![dante instead of vienna ensemble dante instead of vienna ensemble](https://danielbarenboim.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Beethoven_Piano_eCover-1-450x450.jpg)
- #DANTE INSTEAD OF VIENNA ENSEMBLE SOFTWARE#
- #DANTE INSTEAD OF VIENNA ENSEMBLE PC#
- #DANTE INSTEAD OF VIENNA ENSEMBLE LICENSE#
That's why only a few companies are building around it, while Dante is in use by dozens of times more devices. AVNU Alliance (AVB people) haven't been able to create a solid standard or solidify anything for years. There is no ongoing fee for using anything Dante.
#DANTE INSTEAD OF VIENNA ENSEMBLE LICENSE#
Dante doesn't 'require a license to use.' THey (Audinate) license the technology to the mfr, OR they sell a simple dedicated chipset to the mfr (say Presonus/Sennheiser/etc), who installs that Dante interface chip inside their box. To help with some of your misinformation: 1. You should really consider researching some of this stuff prior to publishing.
#DANTE INSTEAD OF VIENNA ENSEMBLE PC#
However, I am still persevering with AVB currently (I also have Dante on other equipment) and will decide over the next month or so to either keep it all working on a PC or throw out the AVB and NEVER go back. And for those that think that AVB is 'catching on' its been around for years and still seems to retain its back seat networking protocol. Why? My personal view is because they are pushing AVB along with MOTU and they don't want to support competitors called Dante. Disappointingly I was less than pleased that for the Presonus StudioLive III console that on this latest version they took away the interface board. I don't care about the 'technicalities' - like most users of the gear I am only interested in 'does it work or not' and bearing in mind that Dante is years ahead it sort of relegates AVB to an also ran. it seems that both those companies love Apple? I don't and neither does the majority in the world using computers today, so using AVB limits your own networking, whereas Dante is far superior. Dante is the standard and AVB seems to be getting driven by companies like Presonus and MOTU and to be honest. Who on earth would choose AVB when for just $29 you can make a network card in to a Dante card on any reasonable PC and integrate simply with Dante.
![dante instead of vienna ensemble dante instead of vienna ensemble](https://www.ravennafestival.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/210509_Muti-Wiener_3a.jpg)
Presonus are very 'sheepish' when you mention PC's running windows and AVB in the same breath. rubbish! Companies like Presonus launch gear like the StudioLive III 32 channel mixer, but trying to get that to run on a PC is folly. You should check out Audinate’s free Dante Certification program so you get the info straight from the source.Īctually as a choice of Dante or AVB platforms ESPECIALLY RUNNING ON A PC FOR RECORDING I'm afraid that the AVB solution is at best. I’m not sure where you got your info about Dante from but I don’t think it was correct.
#DANTE INSTEAD OF VIENNA ENSEMBLE SOFTWARE#
These pieces of software are super powerful and can really Up the game of any studio or live production.
![dante instead of vienna ensemble dante instead of vienna ensemble](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/v_nK4o-JG0I/maxresdefault.jpg)
For instance, Dante via and Dante Virtual Soundcard. Finally, the applications that Audinate makes for Dante are much better than the products made for the AVB protocol. This is why Dante can work with unmanaged network switches. These unicast setups don’t require the switch to decide where packages go. Dante is usually in Unicast mode which is what you have demonstrated in your drawing. Plus, Dante only requires the switch to “snoop” packages when in multicast mode. If you scaled into a larger application your latency would be 1ms, which is beyond human comprehension. For your application ( A small network with 3-4 devices and 1 switch) you could have latency as low as 250 microseconds. I don’t think you fully understand the Dante protocol.