This is topic Cinema Sound Processor in Media Block? in forum Digital Cinema Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=16;t=002591

---

Posted by Harold Hallikainen (Member # 5405) on 02-18-2016, 05:55 PM:
 
I've heard that people are considering moving the sound processor functionality (equalization, delays, crossover, etc.) into the media block so the media block would drive the amplifiers directly. What does the group think of this idea?

Thanks!

Harold
 

---

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 02-18-2016, 06:28 PM:
 
Might be worth to consider for very streamlined setups like boothless auditoriums in large multiplexes. Personally, I would always buy a separate device for the added flexibility.

That said, would be nice if all cinema processors would support a basic common IP command set for format, volume, mute. That would make setup and control easier.

- Carsten
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-18-2016, 09:40 PM:
 
Well geez, the media block isn't enough of a mission critical item with all of the DCI security nonsense it has to deal with. Let's just add the sound processing in there too! Oh yeah, that's smart.

And to make it even MORE retarded of an idea, let's do it as an IMS so it's inside the projector!

Personally I would NEVER sell such a ridiculous and downright stupid product to a client. I like this thing called QUALITY and RELIABILITY. The more shit is crammed onto a board in the projector, the higher chances of failure or poor quality.

To give you a similar example, I am a huge fan of the QSC Q-SYS processing system. It represents the highest quality with the most flexible processing I have ever come across. So with my opinion on the product now being stated let's look at a fact...the QSC Q-SYS model 500 processor is so powerful it can process audio for 10 auditoriums at the same time!!! Now ask me if I would even consider doing such a moronic thing.

Just because it might physically be possible in no way makes it a good idea.

Please excuse me while I go rinse out my mouth from the vomit I just puked up.
 

---

Posted by Harold Hallikainen (Member # 5405) on 02-18-2016, 10:13 PM:
 
So Brad, tell me what you really think!

Thanks for the comments! I really appreciate them.

Harold
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-19-2016, 08:45 AM:
 
This is a really dumbest idea ever if the processor is in the security cover of the IMB. GDC is going to be showing its latest media block at Cinemacon and if this is what they have done then they can count me out on that one. Imagine the look on your customers face when you tell him he has to spend five grand on a new media block because his left channel output is intermittent.

I want to be the fly on the wall at Guttags first installation of one of these! He just loves audio coming out of IMB's

However! If the processor were a separate plug on board like the SX-3000 computer control board is on their integrated IMB then I might consider it for some really small installations. But not for normal every day booths.

While I HATE the Doremi IMS the GDC SX-3000 has been 100% reliable for me, zero failures. In fact I have not lost a single GDC IMB at all, not even a version 1. Having all IMB servers in a large complex actually saves a bit on power. Each large full size server is drawing in excess 300 watts! IMB's are drawing about 50 watts or less.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-19-2016, 09:43 AM:
 
Yep...I'm still not a fan of IMBs and dispute them being any time savings on installation. Running 2 HDSDI lines isn't hard or slow.

I've rarely found that one company has a lock on great things. Good ideas come from everywhere. Why would I think that the company that makes the best server would also make the best sound processor? And even if they did, do I really think that they would put as good a sound processor on an already cramped IMB? Mind you, I did think that Dolby made the best server (DSS line) and I like the CP750, but I have no allusions that it is the end-all. It has a very nice feature set...the CP850 lacks a multi-channel analog input...that sort of thing just takes it out of the running in 95% of our installations...what if that sort of "design" was put into an IMB where things just have to be cut (how much real-estate do you have on an IMB faceplate?).

No...I'm quite happy to keep things separate. There are different strengths and weaknesses out there and there are different life-cycles too. Sound processors typically have a long life-cycle since not too much changes with them over time...particularly for the exhibitor that is not desiring to really go beyond their present sound configuration (5.1, 7.1...etc.) So why tie that into the server? So now I have to send ANALOG lines to the IMB to feed the amps or am I supposed to get some RJ45 box (could have some form of sound over cat 5 or AES) to get the sound to the rack to feed the amplifiers. All of this to move one box to the IMB? Really?

Put me in the "no" column please.
 

---

Posted by Steve Moore (Member # 4753) on 02-19-2016, 09:56 AM:
 
Sounds like having an all in one washer/dryer for your laundry!
One packs up then both have packed up.

Having said that I suppose I can neither wash or dry my dirty socks, so they will be dry to start with and therefore saving lots of time and effort!

 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-19-2016, 10:48 AM:
 
I can't wait for that IMB/auditorium lighting dimmer combo.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 02-19-2016, 11:10 AM:
 
But can it process credit cards at the box-office and concessions stand?
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-19-2016, 12:43 PM:
 
You know if it can also do that and answer the phones it's gonna get made!
 

---

Posted by Harold Hallikainen (Member # 5405) on 02-19-2016, 01:14 PM:
 
I really appreciate all the comments! Because of the complexity involved in external object-based audio rendering (mostly related to security, KDM transfers, forensic marking, non-standard interface to SMS, etc.), object-based audio rendering within the "media block" (server / media block combination) may be more economical. Once you're doing all this DSP work there, you wonder what other DSP work should be done there. I like putting rendering within the media block and delivering "flat" sound to an external multi-channel processor that also accepts other audio inputs. But, of course, we have to look at all the options.

Now we just have to find a miniature AC outlet to fit on the front panel so you can plug in your houselights...

Harold
 

---

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 02-19-2016, 01:24 PM:
 
One issue may be object based sound systems. It does make sense to have the rendering attached to the media block. Dolby needs a complicated and expensive setup for Atmos. Due to the watermarking, Auro 3D needs to be decoded in the media block as well. Now most object based sound systems need more than the 16 standard DCI channels (sooner or later). The USL media block uses these 16 channels, more or less in a proof-of-concept, for their MDA offline-decoding. But what if you need more? Add 16channels through an IP-based interface, but what about the watermarking?

One would need a revised watermarking practice/standard to get rid of these implications. For systems like Atmos, with timbre matching, etc, it does make sense to have EQ in the media block. I guess you would still need an external 'basic' Cinema processor with some analog and digital IO to do routing and source switching. But because EQ is so important for object based audio, it should be done in the media block audio department.

- Carsten
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-19-2016, 01:30 PM:
 
Consider this...what percentage of systems out there are going with object based immersive audio? It HAS to be a tiny fraction of the installed base and likely a tiny fraction of new-builds. To worry about doing much of anything in the mediablock seems like a waste to me. Feed the stream to an external box for those that want/need the fancy sound and let the 16-channels of discrete audio...that we STILL haven't used up yet be for the other 99%. Why make everyone pay?

Honestly, I'd rather there be an SMPTE defined "Object Audio" connector on new mediablocks that can feed the fancy sound info to the Object Audio box...whomever it is and if you have it, great, if not, ignore it. I think putting it all on the IMB, at this stage of the game, is the wrong place.
 

---

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 02-19-2016, 01:58 PM:
 
Well those installations without the need for object based audio simply would not need to buy THIS media block, but the other one without that capability.

The question is, who defines the term 'Cinema processor'. If you call that part 'MDA rendering block', not many people would object to have it in their IMB/IMS. As a matter of fact, for MDA, it is already part of the USL IMS, for Auro 3D, it is already part of the Dolby/Doremi IMB, Alchemy ICMP, etc. Adding MDA or dts-X to them is only one more step, and it will come.

There would still need to be an external CP, you can hardly get all the necessary IO for an audio CP onboard an IMB. Plus, that IMB/IMS would still need to have a standard AES output port for 'traditional' work.

Adding an MDA renderer to an IMS/IMB as a software function would also make object based audio much more affordable. Look at the price and price difference of the CP850 'bare' and ATMOS model.

- Carsten
 

---

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 02-19-2016, 04:06 PM:
 
I second everybody's opinion but let's put it this way: if you lose the media block, you lose picture and sound. Hence your CP750 may be up and running but your auditorium is going to be down anyway.

Don't like the idea particularly but I can see that someone may like it. As Brad said, there is this obscure word called "reliability". Nowadays software is a problem, we are running beta software all the time and glitches and issues are common. Now add more electronics and more software to the equation and wait for the BSOD
 

---

Posted by Marin Zorica (Member # 1716) on 02-20-2016, 02:08 AM:
 
I agree with rest of you guys, just, don't get why somebody did not think of this untill now.....they did integrate all....so...
 

---

Posted by Magnus Eriksson (Member # 6085) on 02-20-2016, 05:12 AM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

I can't wait for that IMB/auditorium lighting dimmer combo

---

Integrate this!
/M.E.
 

---

Posted by Pietro Clarici (Member # 4937) on 02-20-2016, 03:03 PM:
 
If it were 100% reliable and substantially cheaper than the available options, I'd like to use something like that to set up what I call a nanoplex: very small theaters with a boothless setup, a single IMS/processor board and networked active 5.1 audio, basically removing every other device outside of projectors and speakers.

But it's a very specific (and possibly dumb) application, and a couple of very big "if"s.
 

---

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 02-20-2016, 04:43 PM:
 
I'm going to go against the grain here, and say why wouldn't you do this?

An IMB is a special-purpose computer doing digital signal processing. If the IMB dies, the show is over. So the IMB is absolutely critical to the show.

The sound processor (a modern sound processor!) is also a special-purpose computer doing digital signal processing. If it dies, then really, a show without sound is not a show, so it too is critical to show operation.

Because these two things are effectively in series, and both are critical, then the possibility of a lost show multiplies by the failure rate of the two components. In addition to the two critical failure points, there is also a bunch of circuitry involved in transporting the AES streams from the IMB to the processor, which can also fail.

Since there are two boxes doing the same thing (digital signal processing) putting the audio DSP routines on the IMBs processing resources makes the overall system more reliable, as there is only one critical device whereas before there were two, and all the intervening gubbins is lost.

The next thing to do is to use an Ethernet based audio protocol, to get the audio out of the IMB over dual-path redundant Ethernet, and have each amplifier get its audio over the Ethernet. Today that might use the Dante protocol, but tomorrow it would probably be AES67.

Going digital audio to the amplifiers over a redundant Ethernet path gets rid of a truckload of single points of failure, and will again tend to make the overall system more reliable.

The only downside to audio-in-the-IMB is that today's processors are a nice place to plug in non-sync and alternative content. So compared to today's IMBs, the IMB might need to sprout a couple of RCA jacks for the non-sync, extract embedded audio out of HDMI, and perhaps more sensibly, allow AES67 audio inputs.
 

---

Posted by Marin Zorica (Member # 1716) on 02-21-2016, 04:02 PM:
 
Today's board to do everything that does CP750 you can pack in size of doremi DA converter AUD-D2A.....since, you would not need any control for it, and only input is digital from ICMP itself, and some NS from outside.....ICMP would do all controll or ICP....whatever designers imagine.
So i would not be suprised that as Marco said in near future they add extra PCB somewhere in middle of ICMP boards.....
 

---

Posted by Anders Nordentoft-Madsen (Member # 3334) on 03-02-2016, 05:06 AM:
 
Well we are in the process of doing a 6-plex (almost done), and are using Q-sys for the sound system. 3 screens pr core with redundancy (plus redundancy on the Q-LAN network)



Because of this we have gotten rid of the sound rack entirely, putting everything in the projector pedestal.



Since each amplifier has 4 analog inputs, we have plenty of inputs to feed external sound sources.

The Q-sys software are really fantastic enabling us to do almost anything we want.









Next step would be to have the audio steam with AES67 so we can get rid of all the cat 7 cables running the AES signal from the servers to the cores (all the orange network cables in the first picture) and a core with more total audio channels, but that is for the future hopefully

- Anders
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-02-2016, 06:42 AM:
 
Your Q-Sys layout looks pretty cool! Do you have any booth monitors on site? Do you have the ability to monitor the actual audio besides in the theatre? I also like the "Dolby Fader" module with a 0-10 scale!
 

---

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 03-02-2016, 08:41 AM:
 
Really cool! The 'downside' of such solution is that not everybody would be capable of servicing/tweaking it.
It gives unlimited possibilities in terms of sound EQ, routing, monitoring and troubleshooting though.

I'm thinking of someone doing a sound EQ in screen 1 while screen 2 and 3 are playing. I know it can be done but I would feel a little scared in case you did something wrong (i.e. push a new design and the whole system restarts!)
 

---

Posted by Jay Wyatt (Member # 8768) on 03-02-2016, 11:46 AM:
 
Nice designs Anders!

quote: Marco Giustini

---

The 'downside' of such solution is that not everybody would be capable of servicing/tweaking it.

---

quote: Steve Guttag

---

Do you have the ability to monitor the actual audio besides in the theatre?

---

You can 'probe' any individual point in the signal path (or sum all channels to mono) and send it to a mini speaker in the booth. This may require an IO-22 depending how many extra IO is available in the QSYS core.
 

---

Posted by Anders Nordentoft-Madsen (Member # 3334) on 03-02-2016, 12:15 PM:
 
Yes, the booth monitor is the big black speaker on the wall with the blue diode, it's kinda overkill but we got them cheap

The little screen next to the barco touch screen is the local screen interface to q-sys, it has sound format selection and volume control on one page



Monitor control on the next:



And screen light control on the next...

Also to come (not yet done) virtual mixer (from 4 external XLR's comming from the screen), Config page with the ability to save preset volume per sound format, screen music player controls (local or site global) and info page with info about AES lock ect.

The Dolby fader is done i LUA script and is goes up to 11!! Why? Because we can

Doing EQ is quite nice, for this design we did the "CAL" page. That makes it a lot easier than before.

Yes saving a design while running a movie in the other screens is not a good idea, the core needs to compile at that would cut the sound in all other auditoriums running on that core.

- Anders
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-02-2016, 03:28 PM:
 
Very nice indeed! Did you do a monitor mix button or can one merely choose what they want in the mix?

Oh...might I ask if there is a matrix decoder module in Q-SYS to deal with the pesky 2.0 sources?
 

---

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 03-02-2016, 04:10 PM:
 
Don't think there is and this is in fact a good point: how do you deal with HDMI/Blu Ray/consumer sound on a QSYS?
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-02-2016, 04:36 PM:
 
I'd think just with appropriate inputs (analog or digital). And if they have DPA-Q amps, they have (4) inputs into the system built in.

So how are you liking the Barco ICMP? Also what are you using for local touchscreens?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-02-2016, 06:37 PM:
 
Q-SYS is awesome. It's the most flexible and best sounding processor on the market.

But no it doesn't have any sort of matrix decoder. I really wish it did. The way the system itself is designed, it can always be added by QSC at some point.

I am NOT a fan of using the amplifier analog inputs for critical audio. It's fine to inject a microphone or preshow audio or even surround channels into the system, but I always install an input card INTO the Core for the stage channels. If an amp dies, you don't want it taking out your stage channels. If the Core should die, well it's dead anyway.

I am also not a fan of using one Core to do multiple auditoriums. It might save a tiny bit of money, but look at the cost of the entire building to put that into perspective.
 

---

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 03-03-2016, 12:28 AM:
 
Q-Sys is a great system with great potential. I think it would be great if QSC would open up the platform a little so third parties could build extensions for it. In that case, somebody could develop a matrix decoder which could be loaded into your Core. Right now, to achieve this you would have to hook up an analog device which takes a whole bunch of analog inputs and outputs.

For multi-theater setups, in order to achieve some kind of fail-over redundancy in the core setup, it would really help if you could replace the discrete AES signals with AES67 or CobraNet, so you could route that part over Ethernet.

Obviously, you're introducing new SPOFs here. Although it's quite trivial to create a redundant Ethernet network, it's not like they cannot fail. A single misbehaving or misconfigured switch can bring down your network in an instant, despite all the redundancy and throw all your rooms into silence.
 

---

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 03-03-2016, 01:51 AM:
 
Steve,

Sure you have lots of inputs capability but not having HDMI (or SPDIF) inputs makes the system less flexible.
Yes you can buy a blu ray with analogue outputs (which means you're forced to buy those few models available that feature that output) and then you probably want some kind of audio de-embedder and converter to analogue - which is unlikely to work with HD formats and DTS - to make the system capable of dealing with anything that may come up.

I feel that to be implemented as a main cinema processor QSC should develop an HDMI board to extract and process the sound - it would also be cool if the core could do some basic video switching.
 

---

Posted by Anders Nordentoft-Madsen (Member # 3334) on 03-03-2016, 02:55 AM:
 
The Monitor default to a mix of all channels unless you chose on or more of the channels in the "solo" part of the UCI.

No, no matrix decoder. But i'm sure QSC will add one if we ask them nicely

For most HDMI sources we use the build in HDMI port on the Barco ICMP, for other stuff (we do have some SAT boxes that cant output LPCM via HDMI) we use a small SPDIF (coax and optical) DA conterver box (DTS and DD support), that goes directly to 6 analog inputs on the amp, this works fine.

We like the ICMP's more and more. Ingest speeds are fine now, they might be a tiny bit slower that a showvault/DCP2000 but it makes up for that with faster ingest speeds under playback. Also with ATMOS support very soon (I have done beta tests) and the external input strangeness being addressed soon, they are IMHO fully up to par (and in some cases better) than other server solutions, at a cheaper price.
We use the Barco projector touchscreens for local control, but really they are rarely used.

We have been using Q-SYS for all auditoriums in the previous site that we made (9 screens) 1 auditorium with one core (atmos), the 2 screens with one core, 2 screens with one core, and lastly 4 screens on one core (with redundancy), everything has been running flawlessly for the last 6 months.

I agree with the AES67 stuff, it would also make the build a lot cheaper.

As a bonus here is a picture that makes it clear why getting rid of AES cabling would be nice



- Anders
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-03-2016, 05:52 AM:
 
I hear that QSC is working on a Matrix Decoder module for Q-Sys but strictly rumor at this point. This is especially true given that they are over 2-years behind on DCP firmware updates.

For me, S/PDIF audio is a waste of time now. All audio from non-Cinema is going to be on HDMI. We are an Oppo dealer so supplying Blu-Ray players that have discrete analog outputs is no big thing and the BDP-103 has two HDMI inputs that WILL decode DTS or Dolby audio. That said, the external HDMI source is relegated to LPCM or the low-bandwidth DTS/Dolby stuff. We also have access and use the Crestron HD-XSP decoder that will decode everything short of Atmos. So, audio wise, we are sort of covered now on the alternate content front.
 

---

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 03-03-2016, 07:33 AM:
 

quote:

---

we use a small SPDIF (coax and optical) DA conterver box (DTS and DD support),

---

Hopefully this is not the box I tried some time ago or I wish you good luck

Why the adaptor for the AES? Do Alchemy and CIAES have different pinout??

I forgot the Alchemy can do DD and DTS on HDMI, a giant plus for a D-Cinema server. Still, I feel an AP20 gives you more flexibility for a cinema room.
 

---

Posted by Anders Nordentoft-Madsen (Member # 3334) on 03-03-2016, 08:35 AM:
 
We have tested the DA converter quite a bit and it seems to work.

The Adapter is to split the AES signal to both the main and the redundant core.

We do use AP20's in a lot of our other sites, and I agree that it is a fantastic sound processor (Dirac does wonders), but still with Qsys, we can get the job done cheaper and with a lot more flexibility, since we can do pretty much whatever we want.

- Anders
 

---

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 03-03-2016, 12:38 PM:
 
Of course, the redundant core! Thanks.

Is that really much cheaper than an AP20? Also considering that with an AP20 you could use cheaper amplifiers - with the QSYS you're basically stuck with the DPA, great amps but expensive.
 

---

Posted by Jay Wyatt (Member # 8768) on 03-03-2016, 01:01 PM:
 

quote: Marco Giustini

---

with the QSYS you're basically stuck with the DPA, great amps but expensive

---

quote: Steve Guttag

---

We also have access and use the Crestron HD-XSP decoder that will decode everything short of Atmos. So, audio wise, we are sort of covered now on the alternate content front.

---

quote: Marcel Birgelen

---

What kind of automation interface does it offer? Is it something that can be easily remote controlled using some simple TCP commands?

---

quote: Steve Guttag

---

.if it has to go to the redundant system, there WILL be a drop...not long (seconds) but something that discrete systems wouldn't suffer.

---

5 seconds according to QSC.

Yes, you're saving $50000 but if you then run 3 screens per core + redundant as in the example on this thread, then you'll need 6 cores (assuming one core does 4 screens) or 8.

My question is - I'm not really into prices - will 6 Core 500i (plus accessories) be cheaper than 10 Datasat AP10?

In this example we've seen 4 Core 500i replacing 6 standard sound processors. Again my question is: are 4 Core 500i (plus extra boards) cheaper than 6 Datasat AP20?

We should also consider the developing time to create and test the design.

Again, I want to point out that I am not questioning the QSYS system which I love
 

---

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 09-21-2017, 04:36 PM:
 

It has been 565 days since the last post.

 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-21-2017, 04:36 PM:
 
Bumping this one back up. The QSYS Pro Logic decoder is a reality. Plus I really like the UCIs that Anders made!
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 09-21-2017, 04:41 PM:
 
To the original subject the Dolby IMS 3000 Atmos audio processor and IMS together.
 

---

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-21-2017, 05:28 PM:
 
Technically yes, but to get Atmos out of it you need "Atmos Connect" breakouts, either in the form of a DAC3202, their own multi-channel AMP.

Ah, and you need a license. A VERY expensive license.

It's like those cars you buy, where the seat heating is already there, but where you need to pay a few $K to have somebody flip the switch in the firmware.
 

---

Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 09-24-2017, 03:45 AM:
 
It's expensive.

The previous IMS 1000 and 2000 are not exactly shining beacons of reliability. The jury is still out on the CP850, so far so good but there aren't that many of them around in real terms.

As said you need to use external DACs unless you're using Atmos Link enabled amplifiers.

How do you get non-sync into the audio system? I asked this at Cine Europe. The reply was basically to invent some kind of relay switching direct to the amplifier inputs. With Dolby amplifiers you have no analogue inputs.... The only way I could see was to somehow embed non-sync into HDMI and distro it that way. Messy!

Same goes for 'legacy' film sound. How do you get that in?
 

---

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-24-2017, 08:57 AM:
 
Besides the HDMI port, there is also an AUX AES port. This AUX AES port should be able to be used as a non-sync input. Obviously, you'd need to convert analog sources to AES first, but that's a solvable problem. It will also be limited to stereo only via this route.

I'm not sure what formats are supported over the HDMI port, can it properly process a Dolby TrueHD stream? What about the consumer version of Dolby Atmos? Does it support multiple (more than one) LPCM streams over HDMI?

It's clear that an IMS3000 + Atmost Connect solution is really only targeted at DCI-only operations. Analog formats are out of the question and multi-channel digital solutions probably too. So, if you're planning on doing 35mm or even 70mm in the same room, this is not your solution.
 

---

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 04-23-2018, 06:01 PM:
 
New QSC CMS-5000 answers many of these questions.

https://www.qsc.com/cinema/products/media-servers/cms-5000/

I am a bit surprised QSC develops a follow-up to the (USL) CMS-2200. Simply because the market for servers seems to be saturated in most areas of the world, and it must still be an enormous effort to develop a full IMS with that feature set and sell enough of them. The only incentive could be that the new open SMPTE standard for object-based audio needs new media blocks/many digital outputs (compared to the standard 16ch DCI), so, there may be a retrofit market. I liked the feature-set of the CMS-2200, but I can't imagine they sold too many of them?

Some here may like the Q-SYS interfacing, a natural way into Q-SYS core systems.
Also, this one has explicit digital audio inputs to accommodate NonSync, S/P-DIF, etc which ordinary cinema audio processors offer (with some adaption).

- Carsten
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-23-2018, 06:41 PM:
 
Those are cute hard drives they are using on the CMS-5000! I wonder how the life span on thewm is being solid state?

Mark
 

---

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 04-23-2018, 07:47 PM:
 
They seem to be 'M2 SSD', a smaller (and faster) form factor, often used on modern mainboards and in notebooks. However, 2TB, that's expensive...
The CMS-5000 offers 10G ethernet. Could mean extremely fast ingests. But I guess they need to be very fast, since the storage needs to support HFR/>500MBit/s DCP + the bandwidth needed for object based audio, and parallel ingests.

- Carsten
 

---