draft schema for Mic-Line-Interfaces

[Bertrand van Kempen]

Hello,

Is it possible to have access to the draft of EmBER+ schema for Mic-Line-Interfaces?

When do you plan to release it?

Thanks,

Bertrand

[michael...@lawo.com]

Hello Bertrand,

thanks for your interest in the draft and sorry for the delay of the answer. I attached a version 1.0 of the draft here. Please let us know whether the draft is helpful or sufficient for your requirements.

Best regards,
Michael

[Bertrand van Kempen (Merging Technologies)]

Hello Michael,

Thanks for the draft.

I have the following comments:

This schema seems to only target MicrophonePreamp what about if the module is configured in Line; does the provider removes the EmBER+ microphone node and provides another one with another schema e.g. com.lawo.emberplus.line.preamp.v<VERSIONMAJOR>.<VERSIONMINOR>?

Do you have a schema for Mic/Line preamp with a boolean Mic/Line parameter?

Our Mic/Line preamps have a "phase invert" parameter; could it be added in the schema?

In general, what is the right way to extend a schema?

I noticed that the Lawo "941/51 Mic/Line" module has a PAD but the "941/52 Mic/Line" doesn't.

So, in the case of the preamp hasn't PAD capability what about the PAD parameter in the schema?

Do you plan to use the same schema for both cases and so the PAD always returns false for 941/52?

Best regards,

Bertrand 

[michael...@lawo.com]

Hello Bertrand,

thanks for the feedback.

This schema seems to only target MicrophonePreamp what about if the module is configured in Line; does the provider removes the EmBER+ microphone node and provides another one with another schema e.g. com.lawo.emberplus.line.preamp.v<VERSIONMAJOR>.<VERSIONMINOR>?

For switchable resources, we usually provide two separate control nodes - one holding the microphone preamp data and one holding the line data (which only consists of an amplification and could therefore be also represented by the mic schema without any optional parameter, but I think we will provide a separate schema just for the better "optical recognition"). On one hand, this is due to Ember+ limitation that the same node should not occur with different data structures (replacing Mic by Line and vice versa), on the other hand we had some trouble and misunderstandings with the former protocol that offered switchable resources but depending on the settings, some parameters were not operable.  

 Do you have a schema for Mic/Line preamp with a boolean Mic/Line parameter?

See above, we will also provide a schema for line only resources - depending on the switch settings either the mic or the line schema node will be set to online.

 

Our Mic/Line preamps have a "phase invert" parameter; could it be added in the schema?

In general, what is the right way to extend a schema?

We could add it as an optional parameter. This strategy also prevents us from updating all consumers that are on a rather low generic level with a direct access implementation of the parameters they know.

 

I noticed that the Lawo "941/51 Mic/Line" module has a PAD but the "941/52 Mic/Line" doesn't.

So, in the case of the preamp hasn't PAD capability what about the PAD parameter in the schema?

Do you plan to use the same schema for both cases and so the PAD always returns false for 941/52?

Most probably we would implement this using the IsOnline flag of the parameter. But I have to take a look by myself first and talk to the experts. Could I please ask you for some patience, I will find that out ASAP.

Best regards,

Michael