Is there a laptop controller for the DT168?

Forums Forums SQ Forums SQ general discussions Is there a laptop controller for the DT168?

This topic contains 23 replies, has 10 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of tourtelot tourtelot 1 month, 2 weeks ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 24 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #93396
    Profile photo of tourtelot
    tourtelot
    Participant

    I thought there was but I am not finding it on the A&H site. I do find a “Controller FW Update” for Widows only but I am thinking that it might be just a FW updater for the DT168 which already has current firmware on it.

    Laptop control over Dante would be nice. I can get the DT168 to send a mic level to other Dante boxes; confirmed to work. But without the SQ6 in the network, I can’t make any adjustments. I would love it even more if it worked on OSX. Asking a lot, I know.

    D.

    #93405
    Profile photo of KeithJ A&H
    KeithJ A&H
    Moderator

    Hi Douglas,

    This has been requested, but currently (as you have found) to control preamps on any DT unit does require a compatible console somewhere on the system.

    Thanks,
    Keith.

    #93409
    Profile photo of Scott
    Scott
    Participant

    IMO Adding such an app would make the DT-168 a very attractive option to many people without A&H consoles.

    #93410
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    There are very important reasons integrated systems are preferred. The DX168 is an expansion stage box that depends upon the A&H FPGA processing to reach it’s extraordinary potential. I also have a Digigrid/WavesLV1 system that works far better with all of the Waves optional elements in place, than mixing and matching other gear as substitutions. The question is not what will work: it is what works the best. IMO factory optimized gear always outperforms mix and match in the sonic world.
    Hugh

    #93415
    Profile photo of tourtelot
    tourtelot
    Participant

    ” IMO factory optimized gear always outperforms mix and match in the sonic world.
    Hugh”

    True, but having a laptop controller and “factory optimized” are not mutually exclusive. It’s not an “either/or” situation. If I have may SQ6 in the network, it makes sense to use it to control my DT168. But there are times when a small network is the choice and having a laptop controller would allow me to use my DT168 in different and helpful ways.

    Just sayin’

    D.

    #93416
    Profile photo of Mfk0815
    Mfk0815
    Participant

    Imho Audinate must be blamed because the Dante specification lacks of a definition how preamp devices must be integrated into the Dante network to be controlled in a standard way. As it is now this network cannot be used to integrate preamp devices of different manufacturers into a complex system. If there is a mandatory spec all manufacturer are forced to implement it to allow the customers to choose the best device.
    Maybe it needs a decade or so until manufacturers will produce better interoperable devices. In the meantime we have to request for a better solution again and again.
    So from my side a +1000 for a control application for the DT168.

    #93422
    Profile photo of SteffenR
    SteffenR
    Participant

    Imho Audinate must be blamed because the Dante specification lacks of a definition how preamp devices must be integrated into the Dante network to be controlled in a standard way.

    but Audinate does not deliver preamps nor A/D converters in the first place
    they just provide the networking technology and some implementations
    nothing on the converter side…

    the integration is left to the manufacturer of the devices

    what you call a lack of definition is one of the main reasons why it is that successful

    #93424
    Profile photo of tourtelot
    tourtelot
    Participant

    “Imho Audinate must be blamed. . .”

    Nope. Up to the manufacturers to develop controllers for AoIP. And it is done pretty regularly by quite a few companies. So not an impossibility that A&H could do this. Will they? Time will tell.

    D.

    #93429
    Profile photo of Mfk0815
    Mfk0815
    Participant

    Audinate do not create preamps,thats true, but some A/D and D/A devices (Dante AVIO). But that‘s not the story. As developer and „inventor“ of the Dante protocol Audinate defines also the rules of the game. And the more complete and strict this ruleset will be the better will be the interoperability between products of different manufacturers. It‘s similar to W3C. The do not provide real world Browsers or servers or other software used for communication over the internet. But they provide the rulesets for this communication. And if the ruleset ist not complete and strict… remember those dark era when you always read „optimized for browser x“ and you are using browser y. Or think about the success story of MIDI. Before every Keyboard used a different communication method, no chance for interoperability. And there are a lot of other samples in mechanical engineering, electrical engineering(what would happen when every audio manufacturer will design their own, high performance and suberb sounding audio connectors?)

    Standards and Norming is the glue which can hold a complete industry together. That lesson must be learned by all company sooner or later.

    That is the stuff I am talking about.
    So when the protocol defines EXACTLY how to pass meta information for the preamp parameters (gain, phantompower, polarity…) all manufacturers will be forces to implement that part of protocol. And then you can setup on your CL1 a DT168 preamp or on a SQ6 a RIO/TIO or do it right from within a DAW. That will be at lastthe same as when you use a Modern Korg keyboard to play a vintage Oberheim Matrix 12.

    At the end of the day one of the important factors for buying such devices will be how good their interoperability will be. Not how good they might work in the small eco system of a more or less small company.

    Just my 2 cents.

    #93431
    Profile photo of SteffenR
    SteffenR
    Participant

    this is what MILAN is doing… with zero products after 2 years
    endless discussion
    more examples AES50 or AES42
    all standards, highly adopted from one or two manufacturers

    Audinate did the best they can…

    and left some things out of the rules, things for manufacturers to set them self apart from others
    that’s the real force of innovation, not standards

    Ravenna or AES67 did the same, left much room for implementation
    even AVB/TSN has nothing to do with preamps…

    and btw there are standards for preamp remote control available, but nobody is using them…

    another story about standards? EuCON very good idea from Steinberg and Euphonics, now dead…
    and only one brand is responsible for that AVID
    and they are part of the Milan vendors… hmmm

    #93453
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    Given the fact that lots of lurkers follow these threads when daydreaming or planning a gear purchase those of us that have been down this road should be willing to disclose our experience: both good and bad. To this end the subject in this thread has some pot holes that need to be discussed.
    The vast majority of us in our everyday audio activity do not need more than 16 channels. I have spent 5 decades in the Acoustic Americana world, mostly Bluegrass, and rarely need more than 8 or 10 inputs. Over the past 15 years I have moved through several A&H desks. A 24 channel 2800 analog that I donated to a small local church, a QU16, that I gave to my garage band grandsons when I moved into a QUsb for my solo gigs. I found the I-Pad app more intuitive than dealing with the QU small screen so the plug up and play QUsb was a perfect fit for my solo or Bluegrass live gigs. It worked well because we pretty much set and leave the audio settings and control the dynamic presentation with mic technique. The ability to feed two cameras with a live FOH feed for a video scratch track while capturing a multi track for a post produced two track to sync in over the scratch track is pretty much bullet proof for us. (multi tracking is much more dependable with a powered HD like my Glyph 50 or studio model) This protocol “IS NOT RECOMMENDED” when lots of audio management is needed. There is an unacceptable delay (latency) when a wifi app. is the only control option. I initially shared the OP’s desire for a SQ app like my QUsb however much of the work available for turn key audio/video that I offer requires more console management than my own gigs will ever need.
    I replaced the component hardware front end in my studio with a Digigrid/Waves LV1 FP32/96K system 5 years ago. The compatible FPGA processing offered with the SQ5 is linear with my studio gear and when either system is fed with any of my six tube mics the sonic quality is exactly what I have always wanted. The flexibility to accommodate the a/V needs of church drama or corporate events will require more than wifi control. For me an SQ5 with a DX168 stage box meets or exceeds about any or all requirements i will need. Given the nature of my work flow I will never need 32 channels, however the ability to put 16 channels of world class D-Live 24/96K inputs on stage and control them with the second page of an SQ5 that will require only one cat6 line is pretty spectacular.
    Hugh

    #93468
    Profile photo of tourtelot
    tourtelot
    Participant

    Yep. That’s what I thought. I have (let’s say) enough channels of Grace m108 Dante for almost everything I’ll probably ever do, but I saw the DT168 at a great price and I went for it. Seems to work a treat hooked up to my SQ6. I thought it would be perfect for those inputs that don’t need Grace m108. Audience mics, on-stage computer playback, announce mics, etc.

    I used to put up a Lynx Aurora AtoD and had thought about using it to run any 8-channel pre into the Dante rig. Problem? No control room, well, control. The Lynx is 16x line in and 16x line out. Here’s where I am going with the DT168, and my original question. It’s not so much the inputs that I am excited about. Fairly good preamps, controlled from the control room. Great. But 8x outputs. That’s where it gets interesting. Talk backs, studio play backs, cue feeds.

    Great! Easily done with the SQ6 in the network. But what if I don’t want to schlep the SQ6 to a smaller gig but still could use the outputs. Simple I guess. Put the Lynx Aurora back in the network. But wouldn’t it be cool to be able to control the the I/O of the DT168 without the SQ6. Totally awesome.

    Cool right?

    D.

    #93474
    Profile photo of Hugh
    Hugh
    Participant

    There certainly are many factors to consider when we assemble our travel rigs. Douglas has covered in some detail his needs and well thought out preferences. I also have an aversion to “schlepping” a console of significant size around however I have a Gator TSA mixer case (22 x 25 x 8 inch) (GTSA – mix 222508) that will safely contain the SQ5, DT168 & Two Glyph Hard drives along with the requisite hook up cables.
    When My 21 year old Jeep died several months ago I replaced it with a 14 year old Ford Expedition that has plenty of room for all of the gear for a turn key A/V gig including either my 3 KV2 EX10s or an Evox 12 FOH for up to 300 seats. I have a trailer that houses a 10 box KV2 ES system that will cover 1,500 seats comfortably but I have not needed the ES system for several years since most of the venues we work have installed pretty good custom FOH installations.
    I initially considered integrating the Waves option however the Glyph hard drives are pretty much bullet proof, if you follow the A&H protocol, and it lets me keep my two mixing activity and all of the gear involved in that process in the studio. The reason I carry two HDs is one provides the recorded tracks I use in my solo first set of the show and the second is to capture a multi-track of the guest band doing the second set. This is the practice I have developed that works best for me however there are a considerable number of folks that have very different protocols that work very well. I enjoy and learn from some of the new ideas advanced on these threads.
    Hugh

    #97742
    Profile photo of NikoLaasonen
    NikoLaasonen
    Participant

    Hi,

    Any news on the DT-series gain control that was supposed to be released “before christmas”?

    -Niko

    #97743
    Profile photo of SteffenR
    SteffenR
    Participant

    I’m sure it was Christmas 2021…

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 24 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.