M-madi or EtherSound for recording?

Forums Forums iLive Forums Archived iLive Discussions M-madi or EtherSound for recording?

This topic contains 4 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of woutert woutert 14 years, 1 month ago.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
  • #22238
    Profile photo of muzikant

    Hello, just got the T112/IDR48 for our church and trying to figure out the best way to get direct outs for recording purposes. Need a minimum of 24ch. What would be the advantages of getting EtherSound over M-Madi besides less cable to run? The few dealers i’ve spoken to have very limited knowledge.. Where is a good place to buy?

    Thank you for your time..


    iLive T112/IDR48

    Profile photo of Stealth

    Hi Ruslan


    What would be the advantages of getting EtherSound over M-MADI besides less cable to run?

    Both EtherSound and MADI carry up to 64 Channels of bidirectional audio.

    MADI requires 2 75 Ohm Coaxial cables for bidirectional (Record and playback) transmission; EtherSound only requires 1 cat5e cable.

    For direct recording purposes there is no major advantage with using EtherSound over MADI

    EtherSound becomes more of an advantage when creating larger Audio networks as all I/O routing can be controlled remotely from a laptop on the EtherSound network.

    Below is a link to our american distributor:

    Hope this helps

    Sam A&H

    Profile photo of woutert

    Audio quality is the same for all solutions, since it’s just tranport of digital data so… price, connectivity and ease-of-use matter.

    Ethersound: 64 channels of 24-bit/48 kHz PCM audio, standard Ethernet cables and components.

    +: standard network cable and components.
    -: more expensive interfaces, due to the licensing.

    MADI: The MADI format is capable of transmitting up to 64 audio channels (at standard sample rates of 44.1 or 48 kHz) on a standard 75 Ohms coaxial cable or an optical fibre cable. The 64-Channel mode was introduced officially in 2001. It allows for a maximum sample rate of 48 kHz + ca. 1%, corresponding to 32 channels at 24-bit / 96 kHz

    +: less expensive interfaces.
    -: coaxial cable (or optical) and not standard network cable and components…

    OTHER (cheaper) solution: get the mini multi out card and use 3 times ADAT (so 24* 24-bit 48kHz)
    If longer cablerun needed…
    route the ADAT through this ADAT mulicore system: https://www.appsys.ch/
    front: https://www.appsys.ch/images/stories/adx32a_adx64a/front_1600.jpg
    dealer: https://www.musicstore.de/en_EN/CHF/Application-Systems-ADX-32A-/art-REC0007400-000

    (only minus: this also uses a layer1 or less protocol so direct cablerun needed, not hubs or routers can be used… cfr. my recent topic)

    +: very cheap, a quite standard cheap PCI ADAT card an be used in the recording computer. (https://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_hdsp_9652.php). Audio quality remains the same.
    -: uh… direct cablerun needed, and the tiny ADAT optical cables of course :-)


    Profile photo of muzikant

    Thanks for explaining it to me so well :)

    I’m thinking MADI is my best solution as I want to run audio out.

    Do I need to run a separate cable for word clock or will i be ok with just the in and our cables?

    iLive T112/IDR48

    Profile photo of woutert

    Hi Muzikant,

    If you’re not too much under time pressure I would wait for “Dante”. I think this is a 1000 times more interesting than MADI, which seems to be a pretty old-fashioned standard when you look at this:

    Yamaha just started marketing this 2 days ago, Allen&Heath next?


Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

The forum ‘Archived iLive Discussions’ is closed to new topics and replies.