Behringer X32 + SD16, no connection over 150’ cable?

[GaryH]

@Dan Mortensen Last little bit on this subject-I promise . This was the most clearly explained info I've seen on insertion loss. Ran across it by chance:

https://www.flukenetworks.com/knowledge ... esting-dtx

Going back to that chart and using this info, it seems then to be true that if 62 feet (at 100mhz) gives around a 5db loss (looks to be very close to 5 but could be 4 or less) then multiples of that distance would be ok to over 250 feet. 4x=208 feet with insertion loss of 20db (good). if 5x=310 feet with 25db loss (not good). 250 feet should still fall under the less than 24db figure Midas proclaims to be the max limit-at close to 22db loss (still good) That also would ring true (pretty much equal) to the info we know to be true with Cat5e-limits to around 300 feet length. 240 feet max per MT now supported.

The bottom line of all that (to me) is Cat7/8 insertion loss figures are minimally as good as Cat5E and quite possibly better. 5db loss was an estimate but it could be less. This also aligns with my real world tests where 300 feet of Cat8 passed all aes50 signals ok including POE...tho as you noted 300 feet would perhaps be teetering on disaster-or maybe not

Given all else as being imo BETTER, much greater ESD/RFI/EMI protection, stronger and more supple outer covering, better flexibility AND with insertion loss figures being minimally equal to the beloved Cat5E-I officially proclaim Cat7 and 8 perfectly acceptable for AES50 use. (What else would I say)

[pmaillot]

Don't get me wrong. My intent was not to stop the discussion.

[Dan Mortensen]

Wow, @GaryH that is an awesome article on Insertion Loss!!! It really answers questions about what, how, and why, and even where (one pair sometimes worse than others) and things to look for.

Like I've said, I was able to borrow a DTX1800 for a couple months before the Ethernet cable Workshop, and had a blast testing all kinds of cables and conditions, including an average CAT5e unshielded wrapped about 40 times around a chunk of steel pipe to simulate an inductor (cable still Passed in that condition, so I've not worried about cables running too close to a stage leg or whatever).

I had to give it back, and despite two people who worked at Fluke scouring the periodic employee warehouse sales, never got a DTX of any sort. I don't use it enough to justify a US$20k expenditure. Or even $10k or $5k.

Good information, thanks!

@pmaillot Sorry for misinterpreting your comment. Some people don't dig getting really into the weeds with this IT stuff, others go way beyond what I can comprehend. Funny how that works.

My life is going to be kind of confusing (in a good way) for the next month or so, and will either get more or less confusing after that, so I won't be checking in here this often. Keep up the good work @GaryH and everyone else!

[KMaxwell]

My life is going to be kind of confusing (in a good way) for the next month or so, and will either get more or less confusing after that, so I won't be checking in here this often. Keep up the good work @GaryH and everyone else!

Are you going to just leave us hanging? That reminds me of an old joke - Do you know how to keep an idiot in suspense? I will tell you tomorrow.

[GaryH]

@KMaxwell Thats a good one, I’ll be using that, oh and please do tell me tomorrow because I know a few idiots I want to try it out on

[pvannatto]

Just to add to the discussion, Dave Rat just posted a video of him testing cat5e and cat6 cables for AES50 applications using the Fluke DSX5000 tester.
Here is the link

[GaryH]

@pvannatto @Dan Mortensen Thanks Paul, this was very interesting to me, especially the Fluke test stuff. Except for max length tests it pretty much aligns with my real world results with Cat7/Cat8. As I recall from my own tests, I saw failure somewhere between 320 and 350 feet BUT I had no 1 section longer than 100 feet and used Neutrik connectors between them all. Interconnects are frowned upon in general so maybe my results would have increased by a few feet or not, who knows. I just wish he had tried Cat7/8 with the Fluke for my own personal interests . I want to see mostly if my construction techniques are up to par and where my cat7/8 sit insertion loss wise. I found a spot to rent a fluke but have yet to contact them. I am not all that excited on spending a lot to find out though. I am 100% confident that 80M or less is perfectly ok. I like a LOT that he pretty much dispelled the Cat5e ONLY argument-I will putting a link to that video in a nice safe place for the next FB battle with the expert/textperts that haunt those user forums. Dave Rat is highly respected by most. I suspect since he is promoting and partnering with the Cat6a cable maker he tested (I believe he sells that cable) he did not want to somehow prove there was an even better option . Perhaps there were other reasons he left those types out of the conversation. I would send him some Cat8 to test gladly. Glad that video exists, very glad!

[MJKlein]

@pvannatto for easy reference, at 2:56, Dave drops the Cat5e Only bombshell. Now you're loaded for FB War.

[Dan Mortensen]

My life is going to be kind of confusing (in a good way) for the next month or so, and will either get more or less confusing after that, so I won't be checking in here this often. Keep up the good work @GaryH and everyone else!

Are you going to just leave us hanging? That reminds me of an old joke - Do you know how to keep an idiot in suspense? I will tell you tomorrow.

@KMaxwell Sorry about leaving you hanging, I didn't realize you really cared.

What happened was I got a wild hair that I should make an effort to get on the ballot for Audio Engineering Society President, as I realized that I had enough of the right experience to make me a plausible candidate, and that I was at a point in my life where it would make sense to do so, and that it might not make sense to try for that at a later point in my life. So I decided to go for it.

The problem is that the slate of candidates for the next election, which starts later this month (May), was announced on March 29, and stated that it was still possible to get on the ballot but you'd have to submit 100 nominations from the right sort of AES members, who are Full Members (capital M) who can vote in elections. Associate and Student didn't count, but there is a way to upgrade from Associate to Full, and I realized that making that known to Associates would both increase the pool of Members and give them a reason to nominate me. There was also a hard deadline, last Friday, April 26, when all the nominating and upgrading needed to be done, and all 100 nominations needed to be received by HQ.

So after posting for the last time here, I jumped into trying to figure out how to reach potential voters and how to tell them why they should nominate me.

Without going into even more detail, the first week was spent crafting a document showing the why and how and what I would advocate for if you did.

The next three weeks were spent flogging votes, and at the end of the deadline day, I was 93% successful, meaning 93 people had gone out of their way to nominate me. Since 93 does not equal 100 in any math I could find, the effort was a failure, but a lot of people went out of their way to say nice things about me and, among many other things, I learned how to turn a Google Doc into something that could be linked to with a URL. Or any document, I guess.

Then I come here on Monday and find that great video by Dave Rat posted ITT.

FWIW I posted a lengthy comment to his video where I lamented, maybe, that he was just a few points short of that being the definitive video on the subject. I reposted that video on the Live Audio Board in the most recent thread that was rehashing this same topic, that had the usual arguments.


FYI, the things he was missing: how many couplers are acceptable in a digital cable series, a misleading comment about variable twist rates in cables, and incomplete info about Ethercon shells and their necessity at every point in the signal chain.

He wrote back that he will test those things.

[pvannatto]

the effort was a failure

Sorry to hear Dan. You'd make a great president.

He wrote back that he will test those things.

Thanks for doing all that in order to round out a "definitive answer" to a highly debatable topic. Looking forward to Dave's next video on the subject.