Author Topic: What's the big deal with lack of 16 channel recording?  (Read 9828 times)

RoadRanger

  • SysGod
  • Counselor
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: NE CT USA
  • Posts: 1781
  • "Wherever you go, There you are"
    • Cacophony Forums
Re: What's the big deal with lack of 16 channel recording?
« Reply #15 on: January 30, 2014, 01:06:56 AM »
There you go WK154, trying to confuse folks with facts again :facepalm: .

;D

WK154

  • Door #3
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: Valencia CA
  • Posts: 2643
Re: What's the big deal with lack of 16 channel recording?
« Reply #16 on: January 30, 2014, 01:56:44 AM »
There you go WK154, trying to confuse folks with facts again :facepalm: .

;D
Yeah I know a bad habit of mine, but I can't help myself.
When in doubt KISS

Wynnd

  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: Denver Co.
  • Posts: 1403
Re: What's the big deal with lack of 16 channel recording?
« Reply #17 on: January 30, 2014, 03:46:02 AM »
If I understand you correctly, you think that the DL has the horse power to handle 16 channel recording.  That's nice to know.  I'm pretty sure some headroom needs to be maintained to keep it from spitting up and stable software is always a good thing.  Still if they were able to even go to 6 channel recording like taking all the Aux's and sending them recording, that would be a serious improvement in function.  I have found many times when 16 channels weren't quite enough.  On the other hand, I don't know how to incorporate this into Cubase while live.  That was the great thing about the Alesis mixer.  My only issue was deciding how to hook it all up.  (Just used the Alesis for recording about two days ago to my 4 year old MacBook Pro.)   Thanks for the researched info on the DL.  I may never be able to use it, but it doesn't hurt to know about it either.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2014, 09:18:07 PM by RoadRanger »

WK154

  • Door #3
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: Valencia CA
  • Posts: 2643
Re: What's the big deal with lack of 16 channel recording?
« Reply #18 on: February 04, 2014, 04:37:18 AM »
Wynnd: The example I gave above was for the simple way to record by transferring PCM data for 16 channels which most do. However with all that spare processing power in the DL it would be possible to generate the AAC-LC format for 16 channels to the iPad. Here are some of the advantages over MP3 since it's the successor to MP3.
- More sample frequencies (from 8 to 96 kHz) than MP3 (16 to 48 kHz)
- Up to 48 channels (MP3 supports up to two channels in MPEG-1 mode and up to 5.1  channels in MPEG-2 mode)
- Arbitrary bit-rates and variable frame length. Standardized constant bit rate with bit reservoir.
and other features not too relevant here. Include an AAC codec (this is the only thing Mackie would have to license and it wouldn't break the bank) for recording and playback. This would be a simple file transfer to the iPad and not involve core audio. This would result in about a 7 to 10 fold decrease in data transfer due to compression. The software is already available if Mackie doesn't have the manpower. Progress seems to be slow at Mackie.
When in doubt KISS

WK154

  • Door #3
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: Valencia CA
  • Posts: 2643
Re: What's the big deal with lack of 16 channel recording?
« Reply #19 on: February 04, 2014, 06:29:34 AM »
Let me connect the dots now that 22 Mbps (for 16 channels) can be reduced let's say by 7 that puts it slightly above 3Mbps. The current limit to the DL is the 10/100 Mbps Ethernet since WiFi 802.11n can saturate it (150Mbps). Worst case the network at 50% (50 Mbps) and there's more than ample bandwidth to transmit 16 channels of AAC. Just another way in and out of the DL with the existing hardware. :)
When in doubt KISS