Yes, each slave would have to have a separate interface, and then your main DAW would have an interface (probably PCI) that has lots of digital inputs. Note that MIDI-over-ethernet (either Musiclabs MIDI Over LAN or the built-in Network MIDI in OS X) works fine - it's just audio that's still not there.

I have a MOTU PCI-424 card with a couple of their boxes on my main DAW, and Frontier Designs Wavecenter cards (cheap, ADAT and S/PDIF I/O only) on my Windows machines. Actually, I ended up buying another PCI-424 card for my slave G5 too, since I had an extra one of their boxes on my G5.

People say the RME cards have more efficient drivers these days, so I'd take a look at them if I were starting over. But the Wavecenter cards are very reliable.

Whether that would be almost as expensive depends on the interfaces you stick in an Intel Mac. There aren't any cheap interfaces with ADAT only that I've been able to find.

FX-Teleport for Mac (www.fx-max.com) - audio over ethernet - is what we all want, and he's reportedly hard at work on it.

Sandpiper,

I'd say, if you're looking at 4 minis, look into a digital mixer of some kind. It gets to be quite a job to have IO on all slaves piping into one DAW machine. With a mixer you could feed everthing into the mixer, and just send a monitoring out back into the main DAW. And hey, that's what mixers were built for, right? [;)]
Funny how easy it is to forget about the old-school technology when you spend so much time in computer-land. Mind you, getting that many optical ins on a mixer is probably impossible, so you'd still need some sort of interface on the minis. But decent mixers are getting cheaper all the time.

J.

@jbm said:

Sandpiper,

I'd say, if you're looking at 4 minis, look into a digital mixer of some kind. It gets to be quite a job to have IO on all slaves piping into one DAW machine. With a mixer you could feed everthing into the mixer, and just send a monitoring out back into the main DAW. And hey, that's what mixers were built for, right? [;)]
Funny how easy it is to forget about the old-school technology when you spend so much time in computer-land. Mind you, getting that many optical ins on a mixer is probably impossible, so you'd still need some sort of interface on the minis. But decent mixers are getting cheaper all the time.

J.

I take your point but I was just trying to stimulate thinking on the multichannel via FireWire idea. I have 2 Yamaha Promix mixers which could provide suffient analogue input BUT I am currently hooked on ALTIVERB with the orchestral positioning settings which seems to work very well and for that you need about 10 channels of stereo audio either internally or coming in from slaves. My existing Audio Interfaces are an old style MOTU 828 and a Metric Halo ULN 2 channel.

Hi,

Just mentioning: every mac mini comes with a coreaudio-capable soundcard and a digital output (the headphone output also doubles as spdif lightpipe).

Presumably this soundcard is capable of low-latency operation like any other core-audio soundcard.

Anyone tried using the vienna instruments OSX universal binary with the onboard mac mini soundcard?

BTW, if you are looking for a macintel equivalent of V-Stack, try rax http://plasq.com/rax <-- it runs both AU and VST instruments, as well as effects, and has a decent mixing environment.

Leon

Sandpiper, yes - FX-Teleport. The *exclusive* announcement. [:D] [:D] [:D] [:D] [:D] [:D] [:D] [:D] [:D]

JBM - I got rid of my digital mixer a couple of years ago and haven't missed it once - even though it was a really nice board (Panasonic DA7). It had been sitting off to the side untouched for years with the faders at unity, doing exactly what my MOTU hardware does: submixing synth outputs.

The difference is that you don't need to submix them if you have MOTU (or other) hardware, which is less expensive, has enough digital inputs to accommodate all my computers and a couple of hardware instruments I still use (I would have had to add a second mixer to handle everything), and doesn't require you to submix anything - all the inputs come up in the DAW's mixer.

Digital mixers are for people who record live ensembles and need all the mic preamps, talkback features, and quick access to input channels. They're also for people who like to mix on mixers.

But I'm much happier with the streamlined set-up. I got rid of all the extra outboard crap and now just have two high quality input channels. Oh, and I also added a monitor controller (Blue Sky BMC) with a remote sits on my desk; it has some features that are much more convenient than the mixer's monitor section, and I love having it right there within reach.

So if you have a reason to have a digital mixer, of course that's good advice. But it's totally unncecessary if you're just streaming slave computers into your DAW.

***

I'd forgotten that the Mac MINI has digital outputs, but those would work fine...if you only have one computer (and of course if you're happy with just two outputs). If you have multiple machines, there's no way of synchronizing their digital clocks - they don't have digital input. By the time you rig a system to handle asynchronous clocks (i.e. that do a small sample rate conversion to keep everything in sync), you're looking at bigger investment than just getting FireWire boxes...that are a better solution anyway.

Hi Nick, actually the new intel mac minis have both digital in and out. www.apple.com/macmini/whatsinside.html

Not sure what one has to do to get them synced, but anyway, they do have a digital in aswell.

Ah. Well, then if you have more than one machine, you need a way to distribute TOSlink S/PDIF to all the others. The most likely way to do that is with a TOSlink-RCA S/PDIF converter for each machines, such as the one made by M-Audio, and then a video distribution amp to get multiple RCA S/PDIF sources.

On top of that, you need something on your main DAW to accept all those TOSlink inputs. [:)]

Translation: the way to do it is to put a FireWire interface on each slave, and a MOTU or RME card that accepts multiple lightpipes on your sequencing DAW.

You might look on ebay for used MOTU 828 interfaces - the original ones. They have lightpipe I/0 and go for $275.

Nick, would this help the multiple Mac setup any? I'm still trying to figure out what it is...connection wise...


http://www.apogeedigital.com/products/symphony.php


Tom

That's likely to be a nice audio interface when it comes out, sure.

[edit] When I first heard about that card at NAMM, it sounded like it's only for connecting to Apogee's converters, i.e. it doesn't have AES/EBU or S/PDIF I/O. Looking at it now, that may not be the case - it might have lots of standard digital inputs. The bumph is a little ambiguous:

"Symphony features 32 channels of digital I/O on a single PCI-Express card format. With support for sample rates up to 192 kHz, Symphony can be used as a digital router or patch-bay when connected to external converters or other digital outboard equipment. Software drivers for Symphony feature extensive routing capabilities and very low latency performance making very high channel, high quality native recording with Apogee converters a reality."

Nowhere does it mention AES/EBU or any standard format, so I'm inclined to think it's a card for their interfaces.

@Nick Batzdorf said:

Translation: the way to do it is to put a FireWire interface on each slave, and a MOTU or RME card that accepts multiple lightpipes on your sequencing DAW.

If the mac mini's already have a coreaudio-capable digital output, why do you suggest we need an additional firewire interface on each server? What we need is simply a soundcard on the main DAW that will accept multiple digital inputs (asynchronous).

That, or a small box that will merge several optical inputs into one. Like this: www.dolphinmusic.co.uk/page/shop/flypage/product_id/3842 except, this one accepts AES rather than optical (shame!). I'm sure we can find a box that merges asynchronous optical signals though.

Leon,

I've been searching high and low for a box that accepts 16 spdif litepipe in / outs and "merges" them into 2 sets of ADAT litepipe that would then feed into a RME hammerfall card that is on the main DAW machine....

SvK

ps: I can't believe how much polyphony you can throw at the 2gig MINImac...it's crazy...EVEN on fast passages with release samples on!!

wow.......best purchase I've made...next week, I'll buy another

I tried wormhole2 ...it is sloppy .....Built-in opticals are almost instant in comparison....

SvK

Hey Nick,

That's good to know, actually. I've been back and forth on whether to include a hardware mixer in my setup. I've been looking at the ProjectMix from m-audio. I don't really like their stuff, but that looks handy, being a mixer and control surface.

But now that I've got my first taste of the VIs, it looks like most of money is going to be going on the slow process of reaching the Symphonic Cube!

(Though I have to admit, the prospects of Minis are looking very tempting! I suppose the MacBook would be similar? I could use a laptop, and if Mactels are that hot for VIs, it would be a great step.)

J.

SvK, have you tried reducing the latency slider in wormhole?

Also, what about kontakt 2, how does that perform in terms of streaming? (if you use k2)

@Another User said:

If the mac mini's already have a coreaudio-capable digital output, why do you suggest we need an additional firewire interface on each server? What we need is simply a soundcard on the main DAW that will accept multiple digital inputs (asynchronous).

That's all *you* need. We real men and women with gold chains hanging in our hairy chests need more than two outputs.

The other issue is that I don't know of any sound cards with lots of asynchronous S/PDIF inputs other than Pro Tools HD. But that doesn't mean one doesn't exist, just that i haven't heard of it.

Guys,

check this out...


http://www.esi-pro.com/viewProduct.php?pid=11&page=1

hmmmm [;)]

SvK

@svonkampen said:

Guys,

check this out...


http://www.esi-pro.com/viewProduct.php?pid=11&page=1

hmmmm [;)]

SvK

I do have a MOTU 828 Mark 1 that can accept SPDIF /ADAT In out.

Is the simplest option to plug an optical cable into the 828 and Mac Mini?
Would the following be a suitable cable considering the connection on the Mac Mini?

http://www.griffintechnology.com/products/xpresscable/



Then forgive my ignorance but what would need setting to clock the Mac Mini to the 828?


So what advantage might there be for the USB to ADAT connector? Would the Mac Mini be able to see more channels of Audio when plugged into an 828 or equivalent?


I would run Midi over LAN and Plogue Bidule.

@Earlier I said:

I do have a MOTU 828 Mark 1 that can accept SPDIF /ADAT In out.

I also have a Metric Halo ULN2 but that only has SPDIF electrical In/Out.
I could run a second Mac Mini into this but I would need to get from optical to electrical. I would need a converter such as:
http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?TabID=1&criteria=usb&ModuleNo=29293&doy=search&C=SEO&U=Strat15">http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?TabID=1&criteria=usb&ModuleNo=29293&doy=search&C=SEO&U=Strat15

Is this likely to work - again are there clocking issues re latency or does the digital connection set it all up correctly and what settings in the Mac Mini have to be made?

Assuming you could could get AUNetsend/Receive to work with acceptable latency, you would still need to clock both machines together. The reason is that even if the latency starts out okay, without this connection it drifts, and by half an hour the latency can be three seconds: play a note and hear it three seconds later. Not useful.

In other words, AUNetsend/Receive doesn't seem to clock to the ethernet port the way FX-Teleport does on Windows machines; the only digital connection to a Mac Mini without an audio interface on it is the TOSlink (optical S/PDIF) port, so that's what you have to use.

If you have two audio interaces - FireWire or otherwise - you don't need to mess around with TOSlink for sync. But you do also need digital sync, of course - any time you have two digital devices, they have to be clocked togeter. You can use the embedded clock in the digital datastream, but you get lower jitter if you run a separate wired run (either word clock or an S/PDIF or AES/EBU run just being used for clock and not audio). It's not a good idea to use optical cable for sync - the jitter is pretty high. (ADATs used a separate 9-pin connection for sync - they just used the lightpipe for audio.)

You're using the same kind of sync, but my guess is that audio-over-ethernet doesn't have the same jitter issues as standard digital transfers.

Finally, I believe that Digital Performer has an option to clock to ethernet, so you wouldn't need the TOSlink connection with a Mac Mini. However, it doesn't support AUNetsend/Receive, so we're back where we started.

Bottom line, I still haven't been convinced that audio-over-ethernet is a viable solution for Macs yet. But I'm sure it will be sooner than later.