Recommended practice in a home with more than 16 (or 24) zones?

[Hal-Dill]

At my company we end up with a lot of projects in large new-construction homes with more zones than a single matrix can handle.

We used to use the Triad 24x24, but it's been discontinued (why??) and now we use the AV Pro Edge 24x24 - but we still sometimes encounter homes where we need more zones. I come from live audio, where something like Dante could be used to chain matrices together - but I don't think something like that exists for residential, unless I am wrong. (I'd love to be wrong!!)

Our standard practice in such a case is to split everything going to an input to two matrices - but that's messy and convoluted. A field technician asked me today why we don't backfeed one matrix out into a Core5 input, and then use a separate Core5 output for the other matrix. That, to me, seemed like it would not work - but I wasn't really able to articulate why in a way that they understood so I'm open to being fully incorrect on this.

What is the recommended practice in the case of multiple matrices? Does anyone here have a 24 zone (or larger!!) matrix that they recommend? The AV Pro Edge 24x24 is limited in some ways.

[C4loso]

https://www.pulse-eight.com/c/74

Check out pulse eight


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lippavisual]

There is the Pulse Eight 16x32 and 32x32 Audio switches available on the dealer portal now.

You can't use controllers to pass matrix audio unless you want delay (from being digitized) going to the other matrix.  Frankly, that just wouldn't be a good outcome either.

How many inputs are you talking about?  The above switches should cover all, if not most, jobs.

Dante can be used, albeit from other manufacturers, but that would all depend on the design.  I come from the commercial AV world and I've been asking for Dante enabled products since its inception.

[Control4Savant]

32 minutes ago, Hal-Dill said:

At my company we end up with a lot of projects in large new-construction homes with more zones than a single matrix can handle.

We used to use the Triad 24x24, but it's been discontinued (why??) and now we use the AV Pro Edge 24x24 - but we still sometimes encounter homes where we need more zones. I come from live audio, where something like Dante could be used to chain matrices together - but I don't think something like that exists for residential, unless I am wrong. (I'd love to be wrong!!)

Our standard practice in such a case is to split everything going to an input to two matrices - but that's messy and convoluted. A field technician asked me today why we don't backfeed one matrix out into a Core5 input, and then use a separate Core5 output for the other matrix. That, to me, seemed like it would not work - but I wasn't really able to articulate why in a way that they understood so I'm open to being fully incorrect on this.

What is the recommended practice in the case of multiple matrices? Does anyone here have a 24 zone (or larger!!) matrix that they recommend? The AV Pro Edge 24x24 is limited in some ways.

AVB is more prominent in the resi. market than Dante. Another reason I moved on from C4… 

[Hal-Dill]

4 minutes ago, lippavisual said:

There is the Pulse Eight 16x32 and 32x32 Audio switches available on the dealer portal now.

You can't use controllers to pass matrix audio unless you want delay (from being digitized) going to the other matrix.  Frankly, that just wouldn't be a good outcome either.

How many inputs are you talking about?  The above switches should cover all, if not most, jobs.

Dante can be used, albeit from other manufacturers, but that would all depend on the design.  I come from the commercial AV world and I've been asking for Dante enabled products since its inception.

Good to know about the Pulse Eight switches. I'll mention those as a possibility for future jobs.

Thank you for confirming for me that the matrix -> controller -> matrix path was a bad idea. Appreciated!

[lippavisual]

No problem.

[Cyknight]

Pulse-Eight (merged with/acquired Zektor) carries ready to go options up to 32 in (well 32 analogue in, plus 48 digital) 64 (48 analogue, 16 digital) out as well, just not via Control4 marketplace. Just FYI

[cnicholson]

I have 54 audio zones!  I recommend the PulseEight Pro32 as main matrix.  It has 32x32 analog zones AND 48 digital inputs AND 32 digital outputs.  As long a you have fewer than 32 inputs, it is easy to cascade from the core matrix to additional Matrixes--- as long as they have digital inputs.   You don't need to "burn" inputs or outputs to cascade because you use all 32 analog outputs to feed you amps and just use digital outputs to feed the other matrix.  Just make as many digital connections between them as you need independent sources on the additional matrix and you're good to go (if you want, you can use 16 digital outs to feed a 16x16 additional matrix, for example).  You'll have true any-to-any capabilities.

Eight of my zones are 300' away in a guest house connected only by IP.  There's an EA-5 there with all its outputs connected to the 8X8 matrix.  Local sources are also connected to matrix.  And I run an output from that matrix to the EA-5 audio input to give me a reverse path back to main house.  This allows me (pretty much) any-to-audio audio routing of main house zones to guest house zones and vice-versa.  Want to listen to audio from TV#3 in guest house in Bedroom #4 in main house?  No problem.

A couple of thing to pay attention to:  the PulseEight will do internal DAC but *not* ADC.  This means that analog sources CANNOT be routed to digital outputs (including those digital outputs feeding your addition Matrix).  And PulseEight driver DOES NOT KNOW THIS (it's a documented limitation).  So try to only use digital inputs.   I've added some ADCs on analog inputs to avoid unexpected behavior from this limitation.   You can also use Path Setter Driver to invalidate paths from analog sources to endpoints only reachable via digital signal path (forcing use of Core 5 digital outputs to reach those zones, for example).

 

[cnicholson]

4 hours ago, Hal-Dill said:

A field technician asked me today why we don't backfeed one matrix out into a Core5 input, and then use a separate Core5 output for the other matrix. That, to me, seemed like it would not work - but I wasn't really able to articulate why in a way that they understood so I'm open to being fully incorrect on this.

This will work, but then you can only have one source (at a time) shared between the two matrixes (apart from the sources that you Y-out to both matrixes). 

[Andrew luecke]

6 hours ago, Hal-Dill said:

At my company we end up with a lot of projects in large new-construction homes with more zones than a single matrix can handle.

We used to use the Triad 24x24, but it's been discontinued (why??) and now we use the AV Pro Edge 24x24 - but we still sometimes encounter homes where we need more zones. I come from live audio, where something like Dante could be used to chain matrices together - but I don't think something like that exists for residential, unless I am wrong. (I'd love to be wrong!!)

Our standard practice in such a case is to split everything going to an input to two matrices - but that's messy and convoluted. A field technician asked me today why we don't backfeed one matrix out into a Core5 input, and then use a separate Core5 output for the other matrix. That, to me, seemed like it would not work - but I wasn't really able to articulate why in a way that they understood so I'm open to being fully incorrect on this.

What is the recommended practice in the case of multiple matrices? Does anyone here have a 24 zone (or larger!!) matrix that they recommend? The AV Pro Edge 24x24 is limited in some ways.

You could also look at moip based one maybe like the blustream ones. They're a bit more expensive, but a lot more extendable

[lippavisual]

2 hours ago, cnicholson said:

And I run an output from that matrix to the EA-5 audio input to give me a reverse path back to main house.  This allows me (pretty much) any-to-audio audio routing of main house zones to guest house zones and vice-versa.  Want to listen to audio from TV#3 in guest house in Bedroom #4 in main house?  No problem.

I'm wondering why you'd do this?  You can't view the displays from either location, so why?

I can think of a few reasons why, as a guest, I wouldn't like knowing about this capability!

[Hal-Dill]

2 hours ago, cnicholson said:

This will work, but then you can only have one source (at a time) shared between the two matrixes (apart from the sources that you Y-out to both matrixes). 

This is what I was trying to explain. Thank you!

[cnicholson]

1 hour ago, lippavisual said:

I'm wondering why you'd do this?  You can't view the displays from either location, so why?

LOL.  Just an example.   The real world use cases would be more like having sync'd audio from a live sporting event broadcast to non video zones, property wide.  I have a separate IP video distribution solution to broadcast video to the screens.  Or to be able to have a vinyl record player playing in any zone.  Not saying strict "any-to-any" is a legitimate requirement.  Just something I wanted to see if I could implement.

[Control4Savant]

2 hours ago, Andrew luecke said:

You could also look at moip based one maybe like the blustream ones. They're a bit more expensive, but a lot more extendable

This is still not a scalable lossless low latency solution unfortunately. When you have that many zones it’s almost guaranteed to be needed. 

[Rob21]

8 hours ago, cnicholson said:

Eight of my zones are 300' away in a guest house connected only by IP.  There's an EA-5 there with all its outputs connected to the 8X8 matrix.  Local sources are also connected to matrix.  And I run an output from that matrix to the EA-5 audio input to give me a reverse path back to main house.  This allows me (pretty much) any-to-audio audio routing of main house zones to guest house zones and vice-versa.  Want to listen to audio from TV#3 in guest house in Bedroom #4 in main house?  No problem.

 

I am considering doing this, but my concern is with the possibility for delay. Do you have any delay with this setup?

[Andrew luecke]

11 hours ago, Control4Savant said:

This is still not a scalable lossless low latency solution unfortunately. When you have that many zones it’s almost guaranteed to be needed. 

That feels TOTALLY misleading..

 

"Not a Scalable"..

• Supports however many sources and targets you want.
• Uses Multicast which lets you send packets to multiple sources at once. This is managed by the switch. Even for Yamaha ProAudio using Dante, doesn't even need to be good: https://europe.yamaha.com/en/products/contents/proaudio/docs/dante_network_design_guide/101_network_switches.html . They don't need to be certified either (apparently, my friend is doing a gig tonight using Dante and TPLink)
• Unlike AVB, which requires special switches..
• It doesn't send 1 packet per IP.. It sends 1 packet, and the switch splits it. Efficient.
• Also, fibre
• Have you met our friend Dante? IP250UHD?
• DEBUNKED

"Lossless"

• IP250UHD? Those seem to accept some digital lossless Optical Input connector. Oh wait.. hmmm
• Oh.. And Dante itself is Lossless.
• Also, Dante can be routed straight to an amp.. Just like AVB... HMM
• They also make some kind of weird Digital Audio converter that works with Dante directly: https://www.blustream.co.uk/da22dig
• DEBUNKED

 

"Low latency?"

• How much ms do you think it takes before you notice lip sync issues? It's approximately 45ms apparently (16-33ms or 1 frame loss in MOIP, but in practice, that's probably between source and targets. The targets will likely all be synchronised if they're on the same switch).
• If you're using the IP250UHD, I might be wrong.. But I'd be surprised if they didn't use Dante for everything..
• https://europe.yamaha.com/en/products/contents/proaudio/docs/dante_network_design_guide/101_network_switches.html  For Dante, even high end Yamaha gear can run on fairly crappy switches well. It uses fairly common standards..
• Debunked

 

When you have that many zones it’s almost guaranteed to be needed. 

• Yeah.. You're absolutely right.
• That's why Dante is used in large studios where there are hundreds or more sources and such.
• The Dante standard is from 2006. AVB is 2011.  That's 5 extra years of experience
• It's also why I just asked to my friend who sets up all these studio's, concert halls etc. Guess what? Dante..
• If you check the use-cases, the use cases for Dante in one case talk about an event with 400,000 people in a single area. AVB, significantly less
• NOT Debunked.. But actually supports Dante slightly more. If we're making guarantees, pro equipment using Dante is the guarantee..

 

 

19 hours ago, Control4Savant said:

AVB is more prominent in the resi. market than Dante. Another reason I moved on from C4… 

• Dante website: Yamaha, Shure, Allen & Heath, Presonus, Panasonic, Behringer, AVID, etc. Who are these brands? Over 4000 products use Dante apparently..
• AVB: They list Netgear and Cisco as their members. In fact, a lot of their list aren't even proper audio companies (unless companies like Realtek plan to get into the Amplifier business)
• I agree that it would be cool if Snap had more AVB or Dante products though (that wouldn't be a bad thing imho).
• Blustream only released their Dante gear 2 years ago. If the claims you were making about Dante were as clear cut as you claim, they would have gone AVB instead (particularly because apparently AVB has no royalty fees). So as a business case, they most likely discovered the opposite..

The reality is, both are good standards, and both standards have their own benefits. Both Savant and Control4 are good platforms, and in practice for residential though, both Audio standards are somewhat equivalent (but Dante has better latency actually apparently, and doesn't require special switches).

[C4 User]

I recommend the AudioControl matrix amps. You can daisy chain as many as you want together. They have been rock solid in my house.

[Rob21]

I currently have a maxed out triad 24 x 24 matrix feeding three triad 8 zone amps. The only sources that need to be fully distributed throughout my system are the four audio outputs on my EA5. What is the best way to add zones to this without creating delay? All help/advice is appreciated. 

[Control4Savant]

7 hours ago, Andrew luecke said:

That feels TOTALLY misleading..

 

"Not a Scalable"..

• Supports however many sources and targets you want.
• Uses Multicast which lets you send packets to multiple sources at once. This is managed by the switch. Even for Yamaha ProAudio using Dante, doesn't even need to be good: https://europe.yamaha.com/en/products/contents/proaudio/docs/dante_network_design_guide/101_network_switches.html . They don't need to be certified either (apparently, my friend is doing a gig tonight using Dante and TPLink)
• Unlike AVB, which requires special switches..
• It doesn't send 1 packet per IP.. It sends 1 packet, and the switch splits it. Efficient.
• Also, fibre
• Have you met our friend Dante? IP250UHD?
• DEBUNKED

"Lossless"

• IP250UHD? Those seem to accept some digital lossless Optical Input connector. Oh wait.. hmmm
• Oh.. And Dante itself is Lossless.
• Also, Dante can be routed straight to an amp.. Just like AVB... HMM
• They also make some kind of weird Digital Audio converter that works with Dante directly: https://www.blustream.co.uk/da22dig
• DEBUNKED

 

"Low latency?"

• How much ms do you think it takes before you notice lip sync issues? It's approximately 45ms apparently (16-33ms or 1 frame loss in MOIP, but in practice, that's probably between source and targets. The targets will likely all be synchronised if they're on the same switch).
• If you're using the IP250UHD, I might be wrong.. But I'd be surprised if they didn't use Dante for everything..
• https://europe.yamaha.com/en/products/contents/proaudio/docs/dante_network_design_guide/101_network_switches.html  For Dante, even high end Yamaha gear can run on fairly crappy switches well. It uses fairly common standards..
• Debunked

 

When you have that many zones it’s almost guaranteed to be needed. 

• Yeah.. You're absolutely right.
• That's why Dante is used in large studios where there are hundreds or more sources and such.
• The Dante standard is from 2006. AVB is 2011.  That's 5 extra years of experience
• It's also why I just asked to my friend who sets up all these studio's, concert halls etc. Guess what? Dante..
• If you check the use-cases, the use cases for Dante in one case talk about an event with 400,000 people in a single area. AVB, significantly less
• NOT Debunked.. But actually supports Dante slightly more. If we're making guarantees, pro equipment using Dante is the guarantee..

 

 

• Dante website: Yamaha, Shure, Allen & Heath, Presonus, Panasonic, Behringer, AVID, etc. Who are these brands? Over 4000 products use Dante apparently..
• AVB: They list Netgear and Cisco as their members. In fact, a lot of their list aren't even proper audio companies (unless companies like Realtek plan to get into the Amplifier business)
• I agree that it would be cool if Snap had more AVB or Dante products though (that wouldn't be a bad thing imho).
• Blustream only released their Dante gear 2 years ago. If the claims you were making about Dante were as clear cut as you claim, they would have gone AVB instead (particularly because apparently AVB has no royalty fees). So as a business case, they most likely discovered the opposite..

The reality is, both are good standards, and both standards have their own benefits. Both Savant and Control4 are good platforms, and in practice for residential though, both Audio standards are somewhat equivalent (but Dante has better latency actually apparently, and doesn't require special switches).

What are you debunking? I am arguing FOR Dante OR AVB and against the use of traditional matrix in large scale or shared zone applications. The differences and need of use are certainly not opinion as you just stated. AVB exists more in “residential” product. Particularly because of the royalties as you mentioned, it’s also licensed based so the need for specific hardware is only based on that. It’s also a network standard so yes i would expect networking brands to be involved linking audio gear together. Both require certain parts. Pro losses audio has a bigger need, been around for longer and Dante is everywhere in that regard. You can obviously use those 3rd party “Pro AV” products in a residential install, that wasnt my point. Im not sure of yours…

I didnt know that BluStream added Dante as I dont use the product so thats a good nugget of info. Maybe thats where the points got crossed ..

Neither are native in Control4 and that IMO is no longer acceptable when you talk about the cost of these systems and alternative systems do. Savant has 16ch POE powered AVB input and output matrix’s that are the size of 2 ea1s stacked. All of that is scalable, all independent of physical audio jumpers. To keep the focus on point, this is the stuff I WANT Snap to come out with. This is never about dragging C4 through the mud. 

[cnicholson]

On 2/15/2023 at 7:09 PM, Rob21 said:

I am considering doing this, but my concern is with the possibility for delay. Do you have any delay with this setup?

The only delay is the one-time lag when the distant EA-5 is routing a source from the main house Core 5, especially if an analog source.   But it's not really significant compared to the initial startup delay from a streaming source (or skipping to next song from streaming source).  So no big deal.  I think the buffer size is adjustable, so if you are confident in the quality of your network links, you could prob cut down the delay a bit, with possible risk of some stuttering.   I think it's basically a non issue.

If you mean "sync" and not "delay," then you can run into some issues, but not related to endpoints being far away (networks are fast).   C4 seems to automatically sync that stuff up.  It's more from differences in digital processing on different signal paths.   Most common (for me) is digital path through AVRs versus straight through Matrix and amps.   Generally easy enough to fix via delay settings in AVR and Matrix.   For example, I backhaul optical audio from TV in Living room (which is an Atmos zone) and then split the optical, with half feeding AVR and half feeding an external Dolby Digital downmixer, and then into Matrix (matrix can't decode Dolby Digital).   Took a little fiddling to sync this up, but no big deal.  

[cnicholson]

On 2/16/2023 at 6:37 AM, Rob21 said:

I currently have a maxed out triad 24 x 24 matrix feeding three triad 8 zone amps. The only sources that need to be fully distributed throughout my system are the four audio outputs on my EA5. What is the best way to add zones to this without creating delay? All help/advice is appreciated.

If you really just need to add endpoint zones and not more inputs, and the new zones only need to play EA5 sources,  then this wold be a case where you should just Y-out the EA5 outputs to old and new matrix.  That won't cause any delays.  As I noted in my other reply, it is possible that the old and new matrix may have different digital processing/DSP latencies, so you might need to sync up if you have old and new zones within earshot of each other.  But they are probably pretty similar in latency so unlikely to need tuning.

[Cyknight]

2 minutes ago, cnicholson said:

where you should just Y-out the EA5 outputs to old and new matrix

DON'T DO THIS. It creates issues with how the system handles the various streaming services. You can y out 'regular' source, but multi 'mini' source devices like C4 controllers, but also Sonos, Bluesound etc should not get split with a y-splitter.

Feel free to sned half the connections to one matrix or amp, half to the other, but don't bind a single output to more than one matrix.

[cnicholson]

2 hours ago, Cyknight said:

It creates issues with how the system handles the various streaming services

Hmm.  I have some stuff wired like that and I haven't noticed problems.  How do the problems manifest themselves?   I think I have the analog outputs from Core 5 Y-out to both, but have the digital outputs "pass through" the main matrix to second matrix, so maybe I've never actually used the Y'd out inputs since I think it prioritizes digital paths.

Not at all saying you're wrong, just curious what to look for and maybe I should re-wire stuff.  I'm worried about edge cases where lots of different end-points want separate sources and I wouldn't want to hit the limit early by making some Core 5 outputs only available to some end points (based on matrix they are tied to).

 

[Cyknight]

The issue is essentially a virtual matrix to matrix solution.

 

Basically example scenario is this:

You split two stereo audio outputs from a controller to feed two inputs on two amps/matrices. Just the two.

Now two rooms on one amp/matrix are set to play tune in radio, same stream. The system selects audio out 1 as the used connection.

 

A third gets added to the same setup but it's on the second amp/matrix. Here one of two things can happen.

-1 Because it's not considered the same path by the system, it is possible that the system chooses to use audio output 2 as the used connection for that room. This is all good, up until one of the two rooms on the initial start decides to play a different streamed source. Now that third room all of a sudden starts playing the other stream, because the system chooses to use output 2 - or BOTH rooms on amp one start playing the new stream on output 1 (FIFO output selection)

-2 It actually chooses output 1 to stream to the second amp, but it's not properly recognizing that it's the same path. So now the third room is turned off (or both of the first two rooms are) and audio gets cut to the other room(s) as well.

 

In addition, because the sound stops, but the session was never ended in the third room (for example) - the next time someone starts a stream in any room but that one, that 'third room' may just all of a sudden start playing music.

 

 

The more likely it is for the end user to change to different streams in the house the more likely you are to notice any of this.

ie a lot of people will just start music, turn it on in the room(s) they want, then at the end turn them all off - you'd never notice the pathing issue that way.

 

 

[Cyknight]

I've seen both happen in tests, but most often it's the second scenario - which isn't as likely to cause an issue as in most cases, people still turn all the rooms on/off at the same time anyway.

We manage any limitations on streaming music outputs by either using  larger matrix (more outputs at least) - or my being smart about what zones are connected to what amp For example tie in master, ensuite and walk-in closet to the same amp/matrix as they are unlikely to be listening to different streaming music at the same time, so you arguably only need 1 output for those ever, same for the 3 deck back yard zones, the open living room/kitchen/dining and so on.