and better. Unless you want to synchronize multiple DACs (synchronous multi-room case).

 

[Kal Rubinson]

27 minutes ago, Miska said:

Unless you want to synchronize multiple DACs (synchronous multi-room case).

..... or to use 3/4 stereo DACs for multichannel.

[ted_b]

Agree Kal, but give us DSD (up toDSD512) and high sample rate PCM at least.  Let's not go backward.

[Miska]

Just now, Kal Rubinson said:

..... or to use 3/4 stereo DACs for multichannel.

 

Yes, that too. Although not much point in such, because there are so many multi-channel converters with 192 kHz PCM capability...

 

Like for Dante, the Focusrite RedNet A16R, RedNet 1 or RedNet 2.

 

Of course if you need more than 16 channels, you can stack those up to 128 channels.

[Kal Rubinson]

1 minute ago, Miska said:

Yes, that too. Although not much point in such, because there are so many multi-channel converters with 192 kHz PCM capability...

but not so much for the home market.

[Miska]

3 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

but not so much for the home market.

 

Why would it need to be "home market"? Dante is not for home market in first place. It is designed for pro-audio use cases just like Ravenna and other AES67's.

 

With Merging Hapi you can get 16 channels of DXD/DSD256, and with Merging Horus you can get 48 channels of DXD/DSD256...

 

[Kal Rubinson]

18 minutes ago, Miska said:

Why would it need to be "home market"? Dante is not for home market in first place. It is designed for pro-audio use cases just like Ravenna and other AES67's.

Understood but I am hoping for one or more of the AES67 variants to be adopted for it.

[mourip]

4 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Dante is more for pro-audio. For audiophile use it can be tricky one because it distributes clock over ethernet for the purpose of synchronizing multiple A/D and D/A converters and other devices. And Dante doesn't support DSD or PCM sampling rates above 192 kHz. Ravenna which is variant of practically same protocol (AES67) does support DSD and high rate PCM.

 

For audiophile use, clock-less protocols where DAC always has the master clock are easier and better. Unless you want to synchronize multiple DACs (synchronous multi-room case).

 

 

I have been using a Focusrite D16 with a Mutec 3+ USB for reclocking and a Mutec REF10. These are all pro-audio devices but I am getting far better sound from my system than when I had a tweaked out USB chain. It has not been cheap but it brings real magic to PCM. Who cares if they were intended for pro-audio?

 

I have owned 4 Saber DACs that played DSD and I was not too impressed. I am getting far more enjoyable and detailed sound from my present system playing 24/192 to my Yggy via AES. I believe in being open minded about what really works. I would not discount pro-audio just because it is not intended for home use. Why not take the best of what is available?

 

CA will die on the vine if we all just take the same path and refuse to consider new ideas. Lets be about experimentation and mindset breaking...

[Miska]

10 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Understood but I am hoping for one or more of the AES67 variants to be adopted for it.

 

Merging already has their NADAC. But I'd rather see something that doesn't need clock distribution on the network and special network adapters to properly support that. I'd prefer protocol that is less complex and would be more geared towards home playback use cases. Otherwise Mac users can have only limited capabilities, since there are no PCIe slots on Macs anymore and I haven't seen anybody making special Thunderbolt ethernet-adapters yet although such thing is doable. This Focusrite RedNet adapter works directly only on Windows PCs:

https://pro.focusrite.com/category/audiooverip/item/rednet-pcier

Otherwise you need yet another box for doing Thunderbolt-to-PCIe.

 

[Miska]

6 hours ago, mourip said:

I have been using a Focusrite D16 with a Mutec 3+ USB for reclocking and a Mutec REF10. These are all pro-audio devices but I am getting far better sound from my system than when I had a tweaked out USB chain. It has not been cheap but it brings real magic to PCM. Who cares if they were intended for pro-audio?

 

I have owned 4 Saber DACs that played DSD and I was not too impressed. I am getting far more enjoyable and detailed sound from my present system playing 24/192 to my Yggy via AES. I believe in being open minded about what really works. I would not discount pro-audio just because it is not intended for home use. Why not take the best of what is available?

 

Have you actually measured jitter performance of that combination from the DAC output? I rather not have ASRC devices on the way and that sounds like unnecessarily complex setup instead of using just plain D16.

 

I use my own NAA protocol, so of course I'm biased towards it. But I want multichannel DSD and such...

 

6 hours ago, mourip said:

CA will die on the vine if we all just take the same path and refuse to consider new ideas. Lets be about experimentation and mindset breaking...

 

Where did I refuse to consider new ideas? I just say that I'd rather use something that is technically more suitable for my use cases than what Dante/RedNet can offer today. So yes, I'm certainly about mindset breaking.

 

Technically Yggdrasil via AES is as old technology as something can get...

 

[mourip]

5 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Have you actually measured jitter performance of that combination from the DAC output? I rather not have ASRC devices on the way and that sounds like unnecessarily complex setup instead of using just plain D16.

 

I use my own NAA protocol, so of course I'm biased towards it. But I want multichannel DSD and such...

 

 

Where did I refuse to consider new ideas? I just say that I'd rather use something that is technically more suitable for my use cases than what Dante/RedNet can offer today. So yes, I'm certainly about mindset breaking.

 

Technically Yggdrasil via AES is as old technology as something can get...

 

 

I use the best measuring device that every music lover has available, my own ears. All that maters to me is that when I make a change it sounds better to me than the state that proceeded it. I started with a plain D16 but found that adding the M3USB and then the REF10 improved the sound substantially. Modifying their power supplies from an SMPS to an LPS made further improvements. Could I have found a DAC that sounded as good for that same total? Not sure. The Cord Dave is often compared to the stock Yggy and it costs twice as much. Berkeley's best DAC might sound better than the stock Yggy but it costs about 7 times more. This does not even consider the audible improvements of the Mutec devices.

 

I am sure that there are DACs that sound better than the Yggy but their cost is a multiple of the Yggy and the improvement is probably marginal. Many folks like the Saber DACs that offer convenient DSD but personally I find their sound to be artificial.

 

I have tried simple. I have tried complex. I currently use a mix of new and old technology. I use tubes in my preamp and amp in a circuit designed by David Berning. Is that "as old as something can get" or cutting edge? My ears tell me the later.

 

There are many ways to achieve good sound. As an end user it seems more like cooking than rocket science although for a designer I can understand why measuring is useful. I have been working with Linear Tube Audio beta testing their new "best effort" amp. It is based upon David Berning's ZH-230 and uses a Compactron output tube to give remarkable sound. In testing I felt that it needed tweaking. Eventually it went to David Berning to measure on a scope. This helped isolate the issue and determine a refinement. Our ears found the issue but the scope was necessary to isolate the necessary adjustments. In the end my ears decide what I keep.

 

Having said all of this I do appreciate your presence on CA and your informed input on technical issues...

[Kal Rubinson]

6 hours ago, Miska said:

Merging already has their NADAC. But I'd rather see something that doesn't need clock distribution on the network and special network adapters to properly support that. I'd prefer protocol that is less complex and would be more geared towards home playback use cases.

I have used the NADAC but I, too, would prefer something simpler and more widely applicable.

6 hours ago, Miska said:

 

I use my own NAA protocol, so of course I'm biased towards it. But I want multichannel DSD and such...

Of course.  

[dbrulhart]

6 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Merging already has their NADAC. But I'd rather see something that doesn't need clock distribution on the network and special network adapters to properly support that. I'd prefer protocol that is less complex and would be more geared towards home playback use cases. Otherwise Mac users can have only limited capabilities, since there are no PCIe slots on Macs anymore and I haven't seen anybody making special Thunderbolt ethernet-adapters yet although such thing is doable. This Focusrite RedNet adapter works directly only on Windows PCs:

https://pro.focusrite.com/category/audiooverip/item/rednet-pcier

Otherwise you need yet another box for doing Thunderbolt-to-PCIe.

 

 

Hi Miska,

 

The clock distribution is part of the RAVENNA (PTP2) and Dante protocol (PTP1) and is totally transparent and not complex. No special adapters are needed.

 

On the pro market (Horus/Hapi) we use RAVENNA/AES67 in multicast mode, and this indeed requires being careful with the network not to impact too much other equipment on this network.

 

However on the home market (NADAC) we use RAVENNA in unicast mode, which works perfectly on any network, with any of the shelf switches or network adapters. And all this works natively even for multichannel DSD (DSD is part of RAVENNA, as opposed to Dante) without any complexity involved.

 

Merging provides RAVENNA/AES67 drivers for Windows, Mac and Linux (so no hardware adapters required) as well as OEM hardware cards for integrating in hardware products.

 

Simple ;-)

 

Cheers,

 

Dominique

 

 

[mourip]

10 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Merging already has their NADAC. But I'd rather see something that doesn't need clock distribution on the network and special network adapters to properly support that. I'd prefer protocol that is less complex and would be more geared towards home playback use cases. Otherwise Mac users can have only limited capabilities, since there are no PCIe slots on Macs anymore and I haven't seen anybody making special Thunderbolt ethernet-adapters yet although such thing is doable. This Focusrite RedNet adapter works directly only on Windows PCs:

https://pro.focusrite.com/category/audiooverip/item/rednet-pcier

Otherwise you need yet another box for doing Thunderbolt-to-PCIe.

 

 

I hope that I am following your point but I do not know of any posters who have mentioned purchasing Focusrite's PCIe adapter although some claim good results with high end Intel cards. Even Focusrite states that it is only useful if you need to support a large number of Dante devices. If you have a D16 or 16R you can use one of it's two ethernet ports to connect to your server and the second to connect to your network. Alternatively you can add a second ethernet card to your PC so that you only have just audio running between your PC and Dante interface. For my speaker system I just added a second Intel PCIe card for the audio stream. For my HP rig which does not have an external card slot I bought a USB to ethernet adapter for just network access and used my built in ethernet port for going to my D16. I imagine you could use Thunderbolt add-on adapter to add a second ethernet port to a MAC also or Apple's own USB to ethernet dongle.

 

Googling Thunderbolt to PCIe brings up Sonnet and HighPoint that sell Thunderbolt to PCIe breakout boxes.

[Miska]

4 hours ago, dbrulhart said:

The clock distribution is part of the RAVENNA (PTP2) and Dante protocol (PTP1) and is totally transparent and not complex. No special adapters are needed.

 

Hi Dominique,

 

I know there are some adapters that have hardware support for PTP, like the Focusrite RedNet card. Without that hardware support, the network clock accuracy suffers when it is implemented in user space. For home use I don't see point in distributing clock on the network at all (my NAA protocol doesn't).

 

4 hours ago, dbrulhart said:

On the pro market (Horus/Hapi) we use RAVENNA/AES67 in multicast mode, and this indeed requires being careful with the network not to impact too much other equipment on this network.

 

However on the home market (NADAC) we use RAVENNA in unicast mode, which works perfectly on any network, with any of the shelf switches or network adapters.

 

OK, good to know. How is the master clock in each case determined? And how is packet loss for example in wireless networks managed? I have not heard much reports from people using RAVENNA over domestic WiFi, although I have some customers using Hapi and NADAC. Since I've understood that both use RTP-over-UDP instead of TCP stream. And streams are controlled by PTP timing instead of flow control with RTCP?

 

I know the fun of dealing with RTP-based streams because we implemented such when I was still working at Nokia, for voice and video calls over internet. Lot of that technology is still in use on 4G VoLTE. Not to even mention NAT-traversal challenges which of course don't exist in local networks. Newer protocols have systematically moved to use TCP instead.

 

4 hours ago, dbrulhart said:

And all this works natively even for multichannel DSD (DSD is part of RAVENNA, as opposed to Dante) without any complexity involved.

 

That I obviously know and stated earlier...  That's why I see RAVENNA as better option than Dante, also for higher PCM rates.

 

4 hours ago, dbrulhart said:

Simple ;-)

 

I look it from developer point of view as complexity of the protocol stack and stream management. For me it looks very complex for home audio use.

[Miska]

3 minutes ago, mourip said:

I hope that I am following your point but I do not know of any posters who have mentioned purchasing Focusrite's PCIe adapter although some claim good results with high end Intel cards. Even Focusrite states that it is only useful if you need to support a large number of Dante devices.

 

I believe some high-end adapters have PTP hardware support, but I don't remember details on that.

 

They say that the achievable latency is about 4x higher with standard ethernet adapter compared to one with PTP hardware support.

 

6 minutes ago, mourip said:

I imagine you could use Thunderbolt add-on adapter to add a second ethernet port to a MAC also or Apple's own USB to ethernet dongle.

 

Googling Thunderbolt to PCIe brings up Sonnet and HighPoint that sell Thunderbolt to PCIe breakout boxes.

 

I just have some doubts if the Apple's Thunderbolt-to-Ethernet is "high end" NIC model.

 

But yeah, modern Apple way you can do a lot by adding lot of dongles, especially if you obtain some dongle-connection-dongles. Like with my iPhone 7, if I want to used wired headphones or external DAC and charge the phone at the same time...

 

[mourip]

1 minute ago, Miska said:

 

I believe some high-end adapters have PTP hardware support, but I don't remember details on that.

 

They say that the achievable latency is about 4x higher with standard ethernet adapter compared to one with PTP hardware support.

 

 

I just have some doubts if the Apple's Thunderbolt-to-Ethernet is "high end" NIC model.

 

But yeah, modern Apple way you can do a lot by adding lot of dongles, especially if you obtain some dongle-connection-dongles. Like with my iPhone 7, if I want to used wired headphones or external DAC and charge the phone at the same time...

 

 

I am not too happy with Apple's dongle jungle. I miss my old "cheese grater" MAC Pro with all of it's slots...

 

Thanks for the reply.