AES50, Dante, AVB, MADI, and NDI are all networking protocols that are used to transmit audio or video signals over a network. They all have their own strengths and weaknesses, and the best protocol for a particular application will depend on the specific requirements of that application.

• AES50 (Audio Engineering Society Standard 50): Developed by the Audio Engineering Society (AES) in 2003, it is a point-to-point digital audio connection standard. It's designed for stage environments, offering low latency and high channel counts (typically up to 96 channels). It's not a full networking system, but rather a streamlined connection method. No longer as widely adopted as Dante or AVB, primarily used by Behringer and Midas.

• Dante (Digital Audio Network Through Ethernet): One of the most popular audio networking protocols due to its ease of use, scalability, and broad industry support. Dante uses standard Ethernet networks and offers flexible routing, device discovery, and built-in redundancy options.

• AVB (Audio Video Bridging): An IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) set of standards aimed at delivering real-time, guaranteed quality of service for audio and video over Ethernet. AVB prioritizes time-sensitive A/V streams for low latency and reliable performance.

• MADI (Multichannel Audio Digital Interface): An older but well-established standard for transmitting multi-channel audio over long distances. MADI typically uses coaxial or optical fiber connections and can handle up to 64 channels of audio in a single stream.

• NDI (Network Device Interface): NDI (Network Device Interface) is a low-latency audio-and-video-over-IP technology with broad support used in broadcast, worship, education and live events. It is easy to configure and use, and simplifies video production and distribution by enabling cameras, computers, mobile devices, projectors, and other video systems to connect and transmit video effortlessly over standard Ethernet networks including wireless.

Dante and AVB are the two most widely adopted audio networking protocols in the professional audio industry. They both offer low latency, reliability, and support for a large number of channels. However, there are some key differences between the two protocols.

• Determinism: Dante is a non-deterministic protocol, while AVB is a deterministic protocol. This means that Dante is not guaranteed to deliver audio packets in a timely manner, while AVB is. Determinism is important for applications such as live sound, where it is critical that audio packets are delivered on time.

• Openness: Dante is a proprietary protocol, while AVB is an open standard. This means that anyone can develop Dante-compatible products, while only Audinate can develop Dante products. Openness is important for the long-term viability of a protocol, as it ensures that there is competition and innovation.

• Adoption: Dante is more widely adopted than AVB. This is likely due to the fact that Dante was developed earlier and has a larger ecosystem of compatible products. Adoption is important, as it means that there is a larger pool of qualified engineers and technicians who are familiar with the protocol.

• Developed by Audinate in 2006

• A high-speed, non-deterministic audio networking protocol

• Can be used for both live sound and recording applications

• Pros:

  • Widely Adopted: Huge user base and wide range of compatible products from various manufacturers.

  • Ease of use: Intuitive setup with automatic device discovery and user-friendly interfaces. Dante's device discovery and management protocols are quite streamlined due to its vast user base and years of development.

  • Flexibility: Routes audio effortlessly across standard network infrastructure with simple configurations.

  • Scalability: Handles small setups to massive, complex systems. Less stringent synchronization tolerances in some use cases.

  • Broader support for standard network equipment.

• Cons:

  • Cost: Requires licensing fees for Dante controllers and compatible devices.

  • Latency: Not as deterministic as AVB and might have slightly higher latency compared to AVB in some situations, although still suitable for most real-time applications.

• Industry Adoption: Extremely popular across live sound, broadcast, and fixed installations. Vendors like Yamaha, Shure, Focusrite, and many others, fully support Dante.

• When to Use: Dante is great for flexible audio networking situations requiring ease of use, broad device compatibility, and scalability.

• Developed by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) in 2013

• A high-speed, deterministic audio networking protocol

• Can be used for both live sound and recording applications

• Pros:

  • Low Latency: Designed inherently for the lowest possible latency, critical in highly time-sensitive applications.

  • Quality of Service (QoS): Prioritizes AVB traffic, ensuring reliable audio and video delivery even on busy networks.

  • Open Standard: No licensing fees associated with the AVB protocol.

  • Redundancy: Built-in resilience safeguarding against cable issues, device malfunctions, or switch failures along with deterministic recovery

• Cons:

  • Complexity: Configuration can be more complex compared to Dante.

  • Limited Ecosystem: Less widespread device support than Dante.

  • Specialized Switches: Requires AVB-capable network switches for guaranteed QoS.

• Industry Adoption: Gained traction in industries demanding ultra-low latency, such as major professional sports and large format professional A/V. Vendors like Extreme Networks and AVID offer AVB solutions.

• When to Use:

  • Reliability is paramount: Environments where audio cannot be interrupted (broadcast, critical live performances, installations in essential services).

  • Minimal latency is crucial: Even during a network failure, real-time performance must be maintained.

The choice of which protocol to use depends on the specific application and other factors such as networking infrastructure and cost. For applications such as major live sound, where absolute reliability and determinism is critical, AVB is the better technical choice. For most other applications, Dante is a widely adopted, reliable and flexible choice.

Both Dante and AVB are likely to continue to be widely used in the professional audio industry. Dante's popularity and well-established position make it a safe and adaptable choice for many applications. AVB continues to advance with the potential for broader adoption if simplified setup processes and wider device support emerge.

NDI is another standard worth considering, especially for video applications.