Audio Interface with wireless usb?

W

Warwickwhore

New Metal Member
Oct 15, 2009
18
0
1
I am trying to setup my studio with a tascam 1641 usb audio interface. All the tracking will be done in my basement, but I want to be doing all the monitoring of the mics from upstairs. The issue I have is that USB Cables cannot go long distances.
I know one way I could solve this is by having the tascam upstairs and snaking down to the basement. But I do not have a snake for this, and am on a pretty tight budget.

What I was thinking of doing is having the tascam downstairs and plug the USB into this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Alfa-1000mW-USB...emQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item5884cf5f63

Does anyone have any experience with this or have any other ideas on how i could do this?

Thanks,
Ben
 
Alright. Im just curious as to why? I would think Its not the recording inputs that would really be done wirelessly, its just the data being sent?
 
Yeah, I'm with Zack. It's just not...right.
We are talking about large amounts of buffered data here (going two ways) and sending it via wireless just doesn't sound like a good idea. You are going through material - walls, roofs etc. There could be loss of quality and if not latency to make up for it (dunno what I'm talking about but you get the point).
 
Yay! Something that doesn't require a 1M post count to contribute to! :D

Sending that much data through a wireless device (even if it's WiFi not whateverthehellthetechnologyis) is not a good idea. A wireless G router loses 50% of its signal behind after a concrete wall. So I can imagine how much power will be lost (hence, resent packets and data loss) and this might lead to dropouts and other dangerous stuff for audio recording. Unless you can get at least 90% of your signal strength at the receiving end then it's pretty useless for your purpose. Besides, add yet another driver for interpreting data back and forth? Think of it like you put your letter in an envelope and then put it again in another one to send it through a special shipping company. The recepient will have to open two packages rather than one. That's the closest analogy I could get for representing packets so excuse the lameness haha.
 
My dad actually has patents for some of the USB 2.0 connectors haha, he told me they can only go up to 5 meters or something. Im not what you mean by active cables?

Another idea I had was to use one of those PC Anywhere or Remote Access utilities that lets you control a PC with another pc. I would have my recording rig down there with the interface and one of my older rigs upstairs. Im not sure if those let you use audio though.
 
The main problem is bandwidth here. If you can get a strong, stable signal (one could also use signal amps and better antennas to make sure of that) then quality (or lack of) ain't really an issue since it's digital data. Packages are being resent until they arrive and there are also correction mechanisms. And latency from a pure signal quality POV ain't that much of an issue with a strong signal either.

But the Wi-Fi bandwidth @ 54 Mbit/s max. (!) is much smaller than the USB 2.0 bandwidth @ 480 Mbit/s max.

Now we all know that the effective bandwidth differs vastly from these maximums, but still, there's a significant difference. And lack of bandwidth will increase the latency after all.
 
I just ran into this sort of problem trying to set up my machine room getting the mouse, keyboard and other devices back to the PC - I ended up using a hub to give me the 10m I needed.

According to the USB.org they set a specification limit of 5m with a USB 2.0, or 3m ith a 1.1 without a Hub. Using 5 Hubs you can link 6 2.0 cables givng you 30m.

http://www.usb.org/about/faq/ans5
 
it'd actually be better, in this case, to use some analog wireless gear, for each audio in, than to use a wireless network.

digital wireless connections inevitably have packet loss, which in a low latency system like audio recording, just is an absolute no no.

lets say you're recording 44.1kHz, 24bit, on 8 channels, with a stereo output being monitored. you're going to need 10 * 44100 * 24 = 10.8mbit of bandwidth just for the samples, let alone the overhead on top of that. i'd say a conservative estimate would be 20mbit. i don't think i've ever seen my mac's wireless card transfer more than 15mbit, but lets assume that wireless card can do it.

we still have the problem of latency. round trip time on a network for 2 wirelessly connected computers, is about 6ms, so you'd need to have this on top of what ever latency your soundcard is running with. you've got around 4ms left before it because annoyingly audible, which.. is pretty unheard of for a USB interface, i have to say. but lets say you can do this too.

both of these assume that every data packet sent wirelessly will get there, which, just isn't the case. audio over ethernet isn't really that good, that's a practical link speed of 70mbit, round trip time of less than 1ms, and packet loss around 1 in a million packets. 11g doesn't come close to ethernet in any of those respects..

as awesome as it would be.. i'm pretty certain it wouldn't work :(

thanks,
 
Erkan said:
Well, tell your dad he is wrong then because USB cables can go above 5 meters.
Click to expand...

Not without hubbing each cable up. I decided to get that snake, 50 feet is exactly enough to go down 2 sets of stairs from this room and will be very useful for when I have my own place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
Tracking with USB Interface
Replies
3
Views
540
F.O.H.
Fael
F
Kaza
Audio interface and converters?
Replies
2
Views
891
F.O.H.
Kaza
Kaza
S
need help setting up MIDI to usb in Pro tools 9
Replies
4
Views
1K
F.O.H.
greyskull
G
XNightrage87X
Advice on Tascam US-1800
Replies
2
Views
1K
Backline
Russtopher
R
marios.blythe
what audio interface should i buy?
Replies
5
Views
4K
F.O.H.
DullElysium
D
Top Bottom
Back