Anyone looking at taking the Thunderbolt plunge? I notice that Lynx is releasing a Thunderbolt LT card and I am considering upgrading. Problem is I don’t really want to rip out the old MOBO and replace it with a Thunderbolt-enabled MOBO unless the results are worth it. I’m not even sure what ‘results are worth it’ means… Current configuration gets the job done (LT FW)… Must be bored…

In my opinion Thunderbolt is one of the most over-hyped “technologies”. It’s nothing new, just 2 older iterface busses squeezed into one connector/cable.

It’s just another example of artificially trying to make older equipment look obsolete.

Thanks for the info… On to the next thing I don’t need…

I keep repeating this over and over to my wife. :slight_smile: :slight_smile:

Still nada! :slight_smile:


what’s the alternative for Thunderbolt on a PC ?

you can have TB on a windows system using a haswell processor and mobo with TB.

thx !

From what I noticed a few months ago, the motherboards with TB on them seemed to be fairly middling in performance and other facilities, with PCIe lanes shared between the TB channels and PCIe slots.

It seemed that one could not have a performance motherboard AND lots of PCIe I/O AND TB, which meant that I could not use my six monitor/UAD2 setup AND have TB for future expansion.

and you would be wrong

I think I will wait for 10GbE displays to come about, which along with AoIP audio interfaces would allow fully routable setups using stock standard LAN hardware. You could then have monitors locally or remotely and the computer wouldn’t know the difference.

To me, TB seems like a kiddy solution to connectivity.

IMHO TB will only make inroads in the pro-video sector, to provide peripherals for the new MacPro, which is a machine designed to do just that and not audio (and it would be foolish to pay through the nose for monster dual GPU’s that you will never need, unless you’re a video editor.) In the world of audio, it’s not going to make any significant dent. Heck, not even USB 3.0 will, because for 99% of the people, modern USB 2.0 interfaces are well capable to handle everything they throw at them.

With the influx of new Thunderbolt audio devices, I think it is fair to say that the standard is finally gaining momentum.

Avid, Apogee, Universal Audio, Lynx, MOTU and even Zoom (!) all have Thunderbolt interfaces now. Curiously, notably absent is Mac-only Metric Halo, one of the first FW audio device manufacturers.

I think the mid and bottom tier device makers (i.e. M-Audio, Focusrite etc.) will follow suit by NAMM 2015.

Not an avalanche though!

Focusrite is one company that has made the leap into Dante-based GbE AoIP audio interfaces. Their takeup of TB depends upon how many different systems they want to spread their resources across and where they think they are heading.

i would love to hear real live experience from both thunderbolt and dante users!

All i heard about Dante is that it isn’t useful for recording because it introduces a lot of latency. A friend of mine changed his Dante card for his Yamaha 01V to RME Raydat (ADAT).
I wonder if Focusrite solved that problem and provides own drivers?

Dante is supposed to be able to get to sub ms latencies. What did your friend actually get?

I thought that the only card available at this time IS the Focusrite one, though it might be a re-badged Audinate one.

I suggested to Audinate that they make a companion Dante client software that wraps the ASIO drivers for existing cards. The CTO said they were passing that on to their development team as they wanted to get Dante out there.

Up until now, the only ones taking AoIP (Dante and Ravenna) on are Focusrite and some others, and a bunch of digital desk manufacturers. Even so, those audio card manufacturers are only looking at large I/O sets per module, which makes for a very expensive entry cost.

A software wrapper for existing ASIO cards would allow the rest of us to use our current cards initially, but just add more I/O as our needs increase. I could imagine adding little i3 BRIX modules with USB audio interfaces as and where we need them.

his solution was the yamaha dante card with the adinate dante virtual soundcard.
for him it was an unsatisfiying solution, thats why he switched to rme raydat
unfortunalty i dont know what type of latency he actually got with dante.
he simply said : “unstable and a lot of latency”

my local dealer told me that he never heard of anyone using dante in a recording environment.
he said: “it is okay if you do “live show” and use it to record the show”

thats why i would be interested to hear if someone was able to use adinate one or focusrite dante.
right now i believe it is an highly overpriced ethernet network card.
but AoIP would be great.

The Dante virtual sound card (host) will add a minimum of 4ms overhead, with minimum ASIO latency of 1ms. It is software, and I would expect that it is more for driving PAs than for serious recording work.

The Dante interface card (client) for Yamaha devices can be set for latencies of 0.15, 0.5, 1.0, or 5.0 ms.

The physical Dante sound card (host) cites network latency as low as 150us, and round-trip latency, including audio app, as low as 2.99ms, which is about what I currently get with my Cubase and Firefaces at 256 samples at 192k/32.

Hence, it appears that using the software Dante host is the limitation in your friend’s setup.

For serious recording, I would expect to use a physical Dante PCIe card to get the lowest latencies. Unfortunately, the Focusrite one is $1000. Hopefully if Audinate can get better traction for Dante by providing a client ASIO wrapper, the price will drop.

okay, adding another 4ms to the system, yeah the virtual soundcard could be to blame.
but what about system stabilty / reliabilty?

2.99ms RTL ? at wich sample rate? including converters or just for ethernet - sequencer - ethernet?
As as far as i know the whole ethernet protocol and the router adds latency to the system.

do you have tested it yourself or are these the marketing claims?

Have to wait for reviews for that, but a few heavyweight equipment players have opted for it, but mainly (like for Ravenna) in the digital console area, rather than DAW.

They cite that 3ms for ‘round trip’.

The latency settings for compensating for this go as low as 150us and up to 5ms. The hardware card has its own GbE port, and one would use switches separate from general LAN traffic to ensure minimal disruptions.

Advertising blurb. Lots of promises, but awaiting for someone to review the setup, and some desperate early adopters to give the goss on what it is like to live with.

Dante can work at low latency (hardware the software version is not too great)
however a very good knowledge of networking is required. despite what you may read on some vendor sites.
a good Network switch is required to use DHCP… some sites say NOT to use DHCP and this is completely WRONG…

we have set up Yamaha Nuage and Focusrite Rednet systems as well as the older original Dante card for Yamaha.
all working at low latency large track count.
Yamaha still uses our systems for their commercial audio demos at shows and those are all dante set ups.