- Eventide Audio

Home Forums Products Rackmount H9000R and Emote: Any possibility of MIDI Port Driver Conflicts on a PC? Reply To: H9000R and Emote: Any possibility of MIDI Port Driver Conflicts on a PC?

Kamurah wrote:

I know what I wrote may seem complicated and overkill.  Really the main point is to think of Dante in a small studio as a digital patchbay instead of analog.  Since it seems you are already setup for analog routing, there may be little added value for you.  RME interfaces and drivers are great and I have a Babyface Pro I use for live performance and love.

Dante with RME:  If you were thinking of switching to Dante, you could still use the UFX…it just would not really make sense for it to be the main interface.  You could still route audio into and out of the device, utilize it’s preamps and conversion, and with the RME software route everything for monitor mixes, etc.  The advantage Dante would have in this setup is everything stays digital, and that ultimately, the RME has a limited number of I/O …..AND….the UFX needs to be positioned relatively close to the computer if you are using it as the main interface…. the number of I/O channels on the RME may be plenty for your studio…so you would need to make that determination.

Location:  Dante allows you to position anything anywhere in the studio…and have just one cable connecting back into the switch with extreme cable lengths allowed.    My AXE FX is on the other side of the room near my guitars and one cheap CAT6 cable connects it to the Dante system.  The one cable is bi-directional so it can carry signals into and out of the AXE.  If you need to add more channels in the future….you just connect the device and the network will automatically add it to the digital patchbay (Dante).  From there, you just assign where the audio is supposed to be routed.

Clocking:  In Dante, you really do not have to manage clocking as closely as in a traditional studio.  I set up every device to receive clock from their Dante connection, and the network handles the rest.  (in the case of the UFX, you would just assign the UFX to receive clock from AES, and that is it).  It is automatic, and I really have not given it a thought after the first setup.  An advantage of doing it this way, since the Dante network decides where the clock is coming from and distributes it automatically, if I turn a device on or off…even if that device was assigned as the Master Clock, the network will re-assign the clock master and re-clock everything else automatically.  You also have the option of assigning clock manually, but I just let the network do it for me.  I have not had a single hiccup with clocking since I got it configured.

Not Dante:  AXE FX / Eventide – Will be interested in your thoughts running into and out of the two units.  I thought I would be constantly using the AXE FX for amp / cab sims, and the Eventide for modulation, delay, and reverb effects.   In practice I have found that while the H9000 works well on some things…it is not a given for every guitar sound.  More often than not, I record the AXE signal as is.  Just a preference thing, but again…interested in your thoughts.

My H9000R is now updated and running, thanks to some timely help from Eventide, but I still need to test it in Cubase. I have the unit positioned in a closet at the back of the room (so I won’t hear the fan), and I decided that it needed some company, so I spent much of the day moving my computer there too. I need a couple of adapters (for longer cable runs) that won’t arrive for a few days, but then…no more computer noise in the room.

Can you give me a very ballpark estimate of what it would cost me to switch to Dante, or maybe what it cost you? I still don’t know for sure what the actual components are, or I would try to come up with an estimate myself.

Right now, besides the UFX, I have a Focusrite Scarlett Octopre, which interfaces with the UFX via ADAT to give me 4 additional stereo channels of analog I/O. I will soon receive a second Octopre (those things have been hard to get of late) which will also connect to the UFX via ADAT, so I’ll have an additional 4 stereo channels. With the UFX’s 4 stereo channels I’ll have 12 in all. 

My plan is to set up TotalMix to utilize the second Octopre as 4 stereo sends and returns for the H9K, one for each effects chain. So this leaves me 8 channels, meaning I can input up to 8 analog sound sources at one time. That’s more than I EVER use. And any of their channels in TotalMix could be sent to the H9K.

Or I could patch directly from a synth into the H9K to use it as an insert effect rather than a send effect. (It’s also possible to set up TotalMix to use external insert effects.) 

For audio already within Cubase (VST synths, samples), there’s a way in Cubase to configure sends to external effects, and there are videos explaining this on YouTube. I actually used this feature a while back, but will need a refresher course.

It’s actually mind-boggling. I started in 1980 with a 4-track reel-to-reel, which was state of the art for a home studio at that time. What a long strange trip it’s been.

Re the H9K and guitar, I assume that only a small subset of the choices available to me in the H9K will be suitable for a specific project or of interest to me in particular. Anyway, most of what I do is actually synth-based. (In 2015 I slipped on ice and fractured my left wrist in 2 places. I had to lay off guitar for a long time, and it’s been difficult coming back.) I typically send some MIDI to a synth, change it all around, and audition various patches until I find something I think I can work with. Then I add other parts, record/mix/master, and voila!

Thanks again for your input.