DANTE Please

  • I really would like to see Kemper embrace a dedicated Dante output on the amp.

    Dante on the Kemper would integrate into a Dante studio so well and the latency with Dante is so incredibly low.

    Not to mention the routing capabilities, the clean clear possibilities.

    Another very cool feature is you could have your 412 cab in the cellar sound proofed to the max with mic's in place and control room 3 stories above with excellent results.


    Wishful thinking and probably been asked and debated ad nauseam here but just my 2 cents.


    Only had my Kemper for a few weeks now but GAWD I love it! Cudos to Michael Britt for the outstanding work on profiling amps. I bought everything he had. 8)

    "Give a kid a guitar. You won't believe how rewarding it is to them and for you! Knowing that they will never forget that kindness and someday they will pass it on to another generation. So far I have given away more that a dozen."

    Arlo West

  • ... and then the other half of the "pro studio" world asks for MADI, AVB and Ravenna. :)

    Let's keep it real, Kemper won't be able to provide all incarnations of digital interfaces. And if they did, it would be a pretty costly thing.

    You wouldn't save a penny compared to the investment in e.g. a Dante stagebox. :)

  • Excellent video and great explanation of AVB. Thanks for sharing.

    "Give a kid a guitar. You won't believe how rewarding it is to them and for you! Knowing that they will never forget that kindness and someday they will pass it on to another generation. So far I have given away more that a dozen."

    Arlo West

  • Excellent video and great explanation of AVB. Thanks for sharing.

    ... although I'm not sure his Dante vs. AVB arguments make much sense... "Dante does have some serious networking problems which are being solved in AVB"? Dante uses DSCP to give audio higher priority - something supported by any decent switch, without need for a more expensive AVB capable switch.


    But when you say "DANTE please", why not ask for the most obvious (which I believe would be yet another step ahead of the competition for Kemper): plug your guitar into the Remote, and have the signal streamed through Dante over the network cable to the Profiler, along with the Remote commands. Perfectly feasible - no latency - no risk for network priority issues - one single cable to the rack...

  • Dante uses DSCP to give audio higher priority - something supported by any decent switch, without need for a more expensive AVB capable switch.

    Yes, but the point is that, in MOTU's case for instance, its AVB latency figure is a ridiculous 0.6ms over six network hops up to a distance of, IIRC, 1km.


    The "extra" discrimination / processing described in the video that's required in a Dante network must surely detrimentally affect latency. Try shunting 1000 channels at 192kHz through 6 network boxes and 1km distance.

  • The "extra" discrimination / processing described in the video that's required in a Dante network must surely detrimentally affect latency.

    Audinate publishes following Dante specs :

    1 switch hop: 0.15ms, 3 switch hops: 0.25ms, 5 switch hops: 0.5ms, 10 switch hops: 1ms, +10 switch hops: 5ms

    These values are not affected by the number of devices or the number of channels used.

    Anyway - I'm not at all an expert in this matter, I have no experience with AVB, and therefore I have no preference whatsoever for one or the other technology. I'm confident that Kemper will pick the right one for their Profiler2+Remote2 8)

  • Sounds impressive too!


    Yeah, I plead ignorance as well, mate. My eyes glaze over very-quickly the second networks are discussed. It's probably my "weakest area" general-knowledge-wise. I'm literally a network luddite. :D


    I do think the Remote will require at least one hardware tweak in addition to the obvious software ones for this to work 'though, and that would be either the addition of a Hi-Z guitar input or the conversion of a 1/4" pedal input to guitar spec's.

  • Audinate publishes following Dante specs :

    1 switch hop: 0.15ms, 3 switch hops: 0.25ms, 5 switch hops: 0.5ms, 10 switch hops: 1ms, +10 switch hops: 5ms

    These values are not affected by the number of devices or the number of channels used.

    Anyway - I'm not at all an expert in this matter, I have no experience with AVB, and therefore I have no preference whatsoever for one or the other technology. I'm confident that Kemper will pick the right one for their Profiler2+Remote2 8)

    These values were quoted in Dante Controller Latency settings, and were conservative - they are no longer stated as such. Realworld performance was/is considerably better in most cases, and most large broadcast Dante networks I commission are set to 0.5ms network latency with more than 5 switch hops. This is the max latency threshold you're setting before a network packet is considered late, and dropped. When you set 0.5ms latency, most of the time you are getting better performance than that e.g. 0.3ms.

    I support Dante all the way, and so do the vast majority of manufacturers in audio over IP. The reason is that it is a complete technology, that uses the AES67 transport stream (as do the other protocols including AVB), but also has accompanying software, control, routing, device discovery and device announcement capabilities. No-one else has an offering that is as complete, and out of all of the AoIP protocols (because there is no complete standard yet), Dante is the leading horse in the Broadcast and Live touring sectors.

  • ... although I'm not sure his Dante vs. AVB arguments make much sense... "Dante does have some serious networking problems which are being solved in AVB"? Dante uses DSCP to give audio higher priority - something supported by any decent switch, without need for a more expensive AVB capable switch.


    But when you say "DANTE please", why not ask for the most obvious (which I believe would be yet another step ahead of the competition for Kemper): plug your guitar into the Remote, and have the signal streamed through Dante over the network cable to the Profiler, along with the Remote commands. Perfectly feasible - no latency - no risk for network priority issues - one single cable to the rack...

    Yeah, I disagree with much of what this chap is saying too. Dante has no serious networking problems, otherwise most of the national broadcasters I work with around the world would be in trouble. DSCP queuing is indeed supported by off-the-shelf switches. Prioritising e.g. clock multicast data is only relevant when the network bandwidth is limited, and it's easy to provide sufficient bandwidth across even very large networks to avoid this, but when required, it's there. All professional Dante networks I encounter are physically separate, or separated by switch VLANs, but QoS and DSCP is utilised on occasions where network traffic is mixed (I see this more in music studio networks with lower channel counts).

  • Something like the SF-DN4 SPDIF->Dante converter will get you there if you really want to keep things in the digital domain and put your audio onto a Dante network. Cheap it isn't... but then it's not going to be when there's Audinate hardware costs involved.


    I don't think the take up of a Dante expansion card etc would be significant enough to make it economy worthwhile... especially when, in the grand scheme of things, for Kemper users, it would mostly fall by the wayside.