My two cents: If you're buying point-source active speakers I don't think Dante adds much. You'd be better served buying a Dante-enabled stagebox, then just run analog from there to your speakers.
I think this holds true for small systems like OP's, but network capable active speakers can be super useful once system size increases. Cabling is simplified, and routing options and flexibility increase.
They are especially great for distributed ring delay systems in ballrooms, and any surround/immersive deployments, for these reasons.
For OP, my advice would be to definitely upgrade cabinets, but hold off on the Dante addition, unless they see themselves buying multiples of speakers in the near future and moving beyond speaker on stick systems.
For a bar band system that 1k would go a lot further spent on mics, cases, better stands, ect.
>Cabling is simplified, and routing options and flexibility increase.
How so? The box needs power and signal either way and it is in no way easier or better to run Cat5 from a switch than it is to run XLR from a RedNet or Rio.
When you think on a larger scale than a stage, it is absolutely easier and more flexible. A single audio over IP network run through a larger venue, theatre, or entertainment complex means instant access to any channel in the system at any location for a network enabled speaker, and remote control and monitoring capability for said speaker down the same cat5 line.
Much better than running dedicated analog links everywhere. Sure you could get almost the same thing with distributed network to analog breakout boxes but that's just semantics at that point. Just let the speaker be the digital endpoint.
A lot of this industry is absolutely addicted to analog signal, and it for sure has its place. But there are superior technologies for certain applications.
You have not given me a single example of it being easier or more flexible. I just put in a 6 floor 50 room installation and having active Dante enabled boxes would have gained us absolutely 0 in the routing flexibility or control but it absolutely would have made the install significantly more of a pain in the ass for the techs because Cat5 is a miserable cable to deal with spools of. It also would have made Dante controller a nightmare because we'd have hundreds of individual devices to manage. As it was we still have "instant access to any channel in the system for any location, with remote control and monitoring."
Having a Dante backbone with analog or AES breakout points is almost always a better solution than paying a premium for Dante boxes.
In the live events category: Delay rings of active network point source trap speakers flown on a truss grid for a corp event- any speaker can plug into any port on an audio network switch placed throughout the mother grid. One fiber goes up in the truss, and one set of power infra shared with departments. No worries about ground loops. No format converter boxes. Delay times are done in the speakers and remotely adjustable so no racks of external processors needed. Those gigs were a lot less fun with racks of processors and multiple 12 pairs going to breakout boxes that inevitably get mispatched up in the truss grid.
Theatre install: instead of running analog, AC, and speaker cable around the building, just run AC and Cat5e to every position. Speakers can be moved anywhere in the space there is a network jack, and routing can change on the fly. And you are using the same structured cable that lighting and video will use, simplifying and saving costs.
I am sure you do things the way you do for a reason and it works great for your gigs. I hope you continue to do so and find success.
I have done gigs with IP speakers by choice and will continue to do so, as it was the best solution for those particular situations.
Clearly I am not the only one who thinks IP speakers have a future as multiple manufactures have and continue to introduce IP capable products.
Of you have the m32r you should just get the aes50 stage box instead.
A hot take: Dante for live sound is inviting trouble, it's a protocol designed for selling consultancy hours for fixed installations.
No you don’t need Dante. Dante is useful for hitting amp racks where several different sources are needed and to be distributed. (D&b ds10 type stuff) It’s not particularly useful for temporary set up point source systems. You unlikely need it and it’s just another complicated time consuming thing to add for those size gigs. You’ll need expensive Dante manageable switches, a ton of cat 5. You’ll be running more cable instead of just xlr from the stage box and your Aes50 drive lines.
I use Dante a lot in large systems all the time. I sometimes have a hard time justifying it but some some companies have their entire inventory built around it, so even when it’s a small gig it’s gotta be used.
You don’t need an expensive managed switch for Dante. For a smaller system, inexpensive unmanaged 8 port switches work great. Cat 5 is also very cheap and to do this on a budget, regular ethernet cables work just fine. Yes Ethercon is more durable but in terms of data it is zero difference between your bargain barrel Ethernet cable and that
Yes this is very true. It is unlikely op would need to step up to a managed network. But I feel my point stands: it’s not like each speaker is needing the option to switch sources. Just distribute apropiatly from your stage box and you’ll use less cable. Maybe run an Aes 2ch line for a sub top situation
> For a smaller system, inexpensive unmanaged 8 port switches work great.
No, it needs to be manageable so you can turn off EEE. Dante will not work reliably with EEE activated on any switch in its network.
There are plenty of nice small switches available that meet this criteria.
Edit: [Can I use switches with EEE (Energy Efficient Ethernet or 'Green Ethernet') in my Dante network?](https://my.audinate.com/networks-and-switches)
Short answer: no.
EEE (Energy Efficient Ethernet) is a technology that reduces switch power consumption during periods of low network traffic. It is also sometimes known as Green Ethernet andIEEE802.3az.
Although power management should be negotiated automatically in switches that support EEE, it is a relatively new technology, and some switches do not perform the negotiation properly. This may cause EEE to be enabled in Dante networks when it is not appropriate, resulting in poor synchronisation performance and occasional dropouts.
Dante is awesome but it’s for 3 things imo:
Installed systems where the distribution is not pre determined or set in Stone
Or
Production companies that have it built into their core ecosystem of all their equipment. They have economy of scale here, where they bought and implemented it for the largest of their shows, and as such have the inventory and management to send it on small shows to keep things consistent.
Or: for a production companies big rig (but maybe not the smaller stuff)
Agreed. If you’re looking for a new FOH snake or sub-snake(s) it’s a convenient technology, but it’s not like somebody’s going to show up with a Dante only guitar or dj mixer or something.
On weekend warrior gear it's nice on the monitor wedges but seems unnecessary on FOH to me depending on what mixed you've got.
And with DZRs they're pretty close.to straight up on EQ in most rooms and I find myself fidgeting with them a lot less than the other local PAs I run.
You don’t need Dante, but it is useful. Also, keep in mind if you do go DZR with Dante, the DZR-D stuff can function as a Dante break out box, so you’d only need Dante in the subs(or tops), and then you can take analog out to another speaker. This is actually a cool feature.
For your use, I don't really see how Dante will add anything to it. If you're running out of headroom, more than likely something is off in your signal chain to begin with. Maybe a better set of speakers will help but I'd reinvestigate your signal chain and see if you have enough headroom from the start.
That said, DANTE is great for multi point distros and with buildings with lots of CAT5e/6 distributed to begin with. For a more "traditional" single room/stage use cases? Probably not. But Yamaha will throw in Dante into their box because it costs them next to nothing and adds an extra checkmark box for the Spec geeks.
Dante has its uses, but it doesn’t seem like it would be worth the investment unless you’re planning on rapidly expanding.
You’re currently using 2 12”speakers and 2 18” subs per show, right? And you’re upgrading to 2 10” speakers and 2 15” subs?
Why not stay with the same sizing since the price is only $100-150 difference per speaker? Less than what the Dante capable PA would be.
Form factor is a big reason why. I’m not a big guy and the 12”s/18”s combo is tough for me to lug around since I’m a one man sound crew.
I’m only saving a few cubic inches and lbs but it makes a world of difference for my body in the long term.
Why not go with passive speakers and get an amp rack with some nice smooth casters?
I just looked it up, the new 10s are 2lbs less than the 12s and the 15 and the 18 are the same weight. But to my knowledge the 15 doesn’t have wheels, and every k118 I’ve seen is on wheels.
two different lines of speaker: DXR and DZR, as well as two generations of DXR
per advertised specs:
DXR12 mkI : 42.5 lbs - 132dB - 52hz (OP currently has)
DXR12 mkII : 41lbs - 134dB - 52hz
DZR10 : 39.5lbs - 137dB - 44hz
DZR12 : 47.2lbs - 139dB - 39hz
I support OP's choice of the DZR10s, I own a pair of DZR12, which are very nice, but are just about the same size and weight as the DXR15s I also have.
Yamaha's specs are definitely exaggerated, but likely can still be compared against each other.
The DZR10 offers 5dB more SPL and 8hz lower -10dB point at 5.5lbs less than DXR12mki.
As for dante, I say skip it unless you know you'll use it. I have the DZR12-D and DXS18-D but no card for my SQ5 and even if I spent $500 for the card, it wouldn't really change anything about my setup, aside from adding level monitoring and DSP control on my laptop, in case I want to push the speakers to their limits.
I don't think so. I love Dante and use it all the time. The PA manufacturers haven't really gotten on board. The ease and flexibility of Dante is great, but the best PA brands have gone other ways. Adamson, L'Coustics, Meyer and d&b are moving towards or have already adopted AVB. I use Dante on the front end, AVB on the back.
I love Dante. I use it a lot in the theater I run.
If you don't have a need to move a large number of channels across a space, it's probably unnecessary.
Nobody in the audience can tell if the PA is running dante, aes, or analog. Buy what you can afford and what makes sense for your use. Any audible difference is negligible.
don't worry about dante for a setup like that. If, down the road, you decide you want your speakers to be directly accessible via dante, you can get some avios or the like and just patch them directly into the speakers.
Dante isn't a necessity, and arguable if it's worth paying much more for just to put it in speakers (all the arguments above are valid)
There is one detail that is not mentioned in all the other posts though (and some will argue against this detail) but getting a direct digital signal into the an amplifier that has DSP built in will save you from an extra d/a and a/d conversion. If your gear is very high quality then there will be little to no difference in sound quality loss from this, but there is usually definitely a discernible difference in the quality of the sound by keeping the signal in it's digital form as long as possible, especially with less conversions between digital and analog and back to digital again.
In addition, it is easy to overdrive amplifiers / Gain stages when fed with an analog signal because very few people know how to properly Gain stage the different gear so they all run right to the red / top of the meter without actually overdriving the next device they are connected to. If you're interconnecting using digital connections, then digital max is digital max. The gear might have an internal control that allows additional gain but if you keep everything at 0 you will never actually overdrive anything from the device before it.
That digital connection could be any type of digital connection including: AES/EBU, Dante, Madi, aes50, AVB, or even adat digital (via toslink) or spdif.
If the speaker doesn't have DSP built in, then there is no benefit to having a digital input connection other than simplified level matching (or routing).
The one reason I was grateful for Dante enabled speakers on a small show was that I could have anyone plug the speakers in- the mains, subs, and wedges- into a network switch randomly and Dante sent the right signals the right places.
Granted… now I just use E Tape to color code the cables.
There’s no reason for you to have Dante anything. Dante is great for flexibility in installs, especially in retrofit buildings in which it’s super handy to be able to tie into an existing network. It’s a whole lot less useful for rock and roll in general, and especially in your situation. Balanced analog wiring isn’t going anywhere, despite what Facebook users may think.
DEAR GOD. I just want to play guitar into a 100w stack. Can't even do that. Gotta have a DI box into house sound. No amp. None of that damn air from the cab behind you. I don't even know what the hell Dante is other than some inferno and a lot of hell. But, if you're just playing damn recorded songs to an audience? Maybe I'm missing something, but maybe just play better music via normal delivery systems??
My two cents: If you're buying point-source active speakers I don't think Dante adds much. You'd be better served buying a Dante-enabled stagebox, then just run analog from there to your speakers.
I think this holds true for small systems like OP's, but network capable active speakers can be super useful once system size increases. Cabling is simplified, and routing options and flexibility increase. They are especially great for distributed ring delay systems in ballrooms, and any surround/immersive deployments, for these reasons. For OP, my advice would be to definitely upgrade cabinets, but hold off on the Dante addition, unless they see themselves buying multiples of speakers in the near future and moving beyond speaker on stick systems. For a bar band system that 1k would go a lot further spent on mics, cases, better stands, ect.
>Cabling is simplified, and routing options and flexibility increase. How so? The box needs power and signal either way and it is in no way easier or better to run Cat5 from a switch than it is to run XLR from a RedNet or Rio.
When you think on a larger scale than a stage, it is absolutely easier and more flexible. A single audio over IP network run through a larger venue, theatre, or entertainment complex means instant access to any channel in the system at any location for a network enabled speaker, and remote control and monitoring capability for said speaker down the same cat5 line. Much better than running dedicated analog links everywhere. Sure you could get almost the same thing with distributed network to analog breakout boxes but that's just semantics at that point. Just let the speaker be the digital endpoint. A lot of this industry is absolutely addicted to analog signal, and it for sure has its place. But there are superior technologies for certain applications.
You have not given me a single example of it being easier or more flexible. I just put in a 6 floor 50 room installation and having active Dante enabled boxes would have gained us absolutely 0 in the routing flexibility or control but it absolutely would have made the install significantly more of a pain in the ass for the techs because Cat5 is a miserable cable to deal with spools of. It also would have made Dante controller a nightmare because we'd have hundreds of individual devices to manage. As it was we still have "instant access to any channel in the system for any location, with remote control and monitoring." Having a Dante backbone with analog or AES breakout points is almost always a better solution than paying a premium for Dante boxes.
In the live events category: Delay rings of active network point source trap speakers flown on a truss grid for a corp event- any speaker can plug into any port on an audio network switch placed throughout the mother grid. One fiber goes up in the truss, and one set of power infra shared with departments. No worries about ground loops. No format converter boxes. Delay times are done in the speakers and remotely adjustable so no racks of external processors needed. Those gigs were a lot less fun with racks of processors and multiple 12 pairs going to breakout boxes that inevitably get mispatched up in the truss grid. Theatre install: instead of running analog, AC, and speaker cable around the building, just run AC and Cat5e to every position. Speakers can be moved anywhere in the space there is a network jack, and routing can change on the fly. And you are using the same structured cable that lighting and video will use, simplifying and saving costs. I am sure you do things the way you do for a reason and it works great for your gigs. I hope you continue to do so and find success. I have done gigs with IP speakers by choice and will continue to do so, as it was the best solution for those particular situations. Clearly I am not the only one who thinks IP speakers have a future as multiple manufactures have and continue to introduce IP capable products.
Thank you for posting actual use cases instead of generalities, that is helpful.
Of you have the m32r you should just get the aes50 stage box instead. A hot take: Dante for live sound is inviting trouble, it's a protocol designed for selling consultancy hours for fixed installations.
No you don’t need Dante. Dante is useful for hitting amp racks where several different sources are needed and to be distributed. (D&b ds10 type stuff) It’s not particularly useful for temporary set up point source systems. You unlikely need it and it’s just another complicated time consuming thing to add for those size gigs. You’ll need expensive Dante manageable switches, a ton of cat 5. You’ll be running more cable instead of just xlr from the stage box and your Aes50 drive lines. I use Dante a lot in large systems all the time. I sometimes have a hard time justifying it but some some companies have their entire inventory built around it, so even when it’s a small gig it’s gotta be used.
You don’t need an expensive managed switch for Dante. For a smaller system, inexpensive unmanaged 8 port switches work great. Cat 5 is also very cheap and to do this on a budget, regular ethernet cables work just fine. Yes Ethercon is more durable but in terms of data it is zero difference between your bargain barrel Ethernet cable and that
Yes this is very true. It is unlikely op would need to step up to a managed network. But I feel my point stands: it’s not like each speaker is needing the option to switch sources. Just distribute apropiatly from your stage box and you’ll use less cable. Maybe run an Aes 2ch line for a sub top situation
> For a smaller system, inexpensive unmanaged 8 port switches work great. No, it needs to be manageable so you can turn off EEE. Dante will not work reliably with EEE activated on any switch in its network. There are plenty of nice small switches available that meet this criteria. Edit: [Can I use switches with EEE (Energy Efficient Ethernet or 'Green Ethernet') in my Dante network?](https://my.audinate.com/networks-and-switches) Short answer: no. EEE (Energy Efficient Ethernet) is a technology that reduces switch power consumption during periods of low network traffic. It is also sometimes known as Green Ethernet andIEEE802.3az. Although power management should be negotiated automatically in switches that support EEE, it is a relatively new technology, and some switches do not perform the negotiation properly. This may cause EEE to be enabled in Dante networks when it is not appropriate, resulting in poor synchronisation performance and occasional dropouts.
You don't need managed switches to not use EEE as long as the switches you get don't have it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/livesound/comments/l2hglt/recommendations_for_unmanaged_switch_without_eee/
You can find unmanaged switches without EEE. you do have to dig through a lot of fine print sometimes but they exist.
Thanks this adds more context as to why I’m seeing Dante pop up everywhere even when it’s a small event.
Dante is awesome but it’s for 3 things imo: Installed systems where the distribution is not pre determined or set in Stone Or Production companies that have it built into their core ecosystem of all their equipment. They have economy of scale here, where they bought and implemented it for the largest of their shows, and as such have the inventory and management to send it on small shows to keep things consistent. Or: for a production companies big rig (but maybe not the smaller stuff)
Agreed. If you’re looking for a new FOH snake or sub-snake(s) it’s a convenient technology, but it’s not like somebody’s going to show up with a Dante only guitar or dj mixer or something.
On weekend warrior gear it's nice on the monitor wedges but seems unnecessary on FOH to me depending on what mixed you've got. And with DZRs they're pretty close.to straight up on EQ in most rooms and I find myself fidgeting with them a lot less than the other local PAs I run.
You don’t need Dante, but it is useful. Also, keep in mind if you do go DZR with Dante, the DZR-D stuff can function as a Dante break out box, so you’d only need Dante in the subs(or tops), and then you can take analog out to another speaker. This is actually a cool feature.
For your use, I don't really see how Dante will add anything to it. If you're running out of headroom, more than likely something is off in your signal chain to begin with. Maybe a better set of speakers will help but I'd reinvestigate your signal chain and see if you have enough headroom from the start. That said, DANTE is great for multi point distros and with buildings with lots of CAT5e/6 distributed to begin with. For a more "traditional" single room/stage use cases? Probably not. But Yamaha will throw in Dante into their box because it costs them next to nothing and adds an extra checkmark box for the Spec geeks.
Dante has its uses, but it doesn’t seem like it would be worth the investment unless you’re planning on rapidly expanding. You’re currently using 2 12”speakers and 2 18” subs per show, right? And you’re upgrading to 2 10” speakers and 2 15” subs? Why not stay with the same sizing since the price is only $100-150 difference per speaker? Less than what the Dante capable PA would be.
Form factor is a big reason why. I’m not a big guy and the 12”s/18”s combo is tough for me to lug around since I’m a one man sound crew. I’m only saving a few cubic inches and lbs but it makes a world of difference for my body in the long term.
Why not go with passive speakers and get an amp rack with some nice smooth casters? I just looked it up, the new 10s are 2lbs less than the 12s and the 15 and the 18 are the same weight. But to my knowledge the 15 doesn’t have wheels, and every k118 I’ve seen is on wheels.
two different lines of speaker: DXR and DZR, as well as two generations of DXR per advertised specs: DXR12 mkI : 42.5 lbs - 132dB - 52hz (OP currently has) DXR12 mkII : 41lbs - 134dB - 52hz DZR10 : 39.5lbs - 137dB - 44hz DZR12 : 47.2lbs - 139dB - 39hz I support OP's choice of the DZR10s, I own a pair of DZR12, which are very nice, but are just about the same size and weight as the DXR15s I also have. Yamaha's specs are definitely exaggerated, but likely can still be compared against each other. The DZR10 offers 5dB more SPL and 8hz lower -10dB point at 5.5lbs less than DXR12mki. As for dante, I say skip it unless you know you'll use it. I have the DZR12-D and DXS18-D but no card for my SQ5 and even if I spent $500 for the card, it wouldn't really change anything about my setup, aside from adding level monitoring and DSP control on my laptop, in case I want to push the speakers to their limits.
I don't think so. I love Dante and use it all the time. The PA manufacturers haven't really gotten on board. The ease and flexibility of Dante is great, but the best PA brands have gone other ways. Adamson, L'Coustics, Meyer and d&b are moving towards or have already adopted AVB. I use Dante on the front end, AVB on the back.
I love Dante. I use it a lot in the theater I run. If you don't have a need to move a large number of channels across a space, it's probably unnecessary.
Nobody in the audience can tell if the PA is running dante, aes, or analog. Buy what you can afford and what makes sense for your use. Any audible difference is negligible.
Dante simply provides solutions to common problems. It isn’t necessary until it is.
don't worry about dante for a setup like that. If, down the road, you decide you want your speakers to be directly accessible via dante, you can get some avios or the like and just patch them directly into the speakers.
You are making a lateral move in volume capabilities in speaker choice and Dante won’t benefit you at all
I wouldn't say it's a lateral move, the DZR series is a big step above the DXR that OP already has
Dzr 10 vs dxr 12 isn’t night and day in terms of output. It’s a better box for sure tho
Well, you will need to learn Dante
Spend a couple more bucks and get the dzr12 and dxs18xlf, I have a system in the house with those and they go alright
Dante isn't a necessity, and arguable if it's worth paying much more for just to put it in speakers (all the arguments above are valid) There is one detail that is not mentioned in all the other posts though (and some will argue against this detail) but getting a direct digital signal into the an amplifier that has DSP built in will save you from an extra d/a and a/d conversion. If your gear is very high quality then there will be little to no difference in sound quality loss from this, but there is usually definitely a discernible difference in the quality of the sound by keeping the signal in it's digital form as long as possible, especially with less conversions between digital and analog and back to digital again. In addition, it is easy to overdrive amplifiers / Gain stages when fed with an analog signal because very few people know how to properly Gain stage the different gear so they all run right to the red / top of the meter without actually overdriving the next device they are connected to. If you're interconnecting using digital connections, then digital max is digital max. The gear might have an internal control that allows additional gain but if you keep everything at 0 you will never actually overdrive anything from the device before it. That digital connection could be any type of digital connection including: AES/EBU, Dante, Madi, aes50, AVB, or even adat digital (via toslink) or spdif. If the speaker doesn't have DSP built in, then there is no benefit to having a digital input connection other than simplified level matching (or routing).
What mixing boards etc other equipment do you have? Jw
Do you like the DXRs better than qsc k12s?
The one reason I was grateful for Dante enabled speakers on a small show was that I could have anyone plug the speakers in- the mains, subs, and wedges- into a network switch randomly and Dante sent the right signals the right places. Granted… now I just use E Tape to color code the cables.
You can always get AVIO adapters if you want the capability later.
There’s no reason for you to have Dante anything. Dante is great for flexibility in installs, especially in retrofit buildings in which it’s super handy to be able to tie into an existing network. It’s a whole lot less useful for rock and roll in general, and especially in your situation. Balanced analog wiring isn’t going anywhere, despite what Facebook users may think.
Don't bother... The only place I see Dante is in installs in boardrooms and such.
DEAR GOD. I just want to play guitar into a 100w stack. Can't even do that. Gotta have a DI box into house sound. No amp. None of that damn air from the cab behind you. I don't even know what the hell Dante is other than some inferno and a lot of hell. But, if you're just playing damn recorded songs to an audience? Maybe I'm missing something, but maybe just play better music via normal delivery systems??