Matrox Pricing (MXO2 vs MXO2 Rack) at DVinfo.net

Christopher Drews · January 11th, 2010, 01:21 AM

Anyone know why the MXO2 is $400 dollars cheaper than MXO2 Rack?
Am I missing some functionality that the rack has over the standard?
(I checked and these both are without MAX technology)
-C

William Hohauser · January 11th, 2010, 11:01 AM

Anything that's rack-mountable will cost more if it doesn't normally come in a rack-mountable form. I never bought rack mount slides for my pro decks when I could purchase a $40 metal shelf. Why? They almost always asked $300 to $500 for two simple sliding metal assemblies with ball bearing casters in them. Compared to the technology inside the decks, it seems strange to spend so much money on crude mechanical technology. But on the side of Matrox, regardless of the cost fewer people will need to buy a rack-mount so Matrox is spending more money per unit to create and stock a rack-mountable unit.

Andy Mees · January 11th, 2010, 11:24 AM

On the functionality side, the added value advantage of the Rack would be the extra 2 input and 4 output channels for (balanced) XLR audio (for a total of 4 in and 8 out) plus an extra 2 input and 2 output channels for (unbalanced) AES/EBU audio (for a total of 4 in and 4 out), Genlock (Ref) loop-through and direct support for 7.1 surround monitoring ... but the main reason for the cost difference in my opinion is as already noted by William above.

Christopher Drews · January 11th, 2010, 06:07 PM

Thanks guys.
Looking at Matrox Rack vs AJA LHi & KL BOX.

Matrox: $2,000.00

AJA: Card $1,500 + Box $350

I notice that BlackMagic had the MultiBridge Pro but I've read bad things about it.

-C

Andy Mees · January 11th, 2010, 09:59 PM

Yep, thats a pretty good comparison ... I have a standard MXO2 box sitting on my desk and a KL Box mounted in a rack next to me (connected to a AJA Xena based system). Very similar I/O although an MXO2 Rack unit does still have those additional audio I/O advantages plus, compared with the particular KL Box you're referencing, it has dual SDI outs versus the KL Box's single SDI out (and not forgetting of course the calibrated HDMI output function offered with the MXO2 unit) . Mostly comes down to whether you have need (or potential need) for those extra I/O's and/or the O2's calibration functionality I guess, but do bear in mind also that the Kona card has the superior scaling of the two. If scaling is not something you need then you should have a close look at the new Motu HDX-SDI, a very capable device at a great price.

MOTU.com - HDX-SDI Overview

Regarding the Blackmagic Multibridge and "bad things", I'll note that you can read bad things about pretty much any device as there are always lemons out there. I've used many many Blackmagic cards and boxes over the years without any issues, and presently we have a bunch of G5's and MacPro's hooked up to Multibridge boxes which work magnificently.

Best
Andy

Wade Spencer · January 11th, 2010, 11:29 PM

I've just been looking at that Motu unit. I'd like something to replace my SD-only Canopus ADVC-500.

Christopher Drews · January 12th, 2010, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy Mees

If scaling is not something you need then you should have a close look at the new Motu HDX-SDI, a very capable device at a great price.

MOTU.com - HDX-SDI Overview

Andy the HDX wont work but I was looking at the V4HD but this was posted on bhvideo:

Quote:

Originally Posted by BHPHOTO

We've owned 2 V4HD's for 6 months. They are loaded with features that would be hard to replicate in any other unit in this price range, but we've had extensive issues with them working with FCP, and never did get it to work at all with CS3. When it does work with FCP, it works very nicely. But the FW800 interface is plauged by hardware and software issues. The physical FW800 recepticle on two units physically separated from the circuit board and have been returned to the factory. When it fails, the connection to the Mac and FCP becomes intermittent. There are also audio sync issues on playback. Have had to re-load software/firmware several times to restore functionality. Worst of all, the Motu tech support line delivers nothing but a busy signal every time we call, and web support is a pain. We'll be switching to AJA Kona cards on our FCP systems.

But I agree Andy, people will say very negative things about any product. I also have many BlackMagic cards and think they are amazing.

With all the choices and the emergence of new technologies, sometimes it hard to recognize when the "time is right" to buy.

All I know is our AJA Io's are not compatible with Snow Leopard, with no support planned from AJA in the future. Ugh.

-C

Andy Mees · January 12th, 2010, 03:39 AM

>All I know is our AJA Io's are not compatible with Snow Leopard, with no support planned from AJA in the future. Ugh.

Well it's disappointing to hear that support has been dropped under Snow Leopard, Chris. Still, I guess they had a good 6 to 7 year run which isn't too bad a lifespan in our industry these days, and you can eke some more out of the tech by keeping one or two operational as uncompressed SD systems on older Mac/OS/FCP installs ... until relatively recently I worked regularly on an old Avid Media Composer v8 (Meridian) system running on a Mac Quadra 950 under Mac OS 8, it worked perfectly and and to my knowledge still does!

Silver lining tho, I guess we can rule out now as being the right time to by an (SD) Io! ;-)

Best
Andy

Christopher Drews · January 13th, 2010, 03:29 AM

Andy-
I like you- we should grab lunch sometime.
Damn- You're in Malaysia!

Pessimistic ramblings aside- I'm going to go with AJA and the KL box.
Even though AJA let us down with the Io support-
they are truly the company to beat on the "just works" front.
Negative reviews mean a lot to me (and I write my fair share of them when sh*t doesn't work) but I don't see many for the Kona line.
-C

Steve Oakley · June 1st, 2010, 12:17 PM

I can't say Kona's are that reliable. IO's in particular are flaky on the FW connection and would require reset power downs once a month or more depending.... the MXO2's have just been a lot more reliable, and they are new technology.

as for the rack, its price is based on all the extra I/O is has, in particular all the audio. the rack form factor really doesn't change the price very much. in fact it was needed just to there was enough space to mount all the connections. it is 2 RU high. it also has an internal power supply which I also like - I actaully have mine mounted in a rack where it worked out perfectly. they have been pretty popular in broadcast environments in trucks where all those connections can be very handy to have. you can plug in anything, and having all the audio outs simplfies wiring because you might not need any DA's to feed decks, speakers, returns, and transmitter. they have even been using them to play out cut pieces live to air.

January 11th, 2010, 01:21 AM	#1
Christopher Drews Major Player Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 628	Matrox Pricing (MXO2 vs MXO2 Rack) Anyone know why the MXO2 is $400 dollars cheaper than MXO2 Rack? Am I missing some functionality that the rack has over the standard? (I checked and these both are without MAX technology) -C

January 11th, 2010, 11:01 AM	#2
William Hohauser Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: New York City Posts: 2,650	Anything that's rack-mountable will cost more if it doesn't normally come in a rack-mountable form. I never bought rack mount slides for my pro decks when I could purchase a $40 metal shelf. Why? They almost always asked $300 to $500 for two simple sliding metal assemblies with ball bearing casters in them. Compared to the technology inside the decks, it seems strange to spend so much money on crude mechanical technology. But on the side of Matrox, regardless of the cost fewer people will need to buy a rack-mount so Matrox is spending more money per unit to create and stock a rack-mountable unit. __________________ William Hohauser - New York City Producer/Edit/Camera/Animation

January 11th, 2010, 06:07 PM	#4
Christopher Drews Major Player Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 628	MXO2 Rack VS AJA LHi & KLi BOX Thanks guys. Looking at Matrox Rack vs AJA LHi & KL BOX. Matrox: $2,000.00 AJA: Card $1,500 + Box $350 I notice that BlackMagic had the MultiBridge Pro but I've read bad things about it. -C Attached Thumbnails

January 11th, 2010, 09:59 PM	#5
Andy Mees Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Posts: 645	Yep, thats a pretty good comparison ... I have a standard MXO2 box sitting on my desk and a KL Box mounted in a rack next to me (connected to a AJA Xena based system). Very similar I/O although an MXO2 Rack unit does still have those additional audio I/O advantages plus, compared with the particular KL Box you're referencing, it has dual SDI outs versus the KL Box's single SDI out (and not forgetting of course the calibrated HDMI output function offered with the MXO2 unit) . Mostly comes down to whether you have need (or potential need) for those extra I/O's and/or the O2's calibration functionality I guess, but do bear in mind also that the Kona card has the superior scaling of the two. If scaling is not something you need then you should have a close look at the new Motu HDX-SDI, a very capable device at a great price. MOTU.com - HDX-SDI Overview Regarding the Blackmagic Multibridge and "bad things", I'll note that you can read bad things about pretty much any device as there are always lemons out there. I've used many many Blackmagic cards and boxes over the years without any issues, and presently we have a bunch of G5's and MacPro's hooked up to Multibridge boxes which work magnificently. Best Andy Attached Thumbnails

January 11th, 2010, 11:24 AM	#3
Andy Mees Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Posts: 645	On the functionality side, the added value advantage of the Rack would be the extra 2 input and 4 output channels for (balanced) XLR audio (for a total of 4 in and 8 out) plus an extra 2 input and 2 output channels for (unbalanced) AES/EBU audio (for a total of 4 in and 4 out), Genlock (Ref) loop-through and direct support for 7.1 surround monitoring ... but the main reason for the cost difference in my opinion is as already noted by William above.

January 11th, 2010, 11:29 PM	#6
Wade Spencer Major Player Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Wellsboro, Pa Posts: 285	I've just been looking at that Motu unit. I'd like something to replace my SD-only Canopus ADVC-500.

January 12th, 2010, 03:39 AM	#8
Andy Mees Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Posts: 645	>All I know is our AJA Io's are not compatible with Snow Leopard, with no support planned from AJA in the future. Ugh. Well it's disappointing to hear that support has been dropped under Snow Leopard, Chris. Still, I guess they had a good 6 to 7 year run which isn't too bad a lifespan in our industry these days, and you can eke some more out of the tech by keeping one or two operational as uncompressed SD systems on older Mac/OS/FCP installs ... until relatively recently I worked regularly on an old Avid Media Composer v8 (Meridian) system running on a Mac Quadra 950 under Mac OS 8, it worked perfectly and and to my knowledge still does! Silver lining tho, I guess we can rule out now as being the right time to by an (SD) Io! ;-) Best Andy

January 13th, 2010, 03:29 AM	#9
Christopher Drews Major Player Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 628	Andy- I like you- we should grab lunch sometime. Damn- You're in Malaysia! Pessimistic ramblings aside- I'm going to go with AJA and the KL box. Even though AJA let us down with the Io support- they are truly the company to beat on the "just works" front. Negative reviews mean a lot to me (and I write my fair share of them when sh*t doesn't work) but I don't see many for the Kona line. -C

June 1st, 2010, 12:17 PM	#10
Steve Oakley Trustee Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: United States Posts: 1,158	I can't say Kona's are that reliable. IO's in particular are flaky on the FW connection and would require reset power downs once a month or more depending.... the MXO2's have just been a lot more reliable, and they are new technology. as for the rack, its price is based on all the extra I/O is has, in particular all the audio. the rack form factor really doesn't change the price very much. in fact it was needed just to there was enough space to mount all the connections. it is 2 RU high. it also has an internal power supply which I also like - I actaully have mine mounted in a rack where it worked out perfectly. they have been pretty popular in broadcast environments in trucks where all those connections can be very handy to have. you can plug in anything, and having all the audio outs simplfies wiring because you might not need any DA's to feed decks, speakers, returns, and transmitter. they have even been using them to play out cut pieces live to air.