Design Article
Comment
Voegelchen
Keep in mind, that 1394 has one simple benefit not mentioned here: There are no ...
kdboyce
As an interesting side note to this article, the entire music score and music ...
Digital audio relies on the features and benefits of IEEE 1394
Morten Lave, CEO of TC Applied Technologies
5/25/2011 9:58 AM EDT
Like most everything else, professional audio production happens almost entirely in the digital domain these days. The digital transition has enabled amazing production capabilities on PCs using digital audio workstation (DAW) software. But with the digital transition came the need for a digital interconnect that had the bandwidth needed to move audio streams in real time along with the need for timing and synchronization capabilities that allow mixing of multiple audio channels. The 1394 or FireWire interconnect has proven to be the only interconnect that can support pro audio applications.
The range of professional audio applications spans live performances to the studio. Only a few years ago, the production task was limited to studios with the huge budgets needed to buy racks of tape decks and the special analog mixing equipment. The digital transition allows professional quality on much lower budgets and indeed musicians and bands can now buy their own equipment and produce material for CDs and Internet distribution.
Let's examine the type of products and the topology of a system used in professional audio. And first we should differentiate the professional space from the consumer or prosumer market.
Any desktop or notebook PC today comes equipped with baseline audio capabilities and there is low-cost DAW software on the market. But the baseline capability usually means a single stereo channel in and out. In desktop PCs, soundcards may add support for a few additional channels. Moreover there are external audio I/O interfaces with configurations such as 2 input and two output channels.
The professional market starts in the 8-channel input and output range. Even an individual musician needs such capability, as many non-professionals are now discovering. A larger band might need 16, 32 or even more input and output channels. The professional market is built around three basic components - the PC, I/O boxes or interfaces, and a mixer. Some manufacturers integrate both I/O and mixing in a single product.
The I/O box typically includes a microphone preamp for each input channel. The devices also include A/D converters to digitize the input, D/A converters to output analog channels, and sometimes DSPs to perform other audio processing. The I/O box links with a PC via 1394. The analog outputs from an I/O box might connect to a mixer or potentially to speakers. And the mixer would generally connect to the 1394 bus also, to receive the digitized audio channels.
Live session and post production
A typical usage scenario illustrates the channel demand and how the 1394 interconnect is utilized. Here it is:
A band might choose to record a live performance for subsequent distribution via CD or the Internet. Independent of the microphones used by the performers, the recording requires a number of dedicated microphones. You would typically use at least four or more microphones for the drum kit.
You need a microphone for the amplifier/speaker used for each guitarist. In some cases -- such as with an electric guitar - you can use a direct connection between the guitar and I/O box. But the robust sound produced by a guitarist is a compilation of the sounds made by the guitar, the effects added via the amplifier or a dedicated device such as a reverb or delay box, and the audio qualities of the amplifier and speaker.
You also need microphones for any other amplified instruments. And you need inputs for the singers. Even a small band can require 15 or more channels.
During the live performance, the production equipment must support both the concert and the recording that will be put through a separate production process later. During the concert, the I/O box would stream the channels over 1394 to a mixer used by a band member or support personnel to optimize the concert sound. The same stream would also go to a notebook PC for recording. Typically the band would want to record the raw audio as opposed to the output of the mixer used at the concert. That affords the musicians freedom to optimize the mixing process once back in a studio.
|
|
|
|
|
frenet
5/25/2011 1:19 PM EDT
IEEE 1394 is being removed from its last nich market, professional audio. I can understand the problem of Mr Lave and his desire to see IEEE1394 being the super champion of professional audio and have TCTechnologies which bet everything on IEEE1394 succeed. But if there is no doubt IEEE1394 is a better technology than USB from a latency point of view and from P2P transfer it's a doomed technology which will not live the next 5 years.
USB3 is there with all its default but it will conquer the professional audio by its ubiquity and cheapness. Present in all new motherboards and chipset it's free for the consumer and the raw transfer speed will compensate for lack of P2P transfer. CPU+GPU processing power is cheap (AMD Fusion processor for example), the fact handset manufacturer will not deploy usb3.0 does not seem an heavyweight argument.
And even ethernet with realtime capacity and AVB should unify on stage all the different bus used (midi/DMX/analog transport).
IEEE1394 is a superior technology as was token ring, it wont prevent it to disappear soon. I hope TCTechnologies is going to do USB and Ethernet products soon.
Sign in to Reply
Charles Hansen
5/26/2011 5:47 PM EDT
Frenet's comment is on the mark.
The "article" was written by the CEO of a company whose revenue depends heavily on FireWire audio. More of an "advertorial", really...
Sign in to Reply
kinnar
5/29/2011 2:15 PM EDT
Technically IEEE1394 has got more benefit compared to USB if you compare architecture of both. So even though USB 3.0 is getting standardized still the audio equipment designer are using IEEE1394.
Sign in to Reply
Bert22306
5/29/2011 5:10 PM EDT
Having lived through the various Ethernet/token ring/100VG LAN wars, not to mention Internet Protocol vs IPX vs ISO, and other contenders like DECnet and SNA, let me say I am skeptical about how IEEE 1394's specific attributes will ensure its longevity. Every scheme has its strong suits, but what history shows time and again is that the winner almost always find a way around its weaknesses. The winner is usually the simplest and cheapest solution, which overpowers the competition by "throwing bandwidth" at the problem. Which it can afford to do thanks to its lower cost. And beyond that, the winner usually finds a way, in its upgrade cycle, to introduce features that were once the sole province of the fancier schemes.
The first two versions of USB might have required the PC bus master to poll any connected device, but USB 3.0 is supposed to permit any connected device to initiate transfers. So the advantage of 1394 peer to peer communications becomes not so unique after all. The original USB might have been restricted to mouse and keyboard connections, but USB 2.0 can reach 480 Mb/s, and 3.0 has a path to at least 5 Gb/s. So honestly, how difficult can it be to establish multiple audio patyhs over such an interconnect?
The initially more "elegant" solutions are certainly not the ones that prove to be the ultimate winners.
Sign in to Reply
Frank Eory
5/29/2011 7:08 PM EDT
Although the author's company has a financial interest in 1394's continued use in pro audio, his points are still valid. 1394's isochronous capability, peer-to-peer capability, and carrying timing information with the data are huge benefits in a recording studio or in a live sound production environment. USB and Ethernet were historically inadequate to meet the demands of multi-channel pro audio production. That could be overcome with the sheer power of huge bandwidth, but it's difficult to imagine audio engineers abandoning a solution that already works, on the promise that something newer and cheaper has more bandwidth, so don't worry about the protocol limitations.
Sign in to Reply
Bellhop
6/3/2011 3:29 PM EDT
Betamax was technically superior to VHS. The rest is history.
Sign in to Reply
kdboyce
6/30/2011 2:40 AM EDT
As an interesting side note to this article, the entire music score and music production for the movie "Avatar" was done on 6 Pro Tools HD hardware and software systems and some Mac computers. The HD interface was PCI Express. Earlier, non "HD" products used Firewire and USB2.0.
Sign in to Reply
Voegelchen
4/26/2013 4:47 AM EDT
Keep in mind, that 1394 has one simple benefit not mentioned here: There are no switches necessary and you can use it as a bus if you have many devices, like in a studio (mixer, mics, effects,...). USB has the disadvantage only to be a point 2 point connection, ethernet needs switches and switches cost time, see AVB and limited number of 7 hops (endpoints & switches)... also regenerating clock from USB devices isn't that easy if not impossible to reach firewire quality in this point. In the technical point of view, firewire is a better solution than ethernet or USB.
Sign in to Reply