Thrown for a loop - a day with ListenTech

How AV friends! Sorry to have been quiet here over the past weeks; we'll try to get this blog back up to at least weekly updates. There's always more to talk about. HDMI 2.0! 4K! OLED! Curved flatpanels! Today I'll start with one of the ways we can improve peoples' lives and experiences. Today we're talking about assistive listening systems, specifically inductive loops.

Some possible layouts of loop systems, with
coverage patterns

Earlier this week I had the the opportunity to meet with the good folk at ListenTech for a single day training session on the theory, design, and implementation of inductive loop systems. This was a quick but thorough single-day class with a combination of theory and hands-on demonstrations. Students included a mix of integrators, consultants, and even a family of audiologists there to keep current on how AV technology interacts with hearing aids.

For those not in the know, a loop system uses magnetic induction to send audio directly to a coil in either a hearing aid or belt-pack receiver. It's considered a better system for assistive listening than the more common IR and RF systems for a few reasons.

• No need for many users to ask for special equipment. They can see the sign for a loop system, flip on the T-coil on their hearing aid, and get the audio without having to ask.
• None of the directionality issues an RF system has; there are no risks of falling into a "shadow" or turning so one is no longer covered. 
• Hearing aids are often tuned to a specific user's hearing loss. Using the hearing aid will give superior sound quality.

The first factor is, for me, possibly the most important one. Loop systems welcome those with hearing loss into spaces and experiences in ways which other systems do not. This is the dominant technology in much of Europe, but here in the US we've been slower to adopt it. Part of this is cost, part is poor perceptions caused by some very poorly done early hearing loop systems consisting - in some cases - of little more than an audio amplifier and some phone wire. Today, of course, we can do better. 

With the ANSI adoption of the IEC 60118-4:2006 standard (ANSI 117.7) there's now actual regulatory pressure in the US to deploy loop systems which meet standards. In addition to the requirements of the standard, ListenTech's Mike Griffit gave us a list of other "best practices" to create the best possible user experience.

The IEC requirements are as follows:

1. EM Background noise must be 32dB or lower (A weighted)
2. Field strength should be 400mA at 1 meter for a 1kilohertz sine wave. 
3. Field strength should be even throughout the covered area, with variations of no more than +/-3dB.
4. Field strength should be constant over the 100Hz to 5kHz frequency band, with variations of no more than +/- 3dB

In addition, one need to pay attention to coverage area, creating adequate signage, and insuring that the proper mix of audio is sent through the loop system. As is the case with many regulations, local regulation might trump nationally-recognized standards. The state of California, for instance, requires an entire venue to be looped so as not to discriminate against the hearing-impaired by forcing them into one area. As is the case with any regulatory issue, check with your AHJ (authority having jurisdiction). Listen also certifies both consultants and integrators in loop systems, and encourages the writing of these certifications into specifications. This is one way to insure that the people who design and install systems do so to an acceptable standard.

Wire layout for a phased array system. Loops colored
in red and green for clarity.

The most interesting thing with modern loop systems is phased arrays; instead of a single perimeter loop, two loops would be placed with the audio signal ninety-degrees out of phase. This technique allows greater areas to be covered and makes it easier to compensate for signal loss due to metal content in floors or ceilings. The most important thing to remember? Be careful to lay the patterns of loop wire (or flat copper tape) exactly as designed. Otherwise, you might end up with current in one leg running in the wrong direction and creating interference.

This wouldn't be a manufacturer-led training class without at least a moment of self-promotion, but to their credit it was brief. I also have to admit that ListenTech's loop drivers are nice bits of hardware; the "Multi-loop driver" contains both two drivers and a phase-delay in a single 1 RU chassis, greatly simplifying integration. Somewhat disappointingly, there's no Energy Star rating yet, but they are more efficient than earlier-generation models, more attractive, and even have basic monitoring.

The "figure 8" test pattern. In reality, the loops
would me precisely measured to give a calibrated
result.

The day wrapped up with a hands-on demonstration of how to commission a loop system and how to make test measurements using a "figure eight" pattern to measure metal loss. This is actually quite an easy thing to do; a field-strength meter was provided to measure the signal in various frequency bands.

Overall, this is a technology about which all of us in the industry should be educated. In addition to complying with the spirit and letter of the ADA, there is a moral responsibility to give everyone the best possible experience - regardless of their disabilities. Hearing loop systems are one way we can do that - in which we can do good as a part of our jobs. My thanks to ListenTech for the lesson, and I'll keep them in mind in the future.

At the end, they gave a certification to all of us who passed the test.
Hooray!

Read More

SVSI N1000 series - Uncompressed video over network switches

Teaser post showing new devices,
not yet tested or even wired neatly.

Two weeks ago, before a much-needed week-long vacation, I left a teaser post showing some shiny new hardware on the Audiovisual Professionals group at the Google+ social network. For those not following me over on G+, this is the N1000 series from SVSI - a video and audio over standard network switches. It's a technology in which I've been interested for a while, but true uncompressed video has always been a big missing item; if you have a source and display in the same room, you want to eliminate the latency that comes with compression as much as possible. Does this solution fit the bill? Time to find out!

My test rig. HDCP protected content from the tablet,
non-HDCP from a laptop. And I'd not be the pixel-and-ink
stained wretch without an actual bottle of ink!

Physically, each encoder or decoder unit is about 7.875"x5.125"x 1" (according to my tape measure here). This fits them comfortably behind displays, in wall-boxes sized for digital media receivers, and other locations you'd want to stow one. There's also a 1RU rack-mount kit for two units, and a 2RU card-cage which will hold six card-versions of the same units. Encoder units have a DVI-I input for video with embedded audio, a single network jack, as well as captive-screw connectors for IR, RS-232, Audio, and DC power. The units can also accept power over ethernet, which is how I tested them. The decoder units are similar, with the exception of slightly different placement on the DVI connector.

I was able to get started and have a functional matrix within probably less than a half hour, using SVSI's Conductor Netlite software. It auto-dected all four units (plus a controller - more on that later) without a hitch, and easily populated them into a 2x2 matrix with reasonably intuitive mouseclicks to select crosspoints and then "take" to transfer. Separate matrices are created for N2000 and the forthcoming N3000 series devices. Sadly, I didn't have any of those to evaluate as of yet, although I'm working at acquiring an N2000 kit.

Front and rear views of encoder with network switch

So how was the switching? As fast and close to seamless as I could detect. Running tasks through the system (drawing on a tablet, using a mouse, etc) felt as natural as they would via a direct connection. Conductor will also let you rename units, give you their IP addresses, and send you directly to their page on a web-browser to adjust various settings, see extended EDID information, set up local play, etc. This is also where you'll find the ability to allow HDCP protected content, which is a quick and painless process. Once you do so, switching between protected and unprotected sources is as fast as any other switch. Compare this to the Extron XTP matrix which took well over a second for the same task.

Decoder and control processor

Along with the encoder and decoder units I got my hands on an N8001 controller. This appears to be nothing more than a small webserver, allowing control of a system via a web browser. IN addition to the familiar auto-discover and matrix controls, there are script editors and a "panel builder" utility for creation of a control interface. Scripts can direct video streams (either by IP address or the unique stream number the assigned to each encoder), direct audio, operate transport controls for SVSI's DVR appliances (not available for the N1000 series), or windowing processor (ditto) as well as embed other scripts, send RS232 commands, switch from "live play" to "local play" (calling up static images stored on the device) and give a delay between commands. Custom button graphics can be uploaded, or a standard squarish-button with rounded off corners labelled as desired. For relatively simple systems, it does the job quite well and is easily loadable to an Android or iOS device via an app. IT doesn't seem to have an intuitive enough design interface or enough options (conditionals, page-overlays, etc) to build really complex systems, but it seems very workable for simple interfaces. I was able to build a simple panel to route either source to one or the other destination very quickly and easily.

Concerns? There are a few. While the devices switch very quickly, they boot up very slowly. From a cold reboot of one of the encoders or decoders, it took a solid two minutes between plugging in the cable and having the unit recognized on the network. What's worse, it didn't always get the video stream back or sync with the display without re-sending the control command. There's also an odd delay and, on some displays a loss of sync, when switching from "live play" to "local play". Sync was re-established, but it took several seconds and some odd color-artifacts and vertical roll. This was odd.

Secondly, and not unexpectedly, is the issue of bandwidth. Each stream is 880Mbps. I have no idea how this would be able to scale up to 4K; it doesn't seem that there's be enough bandwidth available. Will we need to start deploying 10 Gigabit switches? Will this spell the end of uncompressed video over the network? Will we need to send multiple streams and stitch them together? The drawbacks to all of these solutions is obvious.

All told, it's an intriguing set of options. Pricing - especially for a large-scale system - would be far less than a similar HDBaseT solution with fewer proprietary parts, less rack space, less power draw.

Read More

An afternoon visit with Extron

I've not talked about Extron here recently since my visit to Anaheim for their training school nearly two years ago. Since then, two Infocomms have come and gone without Extron's once expected presence, but they've still been at least somewhat on our collective radar as one of the major players in the industry. In lieu of making trade show appearances, they've focused their outreach efforts on creating a network of local demonstration and training facilities. Today was my first visit to the facility here in New York. It's not as much fun as flying out to Anaheim, and they don't have anything as impressive here as the labor of love that is the Saloon (a great live-performance space showcasing some of their products, as well as local Country Western musicians), but it's a heck of a lot more convenient. So what did I find there? Read on!

This is what you get when you take an application diagram
and bring it to life.

The demo room was clean and modern, with quite a few of Extron's product lineup on display. They had, amongst other things, a live demo of the XTP digital matrix system. XTP, of course, is Extron's digital video matrix. It's their answer to Crestron Digital Media, AMX Enova, Purelink PM, and about a dozen other similar products. The demo was very nicely presented on a wall printed with the  system diagram, including cutouts for some of the live and running system elements.

Extron announced that, as of tomorrow, pricing will be available through their online "configurator" utility for XTP systems. This, of course ,is a big step towards being able to evaluate XTP against other solutions.

How does it fare?



It's largely quite familiar to anyone who's used a digital media switch in the past few years. Input blades fit into a 16x16 or 32x32 card frame, accepting HDMI, 'XTP', and DVI inputs. Outputs are XTP or HDMI only.
At 5RU for a 16x16 and 10 for a 32x32 it falls between the AMX Enova DGX (4 and 6RU, respectively) and Crestron DM (7 RU for a 16x16, 14RU for a 32x32). Unlike the AMX product, there's no onboard control processor. Unlike Crestron, there's no USB transport. There is, as of yet, no 8x8 or 64x64 option.

 Like the AMX Enova DGX, it will power a number of cards through the frame with no additional hardware. Like Crestron Digital Media, it offers full audio breakaway. Unlike the above solutions, it is not interoperable with other HDBaseT solutions. This is starting to become a concern as display manufacturers are adding native HDBaseT inputs. Extron claims a high level of support (to the point at which they will commission each XTP system without charge to the integrator). They also claim a very high level of testing, and that no parts of the system will be delivered that aren't thoroughly checked out and guaranteed to work with the widest possible variation of endpoints. The demo system we saw worked well enough, but switching speeds were inconsistent, sometimes taking two seconds or longer. Other solutions, at present, appear to be faster. On the roadmap are fiber input and output cards, possibly SDI input cards, and decora-style transmitters.  There also might be larger switchers.

What it appears that there will not be is an "all-in-one" system similar to the Crestron DMPS or AMX Enova DVX. Instead, Extron's lower-cost all-in-one IN- series devices will continue to use the lower cost DTP extension system, leaving the HDBaseT compliant XTP for the larger matrices. This likely means that the IN systems will never be interoperable with native HDBaseT inputs on displays or with third-party extenders. It's their tradeoff for lower cost.

The other interesting topic of discussion, and something legitimately new to me, is the announcement that their VN-matrix 250 streaming appliance (using the proprietary Pure3 Codec) is HDCP compatible. When I asked what that means, I was told that it encrypts a stream which can be decoded by VN decoders only. It will NOT be decoded by the  VNR recorder, and the receive side will give a green screen if connected to a non-HDCP compliant display. THis is the first HDCP-enabled streaming solution I've seen, and it's definitely nice to have as an option.

The tour wouldn't be complete without a moment in their classroom proper. It sports a 4x2 LCD video wall driven, of course, by Extron's Quantum Elite video wall processor. They did a nice job of showing off the processor's capabilities, including upscaling images to the entire wall, downscaling to display literally over a hundred windows, and the addition of text overlays and time stamps.

There was time for a brief discussion of all things Extron, including their audio products. One thing which may be in the roadmap is Dante support for their XPA series of amps. XPA is one of the Extron lines with which I'm quite pleased; they're small (1RU or less), energy-efficient, dissipate heat out the sides so they can be stacked, and have no fans (and, therefore, no fan noise). The DMP audio processors are simple, fixed-architecture audio processors better suited for simple systems than the larger, more complex and more demanding systems for which one would want an open-architecture system.

All things considered, it was nice having a visit with Extron and nice getting the chance to again see in person their commitment to professionalism and customer service. Will this be enough for them to catch up in the digital video switching arena? They clearly aren't there yet, but I remain open to being convinced as they roll out more products and refine the ones already there. Time will tell.

Read More

Infocomm 2013 - A miscellany of the good and bad

In this last of three posts recapping Infocomm 2013, I'll give some rants and raves about things I saw and experienced at the show. As always, my opinions are my own and don't reflect those of my employers, my co-workers, the stranger in the airplane seat next to mine, or even my pet cats. Although I think the cats would agree...

So what am I looking for in a tradeshow booth? I have a few tips - and rants - in no particular order. Read on..

THIS is how you show a product

Place your product facing the right way
By this I mean that I want to see the back of it. The back shows me what kind of connectors you use, how they are laid out, if there's room for easy wire management, and how many inputs and outputs of varying types there are. The front of it, in most AV components, shows that you have a pretty faceplate. If there are front panel controls or an LCD display, then exhibit two of it, one pointing each way. Better yet, take the cover off so I can see the innards. I like innards.

Know Who You Are, Know the Market
This should go without saying, but if you're exhibiting at a trade show you need to understand the market, understand how your product fits into the market, and know what you don't know. When I asked the folk at Comnet why I should consider their video-over-ethernet encoders over similar offerings from SVSI, they could tell me their advantages (lower bandwidth requirements, lower cost) and disadvantages (a proprietary variant of JPEG2000 which is lossy). Likewise,  the good folks at Xilic were able to tell me that their Jupiter line of audio DSPs were low cost, high audio-quality, and easier but less flexibly configured than others.
Contrast that with someone demoing an HDMI extender which the OSD said was running at 1080p/24 FPS. I asked if this was a function of the source or if it could handle 1080p/60, and got a deer-in-the-headlight look before the rep asked "uh... you mean 60... gigahertz?" If you want me to walk away from you, that's a good start. I don't expect everyone manning a booth to be an engineer, but knowing the very basics of what you're displaying is kind of a nice thing.

Also, don't bash your competition and please don't direct me to the results of comparison studies, shoot-outs,  or comparative lab tests that you did yourself. I not only won't believe you, but I'll take it as a sign that you lack the confidence in your own product to tell me how it stands on its own merits.

Beware Mixed messages
I only found one group guilty as this one and it's really a quibble - the folk at Projector Lamp Services. They recycle lamps, which saves money and is more environmentally friendly. So what does a company committed to the environment to the point of using the recycle logo symbol as part of their recycle logo give out at their booth? Bottled water.When confronted with the fact that bottled water is terrible for the the environment they said that they knew but gave in to the temptation to give out something. I grabbed a bottle to rehydrate on the show floor. It tasted of refreshment and irony.

Matrix switchers. With a
side-order of boobs.

Don't be sexist. Be open to concerns.
This should be obvious, but it's not.The guilty party here was Key Digital who were running a loop of what appeared to be a Sports Illustrated swimsuit photoshoot on giant displays atop their booth. I asked the person manning said booth (whose name badge identified him as a national VP of sales or similar) if he thought this was appropriate and got a smirking "I like it" as an answer. I'll start off by saying that if we want what is currently a male-dominated industry to gain some level of gender balance we really need to not use women as eye-candy. The shame of it is that the smirking, frat-boy response cost them the chance to tell me about their product. It's a crowded market for video transport and routing, and there are plenty of vendors who did try to set themselves apart from the crowd. Some of us in this industry - as is the case everywhere else - need to grow up.

For a better take on how to handle potential off-messages, I brought a concern to who my possibly faulty memory tells me was Jan Sandri of FSR at the Women in AV reception. They generously invited a local charity to their event and solicited donations so as to leave Orlando a little better off than before we arrived. My concern is that the charity of their choice - The Salvation Army - has a poor track record as of late for statements about the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered population. Jan took my concern seriously, explained her reason for choosing the SA (that they spend a very large percentage of their money on actual operations as opposed to overhead) and assured me that WAVE in general and she in particular did not want to be exclusionary. The WAVE reception, as an aside, was a terrific event about which I probably should write more. Let it suffice to say that I left feeling good about both the cause and those working to promote it.

Be Interactive. Be fun
I'll close on a lighter note about how some manufacturers managed to bring an element of interactivity and fun to their booths. I already talked about the pure whimsy from vendors like Vaddio and Gator earlier. This time I'm talking about those who showcased their product in a way we can remember. One favorite was Beam telepresence robots, who had about a half-dozen milling around their part of the show floor. Real people from the company were using them to chat with eachother (robot to robot) and with guests. Better yet, they had a console set up where you could drive one yourself around the office where there remote personnel were. So, I could drive a robot to talk to someone driving a robot which I could then stand up and chat with. Pretty cool.

If you smelled burning electronics, you might have been near the SurgeX booth where they took the very obvious strategy of blowing things up.  It made a point not only about the quality of their protection, but also the durability of their product. They claim that the unit protecting the AMX panel (shown here) was a veteran of several Infocomms, where it had spent hours being "zapped" several times per minute. Still no smoke from the panel, even if stuff next to it got exploded.

And with that, I'll end the recap of Infocomm 2013. It was a great week for meeting people, learning about technology, and taking a look forward at where the industry is heading. Thanks for reading, and stay tuned for more.

Read More

Infocomm 2013 - Part the Second. Death of the AV System?

Part two of my Infocomm recap, in which I'll talk about the bigger stories. I managed to learn about several things, including classes on various AV networking protocols (present and future) and mass-notification systems and some private chats about large-venue speakers, MS Lync integration, and personal branding. The show floor is an impressive array of glittering toys,  but the level of human talent at the show is even more impressive. I hope that the rest of the attendees got to meet as many brilliant people as I did. Now, on to a few things that caught my attention in a big-story way.

I know that the "Death of the AV System" is a provocative title, and I don't really expect our business to completely vanish anytime soon. What I do see changing is the existence of an AV system as an entity separate from the larger information technology infrastructure. One word I kept hearing is "convergence". We're quickly approaching a point at which room systems, unified communications, paging, emergency notification, and the larger world of IT are no longer separated by bright lines. Further, there is increasing availability of software-based solutions to needs formerly fulfilled by dedicated appliances. What did I see that fit this mold?

Barco AV over IP Demo

One exciting group to visit was the AVNu alliance pavillion. They're pushing hard for the adoption of the AVB standard, and by now have a fairly impressive array of manufacturers involved, including Biamp, Meyer Sound, Renkhus-Heinz, Yamaha, and Barco. Barco was especially interesting in that they had a demo of video transport over an AVB network. The unit they were showing is only a trade-show demo, but a brief chat with them was enough to whet my appetite for further news. For those few of you not keeping up, most AVB solutions rely on the IEEE 1722 protocol for transport, which is a level 2  protocol inoperable without an AVB-compliant switch. Barco's unit uses a similar level three protocol which will send real-time uncompressed video over any standard switch (with, I assume, the same caveats the folks at Audinate gave about Dante; it needs sufficient bandwidth, needs certain QoS features, etc). Add to this less bandwidth-intensive solutions like SVSI's JPEG2000 encrypted video and another vendor with even lower bandwidth proprietary JPEG2000 variant and there are suddenly a suite of choices for what looks like full-matrix switching without an actual matrix switcher!

This is part of what I mean about the death of the AV system. One of my colleagues went so far to say that I was wrong to frame it as a virtualized matrix switch; that the better way to look at it is the transformation of sources, displays,  microphones, and speakers from elements of standalone systems to a suite of tools usable by software running on the PC, which is already moving into a central position in the AV system. It means that the traditional topology of a system (inputs --> Matrix switch --> outputs) might be ready to fade away.

In a similar vein on the unified communications front was one of the new exhibitors about whom I'd heard some pre-show buzz: the forgettably-named but memorably-trousered industry veterans at Pexip. Their founding members were a good part of the brainpower behind former videoconference giant Tandberg, and they're back with a completely software based approach to conferencing. Pexip's virtual MCU can live on any standard server, can easily be scaled up or down in number of licenses, and allows impressively high-quality conferencing among multiple platforms. Traditional hardware-based endpoints, software clients, an even SIP-based audio calls fit together seamlessly. Those without either a hard or soft endpoint can connect through WebRTC, an HTML5 browser-based Codec which doesn't require downloads, plug-ins, or any other special effort to set up.  Bob Romano of VCA has a three-part interview with them in which they discuss their origins, the software-MCU concept, and how their approach answers concerns regarding bandwidth and security. They had a nice demo in which they showed both interoperability and how the system seamlessly handles network disruptions, losing only those callers  Pexip is impressive, but are far from alone. Vidyo and newcomer Starleaf offer cloud-based MCUs, as does the venerable Polycom.  Lifesize gives you the option of virtualizing their MCU. These approaches and the various products involved all have enough pluses and minuses that a substantive post can be written about just those.  For the nonce, let is suffice to say that it's an interesting time in which the hardware and software can be more easily separated than ever before.

What else can be virtualized? How about a control system? Relative newcomers HRS Control  have an architecture which fits on a Windows or Linux server. Is this going to be a Crestron or AMX-killer? Doubtful; I've not seen it up close yet, but it doesn't look as if it has the breadth of support and level of sophistication that the best commercial control systems currently have. Could this mean, within the next years, that control companies might move to software the way VTC companies have? Time shall tell.

What about Crestron and AMX? Crestron made a strong move to embrace chance with the introduction of its Airmedia video-over-wifi device as well as a Lync Room System (RL). Airmedia is a nice product in that it's simple and, at an MSRP of $1600, relatively inexpensive. This is one place where I break with Gary Kayye who included the Wow Vision Collab8 on his top-ten tour. I agree with Gary that the Collab8 is an impressive piece of hardware with more capability than the Crestron device, but it also sports a $5000+ price tag. Gary's theme was collaboration - the ability to bring people together through technology. I am looking more at convergence - the melding of AV systems and the PC-based office infrastructure. From that point of view, I find it hard to justify such a high-cost appliance with a single use profile. These items are competing not only with Barco clickshare, but also with a standard room-PC running a WebEx session. Smaller might be better. The Room Lync system didn't seem interesting at first blush; Microsoft has put enough restrictions on these that it's hard for vendors to offer much differentiation. Crestron is offering a mindful solution in that they've taken steps to address issues with handling logins and with the ability to tie into a Crestron infrastructure or not. Years ago, Crestron was in the forefront of the move to digital video transport. I'm not sure where this year's offerings will take them, but they clearly are attempting to continue to look forward.

AMX took a different tack; rather than embrace the PC in a room environment, they're looking to replace it with their Enzo device. This is a small network device which can handle cloud access, integrate with existing dropbox accounts, run some applications, and provide basic room control. It's a very different approach to Crestron's, and one which offers an ease-of-use and integration which is arguable higher than that of a PC-based system. I'm not sure that it is as forward-looking, however. The future looks like it will embrace the PC, not replace it. Once again, time shall tell.

Read More

Infocom 2013 Recap - Part the First. Some Whimsy

This year's Infocomm is now officially behind us and, weather permitting, this pixel-and-ink-stained wretch is heading home. In addition to the technology, there were plenty of social moments, parties, and chances to meet all of the "AV Tweeps" (the twitterati of the AV industry) as well as all of the people I know only from LinkedIn, Google+, or even just a voice on the phone from whom I'd requested a quote or asked a technical question. There was magic, there was music, classes, speaker demos, parties, wildlife, nightlife, and some technology. This post will be a light-hearted one, of things I found fun and nifty. Part two will be more of my big picture - the stories I think could be important. I'll round things off with social observations, a shout-out to the Women in AV, and perhaps a rant or two.

This isn't about things which are groundbreaking, but about what's interesting. After day 1, I ran into one of my fellow New York based consultants in a fly-a-thousand-miles-to-have-dinner-with-the-guy-from-across-the-street moments (this is a thing. trust me). He said that thus far he'd seen lots of incremental improvements, and I find that hard to argue on a broad scale. HDBaseT isn't a new story. Dante isn't a new story. There are lots of stories that aren't new.

I unplugged their TV so I could take
a snapshot. Look ma, no electrician!

One of my favorite "me too" products was Altinex's HDMI over Cat5 Tx/Rx pair. What made this one special? It doesn't meet the HDBaseT standard - it exceeds it in a rather surprising way. HDBaseT specifies the option of up to 100W of DC power with the idea that, if anyone makes a display with the right inputs and enough efficiency - one could run not only control, audio, and video but also power over a single cable. Altinex isn't waiting for the display manufacturers. They not only send 150W (this is where the exceed the spec to the point that they're no longer HDBaseT compliant or interoperable), but they include an AC outlet right on top of the receiver.  This lets you mount a flat-panel anyplace you can get low voltage cable without having to hire an electrician. Groundbreaking? No. A highly nifty refinement of existing technology which fills a need? Absolutely.




This is a product I've seen before - the Perfect Path locking HDMI cable from Liberty. It has little shark-fins that grab onto the inside of the female connector to hold it in place, and is quite will-made with little need for strain relief. How well-made? Yes, that TV is actually hanging by the cable, with nothing at all else holding it up.

And to think that most HDMI cables fall out
if you look at them funny

There was also plenty of whimsy in booth design and presentation; I''ll close with my favorites. The literal carnival atmosphere at Vaddio, the Gator case gator, and, the fashion-statement of the show, #PexipPants.I was especially excited about Pexip, as there was lots of pre-show buzz about them to which they lived up. More on them and perhaps Vaddio next post. See you then!

I didn't get to play skeeball, but did treat myself to
some popcorn!

Me and the gator. It was squirmy for me!

Pexip Pants! I LOVE it. Also some brilliant tech.
We'll talk about them next post!

Read More

Infocomm 2013 - For What I'll Be Looking

This will be the last AV post before next week's Infocomm trade show, and a chance to look forward to what promises to be an interesting few days. Plans have been made, including social plans, booth-visits, and the always-important moment to listen to everyone's favorite professional AV rock band. I even found a ringer to take my place in the corporate 5K run I signed up for before realizing that it was the same week as Infocomm. If there's any interest I might live-blog a bit during the show, and will certainly send updates. Looking forward, I've seen a quite a few people post suggestions and previews - many of which are quite sensible. Following are my own thoughts about what I hope to get from the event. If our paths cross, feel free to grab me for a quick "hello".

Also, take a few moments to listen to what some others are saying about the upcoming event and the state of our industry. Christopher Neto had a great piece on what he sees as game changers at Infocomm 2013. I also noticed an intriguing article by David Danto (whom I've crossed paths with a time or two a couple jobs ago) on disruptions in the videoconference world. Am I in one hundred percent agreement with either of them? Not at all, but then again, I'm not usually in one-hundred percent agreement with myself, much less anyone else - no matter their experience in the industry. Below are some of my thoughts.

Networking.
As I said in my earlier post on AV training, I see network integration as one of the big directions in which our industry is moving. I'm quite interested to see where various manufacturers take this, including the still-fledgling AVB standard and its older cousin Dante (and yes, they appear to be cousins, if not actual siblings).  Will one of these standards eventually be able to challenge HDBaseT as the dominant form of video transport, and if so what would that mean for the topology of AV networks and systems? Will centralized server-type DSPs like those from Biamp or QSC emerge as the dominant form-factor over standalone units like those from Symmetrix or Peavey? We might be at the cusp of a fundamental shift in how our industry operates. In fact, I'd argue that we're on the cusp of many such shifts.

The Other Kind of Networking
The great thing about Infocomm is that it seems that everyone is going to be there. Consultants, manufacturers, reps, contractors, and even end-users will all be in the same big tent learning about the same technology. In addition to the sheer pleasure of putting faces to all the names (or bodies to the headshots on various LinkedIn profiles) I've interactive with over the years, knowing people just makes working in this business easier. There are so many times when the solution to a problem lies not in knowing the technical answer, but in knowing whom to ask.
Don't get me wrong on this; if you make connections purely for the professional value you're not only doing it wrong but are quite possibly a sociopath (I should let my live-in clinical psychologist make that determination). If you listen to people and just take   moment to get to know them you'll have the pleasure of more connections and, as a side bonus,  more resources on which to call when you're stuck.

The Missing Lync
OK, Lync isn't quite missing - but it can be a challenging kind of technology to tie into large-scale integrated systems. It's easier than it's been before - thanks in part to products like Vaddio's EasyUSB line (if you're not aware of them, they're definitely a manufacturer to check out. They're also planning on unveiling some new products with a very high level of niftiness for those who work in the small meeting room/classroom kinds of spaces) - to tie them to small to mid-sized systems, but there still are advantages to appliance-based (as opposed to PC-based) conference systems; appliances are more easily controlled, more easily managed, and end up giving a more seamless user experience. I know at least two manufacturers working on Lync-compatible appliances, including Crestron's long-awaited RL. I'm not sure that I'm quite as high on this as Neto is, but it certainly has the possibility to become an important part of the unified communications ecosystem.

Software. The PC-Centered AV System
This is another part of our big paradigm change, and a new answer to a big question: what is at the heart of a commercial AV system? At one point not too long ago, it was a matrix switch and DVD/VHS decks, with increasing need for laptop interfaces. Now, with so many software solutions for conferencing, for collaboration, and for mobile device integration there's a definite move for the PC to move towards the center of a system, sometimes replacing numerous peripherals. The videoconference Codec? Software on your PC. Blu-ray or other media player? Built into the PC. Screen-scrape from your mobile device? A mobile app and - you got it - software on your PC. That annotative whiteboard? A touch-enabled monitor and a PC. Yes, one gives up some measure of capability and some measure of simplicity. I'd certainly not try to design a large, complicated system around a PC, but those small meeting room and classroom systems of which we've all seen scores? Many of those can easily become software-based solutions with little to no loss of functionality.

This ties in with what Danto said about disruption in videoconferencing; I think that the dedicated appliance will still be with us, but that there's more

Surprises (and why I'm OK with Extron not exhibiting)
There are certainly big, well-known companies worth visiting, especially for those who've not had a chance to see their new offerings in person. I'm looking forward to brief visits with AMX, Crestron, QSC, Vaddio, and others. That said, these are companies very much on my radar whom I follow reasonably well. I've seen Crestron's three-series stuff, seen Vaddio at the Sapphire Marketting Roadshow, and had AMX and QSC around for recent visits. This is why it doesn't bother me that much for Extron to not be exhibiting; I don't need a tradeshow to know what the big players are doing.

What I more want is a nice surprise; something I'd not thought of from someone I'd not thought to find it. In other words, if I knew what I was looking for, I'd not have to be there looking.

For anyone interested in meeting your favorite pixel-ink-stained wretch in person, I'll be arriving early Tuesday for some of Audinate's network seminars. I'll be on and off the floor most of the remaining days, with various social engagements including the WAVE reception on Wednesday evening (WAVE is one of those organizations which I feel deserve all of the support and attention we get) and the Drunk Unkles performance Thursday evening. I'll also try to post news and updates as I see things which delight, surprise, or intrigue me.

Final note for any of you writers or readers out there: there'll be more writing when I get back! Carrie K Sorensen is leading another blog-hop collaborative story. Read the first part here, and stay tuned for more.

Read More

Did you hear what's up? A morning with a ceiling mic

I remember my first ceiling speaker experience. I was the project manager on a simple bid-build job for a local presentation space. In addition to the usual VGA, composite video, and DVD/VHS combo deck (this was quite some years ago), the client wanted some way to record local meetings. No video conferencing, no audio conferencing, portable furniture to be plugged in via floor-boxes. With no good options for placement of microphones and lacking the budget for wireless boundary mics, the consultant decided to take a pair of omnidirectional boundary microphones and screw them to the ceiling. It worked pretty much as you'd expect; Recordings in this room were absolutely perfect if your goal was to replicate the feeling of talking to someone from across the platform at a medium-busy railway station. If you wanted the actual content to be louder than the HVAC noise you were pretty much out of luck.

There are, of course, better solutions, but the end result always seems the same; the ceiling is not the optimal place to locate microphones. They're far from the talker. They're close to all kinds of ceiling noise. The best results one could hope for are "barely adequate". So it was with hope but some degree of sketicism that I took part in a test of Clear One's new digital beam-forming ceiling mic array.

It's neither a bird nor a plane, but a ceiling mic array.

Physically, it's a nice looking piece of hardware. It's thirty inches long, five and three-quarters wide, by only one inch deep. On the bottom (if ceiling-mounted) are cutouts for the individual mic elements and two LED/touch buttons, one of which has the Clear One 'C' log discretely wrapped around it. It connects to a Clear One Converge DSP (and only a Clear One Converge - more on this later) and power-injector through two Cat5-type cables which can be neatly managed through the hollow rectangular support pole. It also comes with a tile-bridge to easily mount to a standard two-foot drop-ceiling. It's certainly a nice physical package.

The big question, of course, is what it sounds like. We set one up in the center of a fifteen by thirty foot room and made calls from various positions. Sitting at a table. Standing next to the table. Walking around the room. Standing in the corner. We turned on a projector about five feet away from it on the ceiling. Then we did a quick-and-dirty A/B test with some wireless boundary mics (from the good folks at Revolabs). Remember that bit of skepticism I mentioned? It turned out to be completely unwarranted. In as unscientific a test as could possibly be devised in which we were absurdly unfair to the hardware under test (passing it through an extra DSP to avoid having to reconfigure an existing system) it performed splendidly. Intelligent tracking software built into the mic follows the sound of voices, giving a clear and even signal as one of us walked in a circle around the room. Audio was clear from all four corners of the room. Clear One's noise cancellation dealt nicely with the projector noise, although at the expense of slight artifacts perceived by those of us with the most sensitive ears for such things.

Those LEDs light blue when the mic is live, red for muted, off for off (and can be turned off entirely via software). Sadly, there's no ability to actually direct the beams although one can switch them on or off. Switching off a beam pretty effectively would cut off audio to half of the room, making the mic somewhat more directional. Configuration is relatively simple through Clear One's Converge Console software.

There are two issues I saw with this mic array; first is that it connects to the Clear One DSP through a proprietary expansion bus. The ability to daisy-chain three of them together is nice, as is the cleanliness of the installation. It's an additional nice touch that even if you inadvertently switch the power and link wires (we tried) you'll not let any of the magic smoke out of the unit; it'll just  hang there until you get the wiring right. The problem is that it locks you into one DSP option, which wouldn't be my preferred option for all applications.

The other concern is that it isn't an inexpensive option. MSRP is close to $4000, and the DSP will be another four. You could get eight nice boundary mics for half of that, assuming you have anywhere to put them. So it's not the budget choice, but is one of the best I've seen thus far. If anyone's interested, perhaps some more on this after some more experimentation.

Read More

Roadshow, roadshow

Last week and this two technology reps hit New York with their roadshows; Sapphire Marketting last week and SYMCO this. I managed time for a very quick visit to each, and saw a handful of interesting things.
For those who don't know the  nice folk at Sapphire, they're reps for several major tech manufacturers, including Crestron, Vaddio, Tripplite, Delta (the displays, not the faucets) and others. Symco reps Savant Systems, Barco, SVSI, Biamp, and different others.  

With the big Infocomm tradeshow just around the corner this is a tiny bit of an off time to be checking out new products. There was a handful of hardware I'd not  seen in person as of yet, including the EasyUSB line from Vaddio (more on this later), but there wasn't a wow, gee-whiz, crazy innovation that would knock your socks off - unless, of course, your socks are knocked off by seeing one of Sapphire's familiar faces don a motorcycle helmet and do some variant of the Harlem Shake. If that's the case, I suggest you invest in some sock-garters. To the best of my knowledge, nobody at Symco did the Harlem Shake. Whether that's a point in favor of Sapphire or a point for Symco is, I suppose, a question for the reader.

I'd caught demos of Cybertouch and Delta Displays recently (see earlier post), so I didn't dwell on those at the Sapphire event. It was a treat to see Vaddio in person, especially with some of their new products destined for use in a current project of mine. They have some very nice quality high-definition pan-tilt-zoom cameras and digital mic arrays in their "EasyUSB" line as well as an audio/video to USB (or H.264) encoder called the AVBridge. Why would you want to do such a thing? So you could use a software-based conference solution (Lync, Jabber, etc) or recording solution in a conference room. It's not always the best solution, but it can be a very attractive option for organizations with existing unified communications infrastructure to leverage. More on that in a later post. The products, of course, have the quality I expect from Vaddio.

Next door to Vaddio was MondoPad. Their product is a flat-panel display with integrated camera, microphone, speakers, and PC with both interactive whiteboarding and collaborative software. There were smartphone apps and videoconferencing (SIP and h.323). When I asked about a better camera for a larger room (it's a 55" display; you're not necessarily going to be right on top of it) the rep nodded next door at Vadio.

Coincidentally, Symco also had an all-in-one PC/multitouch flatpanel/VTC endpoint from Clary.icon. Like MondoPad, the Clari.icon product had an integrated PC, high-definition camera, mic, speakers, interactive whiteboard software, etc. Where MondoPad has a slight edge is with the inclusion of a second WiFi radio. Why two? One points at the network for internet access and videoconferencing while the other can be used with smartphone screen capture and control apps. A cranky wifi at the event space hampered the demo of Clary.icon's remote control app with considerable lag. While this  clearly appeared to be a network issue rather than a problem inherent in the device it did highlight what a thoughtful design choice the second WiFi radio is.

Other products over the two days? I'll confess to not stopping by Crestron as I'm fairly up-to-date with their offerings, having gone so far as to specify the new 64x64 DM switch. They also offered a brief introductory class to the "smart objects" in their newly updated programming environment (relabeled from Core3 to alleviate confusion with their 3 series processors).  There were also some very nice architectural items at Sapphire, including this groovy LCD lift which would be a great fit for a conference table in a high-end boardroom. Someone else had already articulated my wish before I got there: an option for an HDBaseT LCD taking its power along with video and control over the single Cat5. Not today, but perhaps someday soon.

Again at the Symco side I got my first in-person look at Savant Systems' switching solutions. I'd already been introduced to their control options which use an Apple Mac Mini as a host and iOS devices as control interfaces. It's a very nice thought, but for many applications the absence of support for non-Apple platforms (so far!) is a bit of a deal-breaker. A 12x12 switcher fits into a 3RU box (compare 4RU for an AMX Enova 8x8 or 16x16, 4 for a Crestron 8x8, and 7 for a Crestron 16x16). They were showing off local HDMI inputs and outputs along with a tiling card that switched sources in up to five tiles (in what seemed to be fixed configurations). The switching was very slow, but that might have been a matter of the physical configuration; they'd taken the output of the tile processor to the display rather than use it as another switcher input and send a "regular" output to the display. This means that, in addition to negotiating EDID and the HDCP and the like, the tiling processor might have had to recalculate with each switch. I'd like to see the unit in action before judging any farther (and they tell me that it's much, much faster if configured correctly). It's clear that Savant wants to compete in the same space as Crestron and AMX.

There is, of course, more to discuss about some of these. Look for more details on Vaddio, on Savant, on SVSI (not mentioned in this post).

Read More

About that Crestron/Extron/AMX "Shootout" video

For those not following the commercial AV field, this happened last week. Crestron released two videos on their site, comparing their Digital Media switching system to "similar" (more on this point later) offerings from rivals AMX and Extron. This first came to my attention not through Ravepub's write-up on it or even from Crestron, but in an email blast from Extron accusing their competitors of chicanery in rigging the test. Are their accusations true? I'm not sure, but don't know if it really matters.  From where the industry stands now, Extron is clearly a bit behind AMX and Crestron in availability of products. Crestron and AMX are very close to each-other, with each leading in some areas. Would I be interested in a third-party neutral "shootout" between the three (and perhaps others)? Perhaps, although switching speed and performance are not the only metrics, and there are other intriguing options on the way for some spaces.

Form Factors, Specifications, and More
Before we discuss tje performance issues, we need to look at what each side is actually offering. After all, a high level of performance is a bit of a moot point if a device lacks the capability for which you're looking. The Crestron shootout compared Extron's DXP with a Crestron DMPS and AMX Enova. It's a fair comparison on the Crestron/AMX side; each is an "all-in-one" unit comprised of a digital video switcher, audio mixer, and control system, each has HDBaseT (Crestron's DM 8G+ and AMX's DXLink) inputs and outputs, local HDMI inputs and outputs, and a variety of analog video inputs.

The Extron device, on the other hand, is a simple HDMI matrix. It lacks the audio breakaway, integrated control processor, and integrated amplifier of the other products. Reviewing the devices for actual design into a system, I'd completely ignore Extron on this one. They have their places, but this sadly isn't one of them.

So far as Crestron and AMX are concerned, in form-factor and capabilities it's very close. AMX has an edge in that they have an onboard scaler for each local output as well as scalers integrated into all of their DXLink receivers. Crestron has a scaling receiver option, but you'd need to add an external scaler if you want to scale your local output. Crestron does have an option with built-in acoustic echo cancellation (AEC) for conferencing applications. I've not had the opportunity to test this, but it's an intriguing option for small conference rooms and might sometimes save the need for a full DSP.

AMX also claims one more advantage; energy use. The DGX and DVX are presented as being more energy  efficient than competitors. They have their own comparison tool, the DVX Energy Calculator which compares a DVX to a conventional system and a "non-AMX Presentation Switcher". It's pretty much an open secret that the non-AMX PS is a Crestron DMPS. AMX claims about a 4:1 power savings in active mode and over 10:1 in standby mode - a big issue considering that these units will usually be always on. (Why are they always on? Because the control processor is built in. If you power it down, there's no way for the system to power itself back up!) With today's increased emphasis on sustainable technology this should be an issue, the lack of an Energy Star of similar certification or the ability to earn LEED points makes it a harder case to make, even though it is a real advantage.

A test set-up at Crestron's training facility

Performance aside, which of these would I suggest? It depends. In a control-system-agnostic environment, Crestron has an edge on cost, AMX on onboard scaling, Crestron with AEC (if needed), AMX in energy savings. The latter pushes the needle towards AMX for me, but not so dramatically that I'd not consider Crestron a very viable alternative.

About those Videos
I'm not getting into Extron's accusations of outright cheating; I'm not a forensic video analyst, I am disinterested in engaging in a frame-by-frame analysis, and as I said, it's an apples to oranges comparison.

The innards of an AMX Enova DVX

What did interest me is is that the set-ups for the Extron and AMX comparisons are different; for one, they added extra hardware (an HD Scaler) in the latter, while giving the option of not scaling as a benefit. This strikes me as dishonest in the least. The second is that they used two outputs of their test generator to feed both units. I have no idea how EDID and HDCP keys are handled by this sort of unit; it's quite possible that it needs to negotiate both keys and get a "best common" in order to sync. Interestingly, the only times Crestron appeared faster was when showing the test bars - a source shared between the two systems. I'd be very interested in seeing the same demonstration with truly separate sources.

Conclusions?
I don't have one as of yet. We have, at the very least, two great products from two great companies. Performance between Crestron DM and AMX Enova is close enough that "one switches faster" is most likely not going to be the deciding factor, but simply one factor amongst many. The videos should be taken as what they are: marketing. Would there be value in an independent "shootout"? Perhaps, but as stated before, that ignores real difference in form, capabilities, power consumption, and other factors. Going farther, in a larger install these systems would be part of a larger infrastructure, including control programming, remote asset management, and other factors.

Is it ironic that the discussion of Extron's video lead to a discussion of everyone but Extron?

Read More

Certifiable? Certified!

One valuable service provided by Infocomm, the trade organization for the audiovisual industry, is a system of certifications for audiovisual professionals. Last week I passed a career milestone in earning my CTS-D (Certified Technical Specialist - Designer) certification. So what are these certifications, why do they matter and, most importantly, what do I do next?


Infocomm has two levels of certification. There's the basic CTS (certified technical specialist) and the two advanced ones for the installer (CTS-I) and designer (CTS-D) tracks. While there are some very talented people in the industry who remain uncertified and, truth be told, some decidedly less talented people with certifications, there is value in a set of standards for what an AV professional should know. Carrying a certification says that an individual took the time to gain certain core knowledge, spent the effort being tested on it, and made a commitment to keep their certification current through continuing education (Infocomm requires a number of "renewal units" to maintain their various certifications). It says that an organization has made an effort to train their workforce and make sure that training is recognized.  I've been lucky to work  for companies which put a high value on training and education, so have been able not only to acquire certifications but to maintain them through continuing education. For the uninitiated, what are the AV certifications? And where do I go from here now that I've climbed to the top of the AV certification ladder (OK, it was only two rungs. The AV Certification stepladder).

The CTS is a basic, entry-level certification. I've explained it as knowing how to speak the language of AV. A holder of a CTS should (amongst other things), know the difference between balanced and unbalanced audio, different kinds of video transport (composite, component, DVI, Displayport, etc), and the names and standard pin-outs of common connectors used in the AV industry. This is a great introduction to the world of AV, and denotes enough knowledge to be a competent helper-technician  or draftsperson at an AV firm (assuming some knowledge of drafting). A CTS by itself doesn't measure enough capability to run a jobsite as a lead technician, but does indicate that if someone asks you to terminate a mic cable you'd not have to ask what kind of wire (single pair 24 AWG), what kind of connector (XLR), and which pins go where (2 is plus, 3 is minus, 1 is shield).

At the next level - the top of the stepladder - are two choices. The Installer track is just what it sounds like - everything you need to be a lead tech. From cable terminations (including hands-on testing) to rack building to final testing and commissioning of a lead system. I've known several installers with CTS-I certifications. Those who've put in the effort to get that far are the kinds of technicians who can run a job site themselves. This isn't a certification I'd likely ever achieve; I've done my share of installation, testing, and commissioning, but it's never been my primary role and that's not likely to change. Now that I'm on the consulting side of the industry I'm even less likely to be "hands on" to the point where the installer certification is appropriate.

This brings us to the -D which I just earned. As you'd expect, the skillset leans towards design. There are things like projector brightness calculations, acceptable image size for different viewing tasks, lens throw calculations, amplifier power, and the dread PAG/NAG equations (the last of which, to be fair, the test actually gives you in a little pop-up window. There's a minimum of formula memorization required). There are also quite a few questions - enough that you'd not pass the test without them - on process. What goes into a program report. When submittals are sent and who has to approve them. The relationship between specifications and drawings. Overall workflow on a construction project. Some of this is as much project management as it is AV design, but that's OK. An AV Designer who doesn't know how or to whom to communicate plans for an AV system can't really be successful. We work with technology but, as is the case with all things, we ultimately have to work with people.

So now that I've achieved a career milestone, the obvious question is "what next"? There are, of course, plenty of answers to that question. I could follow up with my study of project management principles on the way to a PMP (Project Management Professional) from the Project Management Institute. The last time I was looking into project management study was several years ago when I didn't have the required amount of experience to qualify for the higher certification. Now I do, and a refresher on those skills is always valuable. I'll talk more about project management, perhaps, in a later post. This won't be my next stop, but is on the list. What is the next stop? One trend in AV is a blurring of lines between AV systems and network-based unified communications - especially in the corporate realm. This sometimes blurs the line between the AV and IT disciplines and many AV professionals - myself included - lack the depth of knowledge to intelligently weigh the benefits, drawbacks, and IT requirements for various communications systems which would be integrated with an AV project. With AV and IT converging, it's a good time for us all to learn at least a bit about eachother's space.



So, I'm now filling my head with things like the OSI model, network routing, private vs. public IP addresses, CISCO switch commands, and the like. It's genuinely fascinating to better see how data gets to where it's going once it leaves through that RJ45 jack in the back of your PC, and I'm looking forward to this part of the journey. There will, perhaps, be more of it in this space later. In any event, the technology field is much like the rest of life in that there's always something new to learn.

Thanks for sharing the journey with me.

Read More

AV Systems, Integration Angst, and what I did last Thursday

UCLA-based Greg Brown has been giving us something of a customer's-eye-view of the AV industry in his blog over on the Infocomm site (for those not in the know, Infocomm is the professional organization for the AV industry). He recently had a pointed two-part series on some of the challenges he's faced with AV integrators in general and in the higher-education vertical in particular. Specifically, in subsequent posts he identified two very different issues: poor design and poor workmanship. I'll leave the latter for another day, although there are some interesting things to say about that in which I'm mostly in agreement with Brown; I especially applaud his efforts to be an educated consumer capable of recognizing workmanship errors beyond the obvious (projection screen installed backwards!) to the more subtle (tie-wraps cinched too tightly in a rack).

What raised my eyebrows on his design complaints is that he identified two opposite issues: gold-plating and corner-cutting. He then raised the additional issue of unauthorized and unexpected equipment substitutions, which is a real but more minor issue. A few thoughts, of course, jumped out at me.
First is that if too much complexity is a problem sometimes and too little capability is a problem other times, then perhaps the real issue - or the only issue - isn't with the integrator. I recently left the integration world for that of consulting, making my responsibilities a bit different. 

This brings me to last Thursday; we have a healthcare client looking to deploy technology in a new facility. I saw lots of spaces labelled as "conference rooms"; some less than 200 square feet, some larger, and some divisible. Many of the latter were shotgun-rooms joined end-to-end rather than side-to-side. Standard practices seemed fairly clear; the small rooms would likely have local presentations, the larger ones videoconferencing and some kind of front-projection system. Simple, straightforward, and standard. To be sure that this was what everyone wanted, I arranged a meeting not just with the architect (my client) but with end-users and their AV support staff. We spent two hours discussing how the spaces would be used, by whom they would be used, how they would be supported, and how current spaces are used. This is part of what I learned:

1. They are very heavy video conference users. Every room was expected to have a dual-display VTC system.
2. Image quality is very important to them. Very large flat-panel displays are greatly preferred over projection systems in any but the largest spaces.
3. End-users are intelligent but not very technologically savvy. AV support personnel would be located in a different building, but be expected to access systems remotely via a network.
Etc.

This caused quite a few design changes. Dual flatpanels everywhere. No portable equipment. Ceiling microphones in the remaining divisible rooms to save end-users the trouble of having to connect hard-wired devices without local support. Yes, I can hear you out there gnashing your teeth over the idea of hanging mics from the ceiling. I don't care for it either, but they had reasons to not want wired table mics or wireless mics; this leaves relatively few choices. A number of Greg's (and other clients') issues quite likely were integrators doing a poor job. Equally many, though, could have been jobs which were doomed to failure long before anyone showed up on site and picked up tools.

The point of this story? Not asking the right questions to the right people today would have resulted in a disaster a year and a half from now when they get around to actually building it. That's one reason that  most large jobs involve consultants and part of the value we bring; it also creates a sense of continuity through system designs in various rooms and spaces.

So is the moral "hire a consultant"? I'd give an unqualified and utterly-self-serving "yes" if the consulting firm you're considering is Shen, Milsom and Wilke. Joking aside, that's not quite it; the moral of the story is that y

Read More

Some new products: dispatch from the Mitsubishi Roadshow (and more!)

This afternoon I had the opportunity to drop by Mitsubishi's Consultants' Roadshow here in New York. It was a nice opportunity to see what Mitsubishi and some other vendors are up to in terms of new AV products and all-too-briefly chat about the present and future of the industry. Throw in another stop for Delta Display's new short-throw front-projection videowall unit and a visit by the good folks from Biamp and today was quite the day for AV products, both new and familiar.

The Mitsubishi event was a fairly cozy gathering here in two connected conference rooms of the Eventi Hotel here in Manhattan. The first space was, naturally, taken by Mitsubishi's newest flat panels and projectors. They have some nice commercial-grade edge-lit LED panels in sizes ranging from 42" up to 70, with an 80" or larger display promised very soon now. They're what one would expect from a professional-quality flatpanel; fairly slender displays with a nice narrow bezel, bright colors, RS232 and LAN control, and the expected compliment of connectors.

They also have their LASER/LED hybrid projector, which is the second one of these I've encountered. It's a promising technology for several reasons. With no lamp and no filter there's much reduced maintenance. It can be used in portrait or landscape mode with no sacrifice in reliability. Finally, there isn't the same "hotspotting" you'd sometimes get with a lamp-based projector, even if you point it at a somewhat reflective surface. Mitsubishi claims an advantage over their competitors in using only a single (green) color-wheel, allowing much better colors. It looked nice, but is hard to really judge against another model without a side-by-side comparison. Sadly, it shared the achilles' heel of all hybrid projectors I've seen thus far; it just isn't bright enough for all that many applications. In a reasonably dark room with what looked like about a 90" diagonal screen it looked fine, but at 3000 Lumens it just isn't bright enough for a larger display in most permanent installations I've encountered. They promised a short-throw version of this coming soon with the same collaborative tools as their traditional short-throw projector, located right on the other side of the room.

This one was interesting and the second multi-device network based wireless collaborative solution I'd seen today (stay tuned for the next one!). With the aid of a tiny (4" square by maybe an inch high) server box and a wireless router the projector was able to perform screen-mirroring from a laptop, iOS or android device, and even run a thinclient to a Windows OS on the server itself with no connections save a keyboard and mouse.  The tablet applications are the kind of modern touch for which the "BYOD" environment is creating more and more need.

The rest of the space was occupied by Mitsubishi's partners. Crestron and AMX were both present with their newest touchpanel offerings. My schedule and the fact that I knew what they were both up to prevented me from getting too close a look, but for those who don't know I'll say this: Crestron's new panels have a clean, tablet-inspired appearance and AMX's latest panels with edge-to-edge glass and an ultra-wide aspect ratio are simply gorgeous.

Other vendors included Cybertouch, makers of infrared touch-overlays for flat-panel displays. They add shatterproof glass and extra cooling fans to give the displays a long lifespan even when laying on their back like a table. I wish we could have capacitive touch devices, but if you need something large it seems that camera-based systems are the only option. They have a multi-camera system which allows up to ten simultaneious touchpoints.

We also saw ThinkLogical, makers of fiber KVM extenders and switches as well as Kramer, makers of just about everything.  The former even had a nice bit of synergy with our hosts in a fiber transport system that could run right into one of Mitsubishi's video walls.



But wait... I promised two collaborative tools and only gave you one! Earlier in the day, I was treated to a demonstration of Delta's new front-projection video wall system. The model we saw was 137" wide by 37" high for a 143" diagonal and a resolution of 3240x1080. Two edge-blended short-throw projectors provided a display which, even in  a fairly well-lit room, was bright and clear.  There are wider models with a third projector, and taller ones with projectors mounted beneath the screen as well as on top. The privacy screen across the top projectors serves double-duty as a bit of a light-guard for the screen.  (Friendly tip - if you're discussing the increase width and placement of a third projector, don't gesture expansively with your arms before checking if the manufacturer's rep is behind you, especially if she might be getting herself a cup of coffee. Sorry Lainie!). The part that the Delta team seemed most eager to show off is the software; with a video camera mounted beside the left projector it is able to automatically calibrate the edge-blending at the touch of a button, giving re-calibrating "fine-tuning" fully automatically in less than a minute. The calibration software and edge-blending are handled by a dedicated PC

The collaboration software it's packaged with is also pretty slick. Video can be sent from laptops or tablets running their app. You can send a window, a file, or share desktops from multiple devices in a variety of windowing configurations. One video source can also be brought directly into the system through a capture-card on its PC.


So what was my takeaway from all this? Not too much, other than emphasizing that collaboration, video over IP, and mobile devices are on everyone's mind. It doesn't seem to be near the point at which it will replace traditional means of video transport, but customers are certainly looking for more options, and manufacturers are listening.

Read More