Welcome to the new Film-Tech Forums!
The forum you are looking at is entirely new software. Because there was no good way to import all of the old archived data from the last 20 years on the old software, everyone will need to register for a new account to participate.
To access the original forums from 1999-2019 which are now a "read only" status, click on the "FORUM ARCHIVE" link above.
Please remember registering with your first and last REAL name is mandatory. This forum is for professionals and fake names are not permitted. To get to the registration page click here.
Once the registration has been approved, you will be able to login via the link in the upper right corner of this page.
Also, please remember while it is highly encouraged to upload an avatar image to your profile, is not a requirement. If you choose to upload an avatar image, please remember that it IS a requirement that the image must be a clear photo of your face.
Thank you!
Graphic EQs are, historically, much more DSP intensive than parametric. I also see myself going to more centralized redundant core than one core per screen. So, all of the extra DSP adds up.
We'll see how the new nano cores price out and fit into the cinema scheme.
I agree that graphic EQ uses more DSP than parametrics. In the JSD-60, each filter in the graphic EQ is a biquad filter. A biquad can be set to bandpass, notch, HPF, or LPF. When we set the JSD-60 to use parametric EQ, we just give the user control over the previously fixed frequency, Q, and gain. It takes far fewer filters when the user controls these than having a filter every 1/3 octave.
By the way, you can look in the JSD-60 log and see the "DSP load."
I just did a quick check on a CORE110. A blank design with nothing but 8 Graphic EQs...6% DSP (1/3rd Octave EQs and yes, the subwoofer probably wouldn't be a graphic EQ). Another blank design with nothing but 8 parametric EQs (9 bands each)...3% At 3%/screen...it may not seem like much but if you are using a centralized core...that could be sizable percentage of your DSP blown on EQ that isn't used. If you use any Class 2 stuff, your core's DSP drops in half too.
Today (10/21/20), QSC announced that the NV-32H, starting in mid-December will join the line of cores. Unfortunately, there is a hardware difference so units in the field will not be core capable, ever. However, the "Core Capable" NV-32H (I would have changed the name in some manner since there is a hardware difference on the inside), can function as a peripheral, as it always has as an HDMI over IT device but it can also be operated in "Core Mode." In CORE mode it can handle up to 32 x 32 of audio I/O (half of the CORE Nano or 8-Flex). It can be licensed to handle software Dante (in 8x8 increments, comes with none) and can function as an 3x2 matrix switcher (with the same functionality/restrictions as the NV-32H in decoder mode). It does not handle bitstream audio so everything will need to be PCM.
This could be just the ticket for one wanting to do a 7.1 theatre with some video switching.
Waiting for new nano cores, I'm curious: are you installing 110f or 110c cores? If I am not mistaken, now the 110f core can also use DCIO, while it is the only one with Dante Software already enabled
Elia, it isn't the CORE that decides about the DCIO, that is Designer. Previous to 8.3.3, I believe, the non-cinema enabled Designer didn't have the DCIO in its inventory. Even now, the DPA and DCA amps don't show in the non-cinema enabled Designer. However, once any device makes it to the schematic of a design, everyone can then see/use them in the design.
I hear that the CORE Nano is due out in December. It has finally made it to the price sheets. It will need Designer 8.5 to show up in Designer though. I don't know how far away 8.5 is from release though. It doesn't seem to be merely days though...it feels like it could be more like a month or more (I've been looking for some tell-tale signs of an eminent Designer release and I haven't seen them yet).
And, for all of our cinema stuff, we always use the cinema versions of the hardware so CORE 110C. Given the choice of Dante or AES67...I'm going with AES67 so my needs for Dante are miniscule. Possibly for microphones, in the right situation.
Waiting for new nano cores, I'm curious: are you installing 110f or 110c cores? If I am not mistaken, now the 110f core can also use DCIO, while it is the only one with Dante Software already enabled
Any Core type (nano, flex, 110c, 110f, 510, 5200) can be paired with one or multiple DCIO or DCIO-H. The version of Q-SYS Designer, not the Core model, governs the peripherals that can be included in the design. Because of this, even Core models that went EOL before the DCIO was released (Core 250i/500i) are "backwards compatible".
I try to explain better my question: I wanted to understand more if there is a specific reason to choose the 110c core compared to 110f. I have to design a system in which Dante could be useful for collateral events in the cinema, so I wanted to understand if the hypothesis of choosing a 110f core was wrong or not.
Elia the 110f would be the better choice if you absolutely need Dante. 8channels(4 dante flows) free and 16 & 32ch upgrade options.
Keep in mind that a lot devices using Dante chipsets can be switched to AES67 mode in Dante Controller, thereby allowing the use of standard, license free, AES67 Rx receivers in QSYS. The hidden benefit to this approach is that it simplifies the network switch configuration by standardizing PTP clocks and DSCP flag values.
Dante uses PtPv1 and DSCP values of 56 and 46.
AES67, QLAN, and Dolby Atmos connect all use PtPv2 with DSCP values 46 and 34
Elia, I'm not aware of any benefit to using a CORE 110c over the 110f. At least not at this time. It was hinted, years ago, that the cinema hardware would diverge from the system hardware in how things are optimized. Thus far, the CORE110c is a subset of the CORE110f despite being identical inside. Not only do you not get Dante included, you also lose 4 AEC capability. About all the "c" versions get you is a very miniscule layer of insulation between a cinema dealer and an A/V outfit that thinks they can do cinema too.
I am very curious why there is a limitation on the core 110c with the software Dante as it seems like it is an artificial limitation. According to the info I have there does not seem to be a difference in price you just don't get that entitlement. I would like to know if you can purchase a software Dante entitlement for a Core 110C and if they ever plan to include it in the future.
I can't speak for QSC but it would be my belief that Cinema, at this time, is a miniscule portion of the Q-SYS install base. By not including Dante with the "c" version save QSC money since they have to pay into the Dante license, regardless if they include it with the product or not. With Systems, including an 8x8 Dante would be a value-add that could generate sales. For cinema, the lack of Dante is not likely to hurt sales.
Personally, I don't quite get the separation between Cinema and Systems aside from limiting competition by those that are not well versed in their respective disciplines. From a cost standpoint, it has to be more costly to double the number of SKUs to handle both. As it is, cinema pays the penalty now for not being able to get Qn amplifiers (once remaining stock is gone) because Systems wants amps with the inputs.
If that is the case I wish they would just say so instead of ignoring the question. I have been a very vocal supporter of Q-Sys and QSC products as a whole and its disappointing that I can't get an answer on the ability to purchase a license and whether software Dante is in the pipeline for Cinema cores. If it isn't it isn't just be open and upfront about it. And FWIW I know you and I are atypical but almost every Cinema system I design has Dante in it even if its just for wireless mics.
Sean, I agree with you. As previously stated, I'm not completely sold on the separation of equipment disciplines but I'm also not privy to long-term roadmaps so I have faith that people like Barry know what they are doing (and seem to have had a good handle on what the industry needs, where it is going and what can be accomplished within his company).
What I have also found that for companies, like ours, where there is a degree of overlap between cinema and systems (a recent QSYS installation for us was within a hospital that has an attached classroom but no cinema on site, for an example), there are means to obtain the equipment that most suits the installation so the "c" restrictions have not been a stumbling block. This has been true for us and QSC for decades where we have done exercise facilities and other non-cinemas where we use industry appropriate amplifiers and the like. Heck, if you look at the AFI/Silver pictures, you'll see DCA and CX amplifiers next to each other. CX amplifiers doing lobby background music and DCAs running in the cinemas themselves...and this was back in 2003.
Tweet
Comment