i/o Option

Tagged: 

This topic contains 11 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of Duesenbert Duesenbert 1 month ago.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #93346
    Profile photo of jay.mostacho
    jay.mostacho
    Participant

    It would be nice to have an 8-12 input 1RU for adding extra inputs at the mix position/wireless rack- areas where you may not need any outputs. Maybe like a “DXI12″(or 8)…

    #93349
    Profile photo of Keule
    Keule
    Participant

    You have 12 inputs on the avantis itself.
    Better UHF or UHF digital receavers have dante or aes, wich can be upgraded by card.
    You can add a Gigaace card and put a dx168 on the foh
    If you dont need the slink otherwise, you can place any box (beginning from the ar0804) next to the mixer
    You can add a gigaace card and use that for the big gx4816 and once again, use the slink for any box at foh…

    I don‘t think thats a important feature, Cause its already solved, sorry 😅

    But your right, if you have just 20 wireless mics, and they have to be at foh, a big input box feels a bit weard.
    But if you have that much wireless, chances are good to have professional products, wich might support dante or co. If not: Its anyway a pain in the ass job to make the frequency management, so tell your boss: Air is full 😂

    #93350
    Profile photo of Showtime
    Showtime
    Participant

    DX link card with a dx168 would fit your needs.

    #93359
    Profile photo of jay.mostacho
    jay.mostacho
    Participant

    Thanks guys but this is the “Feature Suggestions” section. I’m not looking for “how to’s”- very familiar with all the i/o and cards available to “make it work”. I’m merely making a suggestion for a 1RU INPUT ONLY box like that of the DXO12. Kinda like why you don’t only have a hammer in the tool box. Sometimes you don’t have the rack space and/or don’t need the extra i/o. Before the DXO12 there were AES cards, DX32, on board AES/analog outputs. Someone had a brilliant idea and now I’m selling DXO12’s for amp racks and WIEM racks- serves a great purpose. I can see the input version going in keyboard racks, wireless racks, playback racks, racks where you just need a few more inputs and not 16. Also, when going into house of worship/performance art venue and you are only upgrading the console system and you have to work with whatever input legacy equipment they may have that isn’t Dante compatible.

    Dropping in a 168 or 4816 or even a DX32 in every situation is just egregious from an integration perspective- both in cost and in function.

    Cheers!

    #93360
    Profile photo of Showtime
    Showtime
    Participant

    The more options the more the cost.

    They coould have made an gx4832 with the aes option, but someone has to pay.

    A&H has the tieline option in al 96 khz consoles, so every console can use every i/o

    Modern wireless has remote option so there is no need tho have them at the foh.

    The development time could be beter used then creating more i/o.

    My wish list : Native control for the neutrik NA2-IO-DPRO for sq/dlive/avantis.

    #93364
    Profile photo of jay.mostacho
    jay.mostacho
    Participant

    Wow- clearly this picture needs to be on the main page of this suggestions tab to warn anyone with potential ideas. Just because it doesn’t make sense in your unique situation doesn’t make it a waste of development time or causal to shoot it down. The form factor exists, the pre-amps exist- it’s code and fitting it all in 1RU. Seriously, it’s like taking the AR804 and upgrading it to 96k for crying out loud. I mean A&H did it for the AB168.

    The excuse of “someone has to pay” is moot since someone always has to pay for anything- and as a sales guy, I’m saying there are plenty of people that will pay for it. But feel free to keep using your wireless argument that “everyone should have AXIENT D/EM 6000 Dante” against the 5 reasons I listed above where my suggestion would be useful/helpful in both production and installed environments.

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #93366
    Profile photo of volounteer
    volounteer
    Participant

    @jay.motacho

    exactly
    somebody has to pay

    AH has to weigh loss in sales and cost of adding features making something too expensive for those users
    as well as loss in sales of more expensive gear if they undercut it with features in a cheaper unit
    vs
    increase in profits from sales due to adding some feature

    you voted for your choice
    AH will vote for the choice of the marketplace

    #93368
    Profile photo of Jgrift
    Jgrift
    Participant

    The DX168 is only $100 more than the DXO12. Not a bad value for getting more I/O. I get the overall space is more but ultimately its a more flexible box. But it doesn’t seem like it would take much to use the same chassis for inputs vs outputs.

    #93369
    Profile photo of jay.mostacho
    jay.mostacho
    Participant

    Unless I’m mistaken, non of you who have commented on this thread so far are an exec, a PM, in R&D, or eng for A&H. IMO the comments about what a corporation might do/should do/wont do or what is too expensive or not really shouldn’t be up for discussion- because we really don’t know and all is pure speculation.

    The point of these open forums is to relay info from end users and see if any steam builds in the discussions- A&H will research the finances, marketing & what not and therefore aren’t relevant to the discussion. The first comments on every one of these suggestions seems to be to try to shoot the idea down first, explain there’s already an arduous path available for the suggestion, or use corporate speculation when those arguments are exhausted. Maybe it would be more helpful if each participant tried seeing if it’s something that would actually be a value add or helpful to them first. Comment to “yes and” the idea or click like if it’s a flat out “yes”. Move on if it’s not. Again, A&H will seek out the threads with most likes/discussion and would help the better ideas float to the top.

    So back to the actual topic, no one can see a use for an 8 or 12 input only 1RU device? It will only make your lives miserable in the field or in your facilities? Buying a 16×8 i/o box suits you just well for an extra 6 inputs in a remote location? Something that is roughly $1300 US and 4RU vs something around $1100 US and 1RU?

    Maybe this idea is a bad one and I’m fine with that but not one participant yet has argued against it’s merits.

    #93370
    Profile photo of Mfk0815
    Mfk0815
    Participant

    The idea of a pedant to the DXO12 is very interesting. The only disadvantage of the Idea is based on the implementation of the DX protocol. On one DX port you only can connect two devices using a daisy chain. For each device 16 in and 16 out channels are reserved for a total amount of 32×32 channels. The best solution would be when A&H get rid of all the current protocols and create a new, more flexible protocol so that you can use a lot of different sies of stageboxes to get, for instance 128 inputs and 128 outputs with that devices in one daisy chain. E.g Mixer, xx3216, xxi8, xx1204, xxo24 and so on ….
    But at the moment the only more flexible protocol is Dante. And I am pretty sure that there will come other dante devices for the A&H eco system.

    #93372
    Profile photo of volounteer
    volounteer
    Participant

    @jay.mostacho

    Unless I’m mistaken, non of you who have commented on this thread so far are an exec, a PM, in R&D, or eng for A&H. IMO the comments about what a corporation might do/should do/wont do or what is too expensive or not really shouldn’t be up for discussion- because we really don’t know and all is pure speculation.

    Not for AH but I do *know* how corporations work and how the bottom line drives decisions.
    Maybe you did not want to hear it but that is the way it is.

    The point of these open forums is to relay info from end users and see if any steam builds in the discussions- A&H will research the finances, marketing & what not and therefore aren’t relevant to the discussion. The first comments on every one of these suggestions seems to be to try to shoot the idea down first, explain there’s already an arduous path available for the suggestion, or use corporate speculation when those arguments are exhausted. Maybe it would be more helpful if each participant tried seeing if it’s something that would actually be a value add or helpful to them first. Comment to “yes and” the idea or click like if it’s a flat out “yes”. Move on if it’s not. Again, A&H will seek out the threads with most likes/discussion and would help the better ideas float to the top.

    I am sure that AH looks at all the discussions very carefully. Along with many other sources of information that would guide their strategy to maximize profits over the long term. The people you object to are just voting no to your suggestion.
    You need to better sell your idea if you want to see a lot of ‘ +1 ‘ comments.

    So back to the actual topic, no one can see a use for an 8 or 12 input only 1RU device? It will only make your lives miserable in the field or in your facilities? Buying a 16×8 i/o box suits you just well for an extra 6 inputs in a remote location? Something that is roughly $1300 US and 4RU vs something around $1100 US and 1RU?

    Maybe this idea is a bad one and I’m fine with that but not one participant yet has argued against it’s merits.

    The merits are relative. AH makes the final decision. So far the folks here have been underwhelmed with the idea or else they would have said otherwise.

    Your profile says sales engineer and integrator so you should not be so dismissive of what people have said here.
    Perhaps you could write an article for some of the integrator magazines/web sites and create more enthusiasm for your idea.

    #93387
    Profile photo of Duesenbert
    Duesenbert
    Participant

    I for one would love this!

    A 1U box with 8-12 preamps for Avantis and dLive – would make for a tidy RF rack, a nice drop for a second location on stage, or expanded local I/O for the console itself.

    I too see the functionality of the DX168/DT168, but most applications where I’d use a DX168/DT168 only needs inputs OR outputs. The 1U form factor would make life easier as well.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.