New surround processor: DANTE vs. Analog out

[Jonas_h]

Hi,

I have a home theater with JBL M2 as LCR which need a DSP with speaker tunings. For this reason I am using a BSS Soundweb London DSP which I will continue to use as I also use it for Room EQ (not interested in going to auto-eq)

My processor is an older Yamaha CX-A5100 and is connected to the BSS Soundweb via analog outputs (i.e. an extra AD/DA conversion in my chain). For a potential upgrade, I have two routes:

A. Get a processor with Dante-output to eliminate the extra AD/DA. My only option is the JBL SDP-55/58 (Storm/Trinnov is not an option).
B. Get another processor (Anthem for example) and keep the AD/DA in the chain as I do today.

Solution A is definitely the prettiest solution and is considered best practice. It eliminates a conversion and various gain structure matching. But it does limit my choices to a processor where I still read about defective units, firmware issues and have yet to see a person which does not still experience pops/noise/etc when using Dante. Solution B would be plug and play and have minimum same sound quality as I have today and it would allow me to pick a processor with a proven stability-track-record. THIS is very important to me.

So this sums up two questions where I would like to hear about your experiences and thoughts:
1. What are the recent experiences with SDP-55/58 and using Dante? Is it actually working without any issues?
2. Is it even worth the trouble going the Dante-route or are we talking about insignificant AD/DA degradation which is not audible at all?

 

[somebodyelse]

You don't mention the Arvus H2-4D or upcoming H1-D (same thread, post #64)
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...annel-aes-balanced-analog-dante-output.26248/

 

[Jonas_h]

That looks very interesting! Gotta read about it. I am worried that it will lack basic AVR functions (App for control, source/video switching, Upmix etc).

 

[abdo123]

Analog out as long as the noise performance is at least in the 105-110 dB range.

 

[ban25]

I would go with Option B because the trade-offs are *very* limiting for Option A. The only thing that would make me think twice would be the latency in your signal chain with Option B. Have you measured it? Personally I can't stand anything more than one frame at 60 Hz (16 ms), and even that is not ideal.

 

[Jonas_h]

I would go with Option B because the trade-offs are *very* limiting for Option A. The only thing that would make me think twice would be the latency in your signal chain with Option B. Have you measured it? Personally I can't stand anything more than one frame at 60 Hz (16 ms), and even that is not ideal.

I'm also inclined towards Option B after having read various SDP-55 owner threads :/

Regarding latency, it is not something I have noticed. Part of my audio calibration is an audio/video-sync clip (like this:

).

 

[sarumbear]

Hi,

I have a home theater with JBL M2 as LCR which need a DSP with speaker tunings. For this reason I am using a BSS Soundweb London DSP which I will continue to use as I also use it for Room EQ (not interested in going to auto-eq)

My processor is an older Yamaha CX-A5100 and is connected to the BSS Soundweb via analog outputs (i.e. an extra AD/DA conversion in my chain). For a potential upgrade, I have two routes:

A. Get a processor with Dante-output to eliminate the extra AD/DA. My only option is the JBL SDP-55/58 (Storm/Trinnov is not an option).
B. Get another processor (Anthem for example) and keep the AD/DA in the chain as I do today.

Solution A is definitely the prettiest solution and is considered best practice. It eliminates a conversion and various gain structure matching. But it does limit my choices to a processor where I still read about defective units, firmware issues and have yet to see a person which does not still experience pops/noise/etc when using Dante. Solution B would be plug and play and have minimum same sound quality as I have today and it would allow me to pick a processor with a proven stability-track-record. THIS is very important to me.

So this sums up two questions where I would like to hear about your experiences and thoughts:
1. What are the recent experiences with SDP-55/58 and using Dante? Is it actually working without any issues?
2. Is it even worth the trouble going the Dante-route or are we talking about insignificant AD/DA degradation which is not audible at all?

You have an option, C: wait!

AES67, multichannel digital transmission is started to enter the market and it will change the market.

StormAudio & Grimani Systems presented an 11.6.6 fully digital, networked, AES67 Audio-over-IP demonstration.

It looks like we are getting there: StormAudio & Grimani Systems will present an 11.6.6 fully digital, networked, AES67 Audio-over-IP demonstration at CEDIA Expo 2023. The collaboration will showcase networked Audio-over-IP technology, while bringing together the collective expertise and best...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Jonas_h]

You have an option, C: wait!

AES67, multichannel digital transmission is started to enter the market and it will change the market.

StormAudio & Grimani Systems presented an 11.6.6 fully digital, networked, AES67 Audio-over-IP demonstration.

It looks like we are getting there: StormAudio & Grimani Systems will present an 11.6.6 fully digital, networked, AES67 Audio-over-IP demonstration at CEDIA Expo 2023. The collaboration will showcase networked Audio-over-IP technology, while bringing together the collective expertise and best...

www.audiosciencereview.com

That might be the best option actually. My "old" Yamaha works flawlessly and sounds good, so I have no issues hanging on to it for a while.

I do worry that the market for these digital outputs is very small and thus will only be available (and in a stable implementation) in the >$20.000 processors. Most people do not have this need and will probably never need it. But time will tell.

 

[sarumbear]

That might be the best option actually. My "old" Yamaha works flawlessly and sounds good, so I have no issues hanging on to it for a while.

I do worry that the market for these digital outputs is very small and thus will only be available (and in a stable implementation) in the >$20.000 processors. Most people do not have this need and will probably never need it. But time will tell.

I disagree. What AVP manufacturer will miss the opportunity to get rid of 10+ channels of DAC, separate PSU for digital and analogue, lots of sockets, hence less time to build the units?

 

[Jonas_h]

To see this as an opportunity, that will require that some manufacturers will offer consumers components after the processor (amps/speakers) with digital inputs which are "plug and play" without requiring more-than-average IT-skills. As soon as you need to open up a laptop, defining a network and configure a big "signal matrix" my guess is, that you will lose a big part of the market. But if the manufacturers are going that way, I will definitely not stand in their way

 

[Descartes]

$20,000 for an AVR StormAudio thinks it is LVMH! Crazy expensive

 

[apgood]

$20,000 for an AVR StormAudio thinks it is LVMH! Crazy expensive

You can get 2nd hand MK1 or MK1.5 for a lot cheaper and then if it doesn't already have the AES3 32 digital channel output module you can buy it as an add-on.

 

[Sam Ash]

Any references as to how a Dante or AES67 processors and power amps are connected. Is it via a single gigabit RJ45 interface on each device that needs a gigabit switch?

 

[Jonas_h]

Any references as to how a Dante or AES67 processors and power amps are connected. Is it via a single gigabit RJ45 interface on each device that needs a gigabit switch?

 

[Sam Ash]

Thanks @Jonas_h. However, I was looking to understand how the new Storm ISP EVO processors would connect to a AES/EBU compliant amps, I suppose the concept is the same. One thing I have realised is that this could get expensive quickly as the processor does not incorporate any DAC chips. Hence, one would require Dante/AES67 amps that incorporate DACs.

 

[Jonas_h]

I'm not sure what you're asking? Are you mixing the different methods?

AES/EBU: Digital outputs - not ethernet based. Equipment connects directly together (XLR-style cable)
AES67: Basically Dante (Ethernet based like my drawing above)
Dante: Dante (See AES67)

If you use amps with Dante then they will always have DAC's. Often they have DSP as well. The only consumer amp (to my knowledge) which have Dante is the JBL Synthesis SDA2200 (and the 7-channel counterpart).

 

[somebodyelse]

There are also Dante to AES/EBU adapters if that's what you really want. https://www.thomann.de/gb/dante_avio_aes3_io_adapter_2x2.htm for example.

 

[Sam Ash]

I'm not sure what you're asking? Are you mixing the different methods?

AES/EBU: Digital outputs - not ethernet based. Equipment connects directly together (XLR-style cable)
AES67: Basically Dante (Ethernet based like my drawing above)
Dante: Dante (See AES67)

If you use amps with Dante then they will always have DAC's. Often they have DSP as well. The only consumer amp (to my knowledge) which have Dante is the JBL Synthesis SDA2200 (and the 7-channel counterpart).

Thanks for that clarification, much appreciated Jonas.