@Krabbe Paul or Robert will know for sure but the units use aes50 and not an ultranet port, they have an in and a thru aes50 port and power is supplied using POE so I'm sure you can link "many". The ultranet port of the p16 with p16D's added could support I believe up to 64 p16M's? Anyway I'm sure at LEAST 4 could be linked, with each supporting 2 mixes-that would give 8 people mixes of their own. My guess is it would support many more, but I'm a guesser!

https://www.midasconsoles.com/Categories/Midas/Signal-Processors/In-Ear-Monitoring/DP48/p/P0BMX#googtrans(en|en)

I think it might also depend on what the functionality of the "yet-to-be-released" HUB4 is when it comes to the remote configuration and also the back-channeling of the mixes.  That could limit the number of DP48s in a chain. 

@KenMitchell The Hub4 kind of sounds like the dp48 equivalent of the P16D, I'm guessing (I do a lot of that) it takes an aes50 line, adds the POE component and supplies 4 dp48's which can each then pass on 1 via aes50 thru (they each have a thru)? As you said that bidirectional aes50 48 ch count makes things a bit sticky. Can't wait to find out! I'll get 10 or so to go with my new WING

Hi @Krabbe,

I can provide some insight regarding this new personal mixer. Daisy chaining of the DP48 is done in a similar manner to the P16's in that each DP48 has input and thru AES50 ports and would require the included power adapter. The Hub4 provides POE on the AES50 to eliminate the need for the power adapter if the DP48 is connected directly to it (similar to the P16-D). 

The Hub4 is a 1U form factor that provides for up to 4 DP48 as well as input and thru AES50 ports. But it also has a lot of routing flexibility in it. One of the features is that you can connect up to 8 stereo IEMs to the back of it, that are mixed from the connected DP48. Each DP48 can accommodate 1 or 2 musicians. 

I've been beta testing these since the beginning of July with 9 tribute bands (from all over Ontario, Canada) and 9 local bands - and everyone loved them. One of the events was a Woodstock 50th Anniversary (Aug 16) that had 1 local band and 5 tribute bands in 9 hours. That allowed approximately 30 minutes between bands. As part of the transition, I had to set gains (only one band showed up for soundcheck), show everyone how to use their DP48's, change mic placement, etc. At the end of each set, I got rave reviews from each of the bands. That shows how user-friendly the DP48 can be - if the sound engineer is prepared to spend some time ahead of the event setting it all up (and the riders from the bands are up to date and accurate).

Hey Paul @Paul_Vannatto , so what is the real world limit to the number of DP48 units on a single mixer? Have they said? Can a stagebox be cascaded off (and back thru) a DP48 or Hub4? In other words if you use the DP48 on a port A or B of a mixer, is that port more or less used up or can other things still be connected? Also the aes50 assignments, are you "stuck" with the ch assignments used on a port (A or B) elsewhere for the available DP48 ch's? For instance say I use out 1-8, out 9-16 for mixbuses and foh and have 17-24 set for say aux1-6/M and then say card 1-8 for 25-32 and p16 for the rest. Are these then then also aes50 ch choices for the DP48? If so it would seem then that one might be better off keeping one port exclusively for the DP48's and use the other port for other mixers and stageboxes?

Hi @DavidC3Av 

No. Ultranet is neither AES50 or Ethernet. The DL153 doesn't have ultranet capability. The Midas DL 32 & 16 and Behringer S32, S16, SD16, SD8 all can do ultranet because they have the proper chipsets. Channels 33-48 on the AES50 bus are then routed by the stageboxes to the ultranet ports. Theoretically it might be possible to send signal to a SD8 and then daisy-chain to the DL153. Maybe someone on the forum has done it.

Thank you Dave, much appreciated. Looks like an elegant solution, and low enough cost to order and give it a shot next Sunday. Do you think it might be possible to daisy chain the SD8 after the DL153? Ie. even though DL153 doesn’t have Ultranet chipset that it is likely to faithfully pass on whatever protocol is happening on the AES50 for the SD8 to put out the Ultranet? Thanks again.

@DavidC3Av AFAIK you can't daisy chain any of the midas "blue" series stageboxes. The second aes50 port on those is redundant meaning if one fails the other will keep working when connected to a Midas Pro series mixer. It's not an in/thru type line. When using with the X32/M32 series mixers, it can be used on one aes50 port and nothing can be daisy chained beyond it on that line, In that regard they become somewhat limited. However your SD8/16/32's can be used on the other remaining X32 aes50  port and daisy chained normally up to the 48 ch limit.

It may, I am not sure, I would wonder how/if the S/SD boxes can pass forward the ch's of the DL153 box properly to the mixer due to the ch shift they normally impose and implement with regard to each other. You might not achieve proper sync. I might guess no but it's just a guess. @ChaseMcKnight would be the guy here who would know for sure.

@RexBeckettsorry did not see your post before writting my response...

Link to pics of my routing pages

---

@staceyhainey wrote:

Just a general question,,,,

My band just purchased an M32C with the DL32, and PM16’s for monitoring 

i split the vocal, and instruments into mix busses, and sent the busses to ultra net, but it seems like we aren’t getting the full signal (some busses seem absent on the pm16)   We do have something that kind of works, but there’s gotta be a better way  

will post a screen shot of the routing pages

---

@staceyhainey 

Where are you connecting the P16Ms - to the M32C or the DL32? If the DL32, you need to open Routing -> AES50 A/B and select AES50-A 33-40 = Ultranet 1-8 and  AES50-A 41-48 = Ultranet 9-16. This will send the 16 Ultranet outputs to the DL32 on AES50-A 33-48 which are routed to the P16 socket.  

@RalphHopstaken 

Hello, I can't answer your question but was curious as to which injector you used for p16? I had toyed with this idea but never tried any.

@RalphHopstaken 

According to the specifications, the DP48 PoE conforms to IEEE802.3af so it should run from an injector that meets the same standard.

@GaryHiggins  you can use every power injector as long it has the same power input connector live the original power supply from the p16. I use something like on the picture below

@RalphHopstaken I would not recommend using a POE injector as shown for the DP48, since it would require the removal of the ethercon shells from the ends of the AES50 cables. 

@Paul_Vannatto you can't use that power injector for the PD48 because those are only 100mbit/sec but for the P16 they work great. for what you sy about the shield insite the m32 or DP48 the schield ends on the shassis so after that there is no connectionif you use cat 6 there is enough shielding and i use only max 10 meter of cable and only to one DP48

---

@colino_ltapl wrote:

Recently i have updated the firmware of the DP48 to 1.2, after which i am not able to remote control the other units via the 1st unit. 

---

Are you trying to change the group names and assignments from the first DP48 or from the M32? If it is from the first DP48 (in the chain), do you have it set  with the remote on (its device ID should say MSTR) and the rest should have remote on and should have unique device ID. Once that is setup, on the master (first) DP48, goto the Broadcast line and press the encoder. 

If you are trying to send from the M32 Library, AES50 screen, we found a bug which the fix will be part of the next release.

Hi Paul,

Appreciate your replies. 

just to recap, the first DP48 on master and the rest are on their on IDs, after which punch in the broadcast on the first unit and select the other unit ID to control them correct? 

Unfortunately it doesn't seems to be working. Did i miss out any step?

---

@colino_ltapl wrote:

Unfortunately it doesn't seems to be working. Did i miss out any step?

---

Did you turn on Remote on all the DP48's before pushing the Broadcast?

The missing information is that there will be a bridge between the pro-series and dp48. This piece of hardware is yet to be released.

Hi MN,

This is a good question and i was exploring this option too. What i could think of was using the KT9650 with AES50 card running on 48kHz, goes back down into the Midas HUB4 which you can distribute them into the DP48. 

The another thought i had was if we are going to sell DP48 to other console platforms where if they are running DANTE/MADI consoles, what is the in between. I could think of the KT9652, with AES50 card and DANTE or MADI card, which other console can send in the direct outs. 

BUT also, if we are going to do that. how is DP48 going to get the Channel labels as only M32 can broadcast the console labeling and get it label on the DP48 when you are doing your adjustment or assignments. Or maybe if there is an Excel sheet that we can follow, transfer it to the SD card and get all channels to be labelled. 

Currently i am waiting for my AES50 cards to arrive so i can test it out on the 9650 and 9652 which i have them too. 

I hope to share more with you guys upcoming and learn more together too. 

Wishing you all staying safe and take care too. 

Hi Peter @pdenenberg 

The developers are aware of this. No ETA yet.

Hi Paul-

I see new firmware today but no solo-mode updates. Any news on a timeline for that please?

Thx

Hi @daniciuc 

I think you will need two Wings to mix a full 48/96 ch's at both places at once. Except maybe FOH doesn't need to mix all sources for the show, in which case maybe the Wing in monitor world M32 FOH might do it....but what the hell, buy 2!!

Hi Emanuel @daniciuc 

Welcome to the forum. As Gary @GaryHiggins mentioned, if the budget allows getting 2 Wings would definitely be the best solution. But if the budget is tight and since you already have an M32, the Wing and M32 can function together. If all of your inputs are mono in nature, all you are gaining (input-wise) are 10 additional channel strips (48 instead of 38). But if some of the inputs are stereo, the difference in inputs increase significantly. 

Gary did bring up an important point with regards to input requirements that differ between FOH and monitor worlds. I find that FOH tend to require more inputs than monitors. Most musicians want specific channels, not the "whole enchiladas". But that may generate complex (creative) routing in order to accomplish this, particularly with the bank of 8 limitations. With the 2 Wing system, that routing complexity disappears (since the bank of 8 limitation is non-existent). 

Yes!

Really hope there can be a way to switch off the solo function !