Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] good intro article on mLAN
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Sat Feb 17 2001 - 03:05:43 EET
On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 01:15:18PM -0800, Tom Pincince wrote:
> >ready to go within a short time would be immense. i mean, can you
> >imagine the implications of running a (working) version of ardour with
> >mLAN ?
>
> I do want to upgrade to linux as soon as I can include 1394, so I follow
> 1394 closely. In this light I found the article to be misleading. For
> most of the article, the author treated mLAN as synonymous with the A+M
> protocol, correcting this only at the end. The articles linked at
I don't think that is quite correct, but I can't check at the moment. As
far as I remeber, the A+M protocol was developed by Yamaha as part of the
mLAN system (the other part being the control protocol).
The A+M and Control Protocol documents linked from my page are developed
and provided by Yamaha. What makes you think its proprietary?
mLAN is the only one of the audio-over-firewire protocols that is open
(that I'm aware of), and it is certainly the only one with noticeable
industry support. The others are the Digital Harmony one you mentioned
(which is an A+M implementation of some sort), the Mark of the Unicorn
one, which is only intended for MOTU hardware, and one other that has
been mentioned here, similar to MOTU's.
Digital Harmony manufactured the first mLAN developers boards, and may be
making the current mLAN cards as used by Korg and Yam, but I'm not
sure. Either way it makes sense that DH stuff would interoperate with
mLAN but DH seems to only be interested in domestic applications, and
don't seem particularly keen on openess, unlike Yamaha.
- Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Feb 17 2001 - 03:35:15 EET