[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

It’s Neutrik OoticalCON MTP X-TREME fibre, all 12 strands are in a single opticalCON advanced MTP connector.
The chassis connector has a breakout fibre which is MTP to 6 standard duplex LC plugs.
Not cheap but nothing worth having is.

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

I had a gain issue with an input on an iLive mixrack that I bought used.
A&H were not able to help, they don’t even release schematics to their authorised service partners.
Their answer was a replacement card which was an answer I was unwilling to accept so I ripped into it and started reverse engineering the input circuitry.
The good thing about the input/output cards is that they have many identical sections of circuitry so any good electronics tech can grab a multimeter and start comparing a working channel with the broken one to find the fault without schematics.
I found a surface mount resistor that was open circuit, once that was replaced the faulty channel matched all the rest.
Total parts cost for repair £0.27.
If you know someone with a decent knowledge of electronics troubleshooting and the skills to work on tiny surface mount circuits there’s a fair chance they can fix it using this method.

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

As Nic said earlier, you can’t use Dante to connect a surface to a mixrack. You also really can’t put that link over any kind of network that has anything else on it.
Your solution to using single mode fibre is media converters and a dedicated fibre pair (or a single strand if you use bidirectional SFPs) from mixrack to surface.
I use TP-Link MC220L converters with an SFP to match the fibre type. They work fine for GigaACE links and are cheap.
My 12 strand fibre uses 4 strands for a redundant pair of GigaACE surface to mixrack links, another 4 for a pair of 10G network and 4 spares.
I’ll say it again, the link between surface and mixrack needs to be a point-to-point link over dedicated copper or fibre infrastructure and should not go through any kind of switch.
The only exception to this is using a switch to extend the distance that copper can cover but in that case nothing else can be plugged into that switch and I would not recommend this solution anyway, dedicated fibre is the only answer for links over 100m.

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

When you press the mix button on an IP8 in surface mode the surface faders switch to that mix just like if a surface mix had been pressed.
It doesn’t work the other way as discussed above, mix buttons never make IP8 faders change function (would be nice if they did).
Mix buttons don’t make sense without some faders to control so in Mixrack mode that option isn’t there.
Don’t forget Director is effectively a surface so you don’t need a physical surface to have an IP8 in surface mode.
It doesn’t matter where the IP8 is plugged in either, you can connect an IP8 to the mixrack sockets and still run it in surface mode.
I think the Mixrack option was more in mind for install type uses where an IP unit might be on a wall or behind a bar for controlling background music and maybe a mic or 2 with an actual surface being rolled out for shows.

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

Never had an issue with any USB drives for firmware and data, only recording.
Needs to be FAT32, format it in the console to be safe.
When you’ve unzipped the AllenHeath-dLive folder do not browse that folder’s contents as operating systems can mess with the structure if you do and that can cause update issues.
You need to unzip the folder onto the root of the drive, not copy the zip file on there.
Don’t forget to save your show file before updating.

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

Thanks Jack.
My prediction of a week in a darkened room was spot on 😀
There’s a couple more new features that I didn’t see last week.
Looking forward to the stream and webinar.

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

Sennheiser integration is definitely in 1.9 as of when I saw it on Tuesday but as always might get pulled before release if they discover problems with it, see Nicola’s comment above.

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

I can tell you what I saw although there’s no guarantee any of these features won’t get pulled at the last minute before release.
Big changes are lots of RTA options including some really cool RTA stuff in the south area, a couple of different expanders, Sennheiser wireless integration (like existing Shure) and the ability to name your card slots so you don’t have to try and remember what card is in what slot.
There are still a couple of minor issues that I’m not at liberty to discuss but nothing earth shattering.

As for release date I’d say from what I saw if the developers were left alone in a darkened room for a week it would be done but we all know it never works like that.

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

I’ve already posted this over on the FB dLive Unofficial User Group page but I’ll repost here for those of you that aren’t denizens of the Facebook world.

This afternoon at PLASA I laid eyes on a lesser spotted 1.9 and can confirm…..
1 – it is real and not related to a unicorn.
2 – it’s gonna put a BIG smile on a lot of faces once it escapes captivity into the wild.
…and 3 – I want it. I want it now!!!!

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

The primary surface must connect to the built in GigaACE ports.
A FibreACE card in a slot is a different logical set of ports so you can’t connect the primary surface to a card configured in a slot.
To connect the primary surface via fibre you need to use a media converter for the onboard ports and this is the option A&H have given you with switching a card to convert mode.
It’s a useful option to have in an emergency but if you’re planning a system the TP Link converters that Showtime refers to do the same job for a fraction of the price and without chewing up a card slot.
I use the MC220L versions which have the advantage of being able to swap out the SFP+ laser module so you can switch between single mode and multimode should the need arise, again these are a fraction of the price of a FibreACE card even when you take the cost of the modules into account.
The card option is neat if you need to make a GigaACE connection over fibre to a secondary surface or another mixrack but this can also be achieved with media converters and a copper GigaACE card for less money at the expense of a couple of extra small boxes to deal with.
Additionally I think you should be able to connect a dLive GigaACE to other A&H console SLink port over fibre using media converters, I don’t think you can do that with the FibreACE card.

In short the cards are a nice idea but they are just too expensive, there are cheaper ways to achieve everything they do.

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

That was a design decision made to help the life of the faders.
I’m not saying requesting the feature will be fruitless but just be aware it’s been discussed before and it’s not an oversight rather a conscious decision by the design team.

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

I would sooner it take a little longer and be fully tested than have it crash mid show on me. It’s not like the current version does not work..

I don’t think anyone would disagree with that statement.
What’s got people frustrated is that the time between us being told it’s “In testing, we hope to release in a month or 2” and the still-unreleased now is measured in years.

Mfk0815 makes some very good points about testing.
There’s only so much a development team can test, the real test comes from getting it out there into the mass of the user base.
Look at Microsoft with their mega bucks budgets, even they occasionally release an update that has to be rolled back or updated again within days or hours of release.
I’m not suggesting that everything possible isn’t done to mitigate this possibility before release but they can only go so far.

Back to repeating myself, I think the current size of the 1.9 update may have shot everyone in the foot.
If updates were developed in an iterative fashion where updates are much more frequent but affect a much smaller portion of code each time then the chances of releasing a version which crashes are reduced (in theory anyway) and the user base feels that constant progress is being made. Maybe the fact that there’s FPGA code to consider means that it’s not as simple as that (there I go wildly speculating again).
It’s certainly an interesting situation.

Mind you at the rate shows are being cancelled and postponed the desk along with the rest of the gear will be staying in the warehouse.😡

Yep. My one big event of the year has just been cancelled (in spite of all legal requirements being planned for and met) due to the obstructive nature of the local authority so my S7k will remain a coffee table ornament for a while longer.

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

try to keep it fair and don’t use abusive speech

I’m never abusive, just could have gone on.

Anyone who knows my posts here and on social media will know I’m an A&H fanboy.
Every console I’ve owned has been A&H and all bar the first one were bought new.
I’ve owned flagship A&H digital consoles since iLive was introduced.
It winds me up when I see the brand reputation being damaged.
First in the analogue days it was because the consoles were such good value for money that every bar and club had one but often didn’t look after them or maintain them so A&H got a bad rep. because band engineers would see so many broken ones. The brand became tarnished not because the consoles were bad but because of the proliferation of poorly maintained examples. A&H were a victim of their own success here.
Since dlive came out I’ve only seen 2 complaints, one on Prosoundweb from someone in the States who was in the market for 5 or 6 consoles and the US distributor failed miserably to get them a demo model so they spent their dollar elsewhere (this was a good while ago) and the other is the 1.9 situation.
Every time there’s a social media post that even goes vaguely near dlive firmware versions someone comes along with a smart arsed comment. I must admit I’m often tempted to but stop myself now because I don’t want to see dLive getting a reputation of “Good value but still expensive considering the company has stopped caring for its flagship users”.
Only today someone posted a picture of a load of dLive kit with the title “Update day ready to get back to work” and the first comment was “Update to what?”
As I said above the decision to halt the 1.9 release when it was almost ready 18 months ago to add more features was a bad move. Again I’m repeating myself (must be my age) but in my opinion a modern agile iterative development process would help everyone. Releases would be much more frequent than at present for all platforms although with fewer new features per release. I guess there must be a good reason why this isn’t the case.
Resources from the Avantis/dLive development team have had to concentrate on Avantis as it’s the new kid in town and as is always the case was released to market with big things being incomplete (Director being a prime example).
I understand the commercials around that but the dLive user base is getting increasingly frustrated as time goes on and there’s still no sign of 1.9. The longer it takes the more negative comments appear to live forever on the Internet.
I’m personally not feeling massively aggrieved by the lack of an update, but am concerned about the impact it’s having on the brand.
Would I like to see Sennheiser wireless integration, sure I would but I can cope without it and get the same information from WSM.

See, rant! And not an abusive word was typed (oh and Nicola didn’t really tell me off, just correct some of my wild speculation , that’s just my English self-deprecating humour). Hopefully it’s not too incoherent.
Come on A&H, time for a little dLive love if only to shut everyone up 🙂

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

Don’t forget that development team are not in the same building due corona.

well… there is this thing called internet…

The dLive development team is the same as the Avantis development team.
COVID has not stopped them working, they’ve released some major updates for Avantis during this time and that seems to be where the majority of the development effort is being focussed.

I’ve said this before, I totally get that commercial considerations have to be taken into account and that efforts need to be focussed on things that keep the cash flowing before development for existing customers (the DX chipset issue being a prime example) but I do think the decisions made on the dLive 1.9 development cycle have lead to a lot of flagship owners being frustrated (to say the least) with A&H.
Every time I see a comment about dLive feature requests on here or social media it’s not long before someone comes along with the “what updates?, we’ve been waiting 2 years+” style comment.
A&H want dLive to be regarded as a premium brand and for the most part they got it right but this issue is the one thing I see as damaging the brand reputation.
Maybe in hindsight the decision to not release 1.9 when (so we were told) it was just about ready at the start of the pandemic and to “add more features” to it was not the best.

I’m gonna stop now before this turns into a proper rant and Nicola tells me off (again) :-D.

[MJCElectronicsParticipant]

I’ve got to admit I’ve never had a problem with the EQ but then I don’t tend to use much anyway.
I’m a big believer in having decent sources through top quality appropriately selected and positioned mics and then my EQ is flat on most channels.
Obviously you’re not always in control of the source but if it sounds awful going in then no amount of EQ is gonna fix it and you’re right about the audience, mostly they only care if it sounds like complete crap and that’s most often down to the source if you’re doing everything else right.
If you’re desperate for specific EQs you can always buy a Waves card and insert your plug-in of choice.
I’d rather see 1.9 and any following firmware introducing features that we can’t get another way.

[Author]

Posts