Yamaha Ql1 R Remote Download
Yamaha Stage I/O Tio1608-D vs. Rio1608-D
Re: Yamaha Stage I/O Tio1608-D vs. Rio1608-D
I own a Rio1608-D and now I see a Tio1608-D both Dante Equipped.
I use the Rio for an LS9-32 and a DM-1000 mixer @ $3600. street price
The Tio is @ $999.00 street price.
What are the differences and can you use the Tio with legacy mixer products?
Given that the Rio is now harder to find on the Yamaha website is it being discontinued??
Thanks,
Jay
I talked to Yamaha when pricing on the TIO was finally announce as it seemed for $600 less then the Ro8 (8 output unit) you get 16 inputs also. Even if the mic pre's are lower quality then what's in the Rio's, it still looks like a better deal.
What I was told as far as differences, Tio is based around the D-Pre of Yamaha's current analog board. So different, but not necessarily worse as mic pre's can be very subjective in my opinion.
Tio does not support gain compensation when used as a digital split between multiple CL/QL consoles that the Rio's do, not something you'd use as you mentioned using the rio with an LS9 and DM1000.
Tio's don't support 96Khz, possibly an issue with your DM1000 depending on how you like to run it.
Tio's don't support AD8HR mode so they can't be controlled by either of your consoles, the biggest issue for you as I see it. Although you can remote control it via R-Remote on a computer on the dante network.
Although I haven't been able to play with a Tio in person, when I mount a virtual on an a CL, it does not show meters next to the inputs making me believe you can't monitor the input level of the Tio directly if an input isn't patched to a channel.
As for differences in the outputs, which was my original question, they said they are different but wouldn't go into specifics on to exactly how and what effect it would have on sound quality. Not sure they weren't just trying to turn a Tio sale into a Rio sale or if there's something significantly different. They did hint at possibly lower build quality.
As for Rio possibly being discontinued, I highly doubt it. They are still under network interfaces, just all R series are now grouped together as there are now several options in the family these days. If a 32 channel Tio were to come out, the 2 would probably be combined under T series on the website in the same way.
I see more differences also.
Price point and eating their own must be a difficult task at Yamaha.
Why would you design a QL and a CL?
Is TF a direct replacement for LS9-32? TF-5 at 48 in, and LS9 at 64 in....hmmmm...
combi xlr/phone jacks.
A 48 channel slot in the TF (rather than Yamaha standard 16 )is good. Stack 3 Tios to the same slot.
Tio is for the TF or....cheaper Yamahas
Dio is for the upper end
Tio could become a nice home recording interface if the hooks in Dante Controller
all function including Head Amp gain
Use Dante Virtual Sound card and this should work.
Y O2R started the lo-cost dig revolution many years ago
B X32 restarted the new lo-cost revolution and feature-per-dollar is now the name of the game. I really hate features being removed just to dumb down a product....but what do I know? Is Yamaha doing the right thing? Their next price bump is 7K higher (LS9 legacy tech) or 10K up with CL and QL. Somehow I'm just not feeling it.
Tio vs Rio
I realize we are a year later here, but I wonder if anyone had any more experience to share on this?
I have a client with an M7CL and a copper multicore. The mult needs to be replaced. They won't be upgrading the console for a while, but would prefer to buy a dante-enabled option so that when they DO upgrade the console (most likely a CL5) they can just 'drop it in'.
I realize that the 2 x MY16 cards will be useless once they upgrade.
Here's the question:
Do they *need* to buy the RIO3224, or can they get away with a couple of TIO 1608s? The cost difference is astronomical.
They need to control gain/phase/phantom from the console.
They do not need to control gains from multiple consoles, they also don't need 48k+.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattontour ➡️
I realize we are a year later here, but I wonder if anyone had any more experience to share on this?
I have a client with an M7CL and a copper multicore. The mult needs to be replaced. They won't be upgrading the console for a while, but would prefer to buy a dante-enabled option so that when they DO upgrade the console (most likely a CL5) they can just 'drop it in'.
I realize that the 2 x MY16 cards will be useless once they upgrade.
Here's the question:
Do they *need* to buy the RIO3224, or can they get away with a couple of TIO 1608s? The cost difference is astronomical.
They need to control gain/phase/phantom from the console.
They do not need to control gains from multiple consoles, they also don't need 48k+.
If the TIO can't emulate an AD8HR as stated above then the M7CL will not be able to control its gain/phase/phantom.
Lives for gear
We are in a similar situation where a recently rehabed M7-48 is being installed in a church where previously a 32 channel analog console lived. Yamaha did confirm the MY Dante cards can be used with the Tio but no head amp control. In our case it may be used to bring 16 channels of wireless in where the head amp can be set by external computer and therefore not need changing once set.
I suspect Some of the price difference might also be the Rio1608-D is based on the Dante Brooklyn platform and the Tio1608s just squeaks into the Dante Broadway.
conversion (and/or preamps) must be different: i recently got to mix files someone else tracked and i was wondering about the somewhat cloudy character of some signals which obviously got tracked via the tio - this was classical music: lots of spot mics and the tio was mainly used on percussion.
i'm not quite getting why yamaha abandoned the ad8hr protocol: i still much prefer them over rio (and obviously also tio - which i haven't been using live yet though) - after ca. 15 years, i'm still occasionally using ad8hr's via ethersound to feed some of my yamaha desks.
[i don't see that much of an advantage of dante over older aoip protocols either, at least not for typical smaller installations... - one of the many reasons i'm sticking to madi!]
That's nonsense. It's a Brooklyn II inside. Either way, it has no emphasis on signal quality, and the brooklyn II has different pricing depending on channel count.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrkirkby ➡️
That's nonsense. It's a Brooklyn II inside. Either way, it has no emphasis on signal quality, and the brooklyn II has different pricing depending on channel count.
aiming at me? - not sure who's posting bs: IF yamaha is using the same dante chips inside the tio and rio stageboxes (do they?), of course this would not explain any difference in sound; i assume we're talking about a different preamp design though (which i cannot confirm as i haven't ripped apart a tio stagebox yet but different specs let me assume this)...
Last edited by deedeeyeah; 4th February 2021 at 05:50 PM.. Reason: wording
All I can say is: when using the Tio with a Yamaha TF mixer.... it works most of the time.
But I encountered a lot of bugs when pairing a Tio with a QL or CL mixer. Like all outputs gone a minute before the show (although dante network manager showed everything was alright and patched) and such stuff.
So not a fan of the Tio at all.
Gear Maniac
Hi !
The Tio cannot be controlled by the LS9 and it's a marketing decision of Yamaha to continue selling Rios to old console owners.
It sounds okay but lacks a bit of something compared to the LS9 preamps. I use it to get some extra in/outs but since it's not controllable by the console, it's mainly for line level stuff.
Posted by: modellinnow.blogspot.com
Source: https://gearspace.com/board/live-sound/1097215-yamaha-stage-i-o-tio1608-d-vs-rio1608-d.html