Can/should MIDI and Dante coexist on the same network?

[Christopher Pyfrom]

Hi all,
I’m looking to take some MIDI triggers from keyboards 3 or 4) using a MIDI over Ethernet device. I am also using Dante for audio. Can (and should) MIDI and Dante coexist reliably on the same network? What about console and QLab remote control? The console and qlab remote control would only be used during tech.

We are talking about maybe 36 to 48 channels of Dante audio sources. I believe the venue has a Dante network in place and they are trying to determine if they can just use the current infrastructure or if they need to create a second network. My thought is to have Dante on its own network and put the MIDI and remote control on a separate network (which may also need to send MIDI to lighting).

Thoughts? Experiences? TIA.

Chris

Sent from my iPhone

[Maik Waschfeld]

Hi Chris,

Did you try different VLANs for different purposes?

So you could divide your existing infrastucture „in the network switch“, if that supports VLANs.

Actually no real-world experiences here, but on the same direction, two years from now.

With kindest regards…
…Maik Waschfeld

(sent from my MBPro16,2)
also at <mailto:Maik.Wa...@Staatstheater-Stuttgart.de>

--
Contact support anytime: sup...@figure53.com
Follow QLab on Twitter: https://twitter.com/QLabApp
User Group Code of Conduct: https://qlab.app/code-of-conduct/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "QLab" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qlab+uns...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qlab/1B0D11EA-27F7-475E-B169-D41535080A72%40gmail.com.

[Rich Walsh]

The specific case you describe should be fine in theory, but may not work in practice. For example, if your console has separate ports for control and Dante it may not actually be possible to connect them to the same subnet: https://groups.google.com/g/qlab/c/Ap3qqn1McMw/m/Cqv1cyoxEwAJ. I'd also advise against a system design that you could easily break by adding a few more bits, unless it is just for one show.

For a reliable, scalable and future-proof system I would approach it as (at least) 3 "networks": control, Dante primary & Dante secondary. Dante primary and secondary should not share any common infrastructure (switches, cables) that could take down both with a single point of failure. Computers will need 2 NICs – one for DVS and one for everything else. 3 NICs if you want redundant Dante (needs a proper card I think) or access to the secondary network from Dante Controller.

You can build this as 3 physical networks or 2 physical networks with VLANs to run control and Dante over the same switches. With some clever trunking and loop protection you can incorporate redundancy for the control network by having it's VLAN travel down both primary and secondary links.

Presumably lighting won't actually be on the same network as you'll convert from IP to 5-pin MIDI at the point your two systems connect?

If nothing else, I would look to use VLANs to create a second network for non-Dante traffic on any existing infrastructure. Bandwidth is unlikely to be the limitation – it will be about what settings you can configure on your devices to share the same network.

Rich