Q-SYS Corner

[Marcel Birgelen]

Thanks for the work you put into this. I think your "Blogs" deserve a better presentation. Just thinking out loud... maybe collect them in a separate topic?

[Steve Guttag]

Thanks Marcel. I've thought about a separate thread or make them a warehouse type item (downloadable PDF). I don't control the site so I can't make some of those decisions. I've definitely toyed with a separate thread. I'm not sure how many in cinema are actually using Q-SYS. There are some common people that do make the occasional post. However, there are countless "lurkers" out there. I'm amazed at how many people approach me at CinemaCon regarding some Film-Tech post (not necessarily Q-SYS related).

I do post on LinkedIn...which has a better format for this sort of thing with their "Articles." I don't have to break up the blogs into parts due to (reasonable) limitations on post sizes. I also get a better sense of how many people actually are interested in it, from LinkedIn. Film-Tech, however, remains THE cinema site and informational record where one knows that cinema people will actually check out, regardless of topic.

I do wish there was more participation and exchange of ideas (and even plugins/user components). I even welcome comments, questions, criticisms/differing viewpoints. In the more traditional Q-SYS forums, cinema is under represented, to say the least.

[Steve Guttag]

Oh...since this may become a thing. Here is a link to the FAQ that will provide the UCI and Scripting licenses to Cores running 9.x. I'm noting that the Core 110c and Core 510c (RIP) were not included on the list. I will inquire to see if that was an oversight or if the respective 110 and 510 UUIDs will work.

Licenses for UCI and Scripting on 9.x

[Marcel Birgelen]

I do wish there was more participation and exchange of ideas (and even plugins/user components). I even welcome comments, questions, criticisms/differing viewpoints. In the more traditional Q-SYS forums, cinema is under represented, to say the least.

Q-SYS being much broader than cinema, there is a substantial audience out there. It's for Brad to decide, but he could open up a separate main thread / sub forum that would allow for non-cinema related Q-SYS discussions, maybe that would entice some other folks to join the discussion, even though it would water down the focus on cinema. But cinema technology isn't a complete island anymore, it's not like solutions that work elsewhere can't work for cinema too.

I'd love to be able to do more with Q-SYS, but I simply don't get the time I would like to put into it. I appreciate your blogs though, they've been useful in the past.

What I see in cinemas is that those smaller operators usually don't like the "complexity" of Q-SYS. Many of those owners want to believe they're in control and Q-SYS only takes that belief further away from them: it replaces yet another "discrete" system with a "computer system". This, while many smaller operators could actually benefit from Q-SYS, especially those who use their auditoriums for more than just showing movies.

[Steve Guttag]

I don't think Film-Tech needs to host a broad A/V or "Integration" forum on Q-SYS. That is already covered...by Q-SYS themselves in their "Communities" forums. I think Film-Tech should keep it cinema specific. One reason I've started the blog was to have a cinema-specific, cinema-centric viewpoint with respect to Q-SYS.

As for cinema being a complete island...on sound, the only part that was, was really in the optical preamp (often mic preamps would work fine) the Dolby NR and the 2:4 decoder. What made a cinema processor cinema is putting all of the pieces in 1-box (or collection of boxes...e.g. CP200) and making it both durable and serviceable. Most everything in a traditional cinema processor could be field repaired...it was modular. But make no mistake, when I came into the industry, there were a lot of theatres using the likes of Bogen PA amplifiers as the sound processor (mono). Only the rich kids could get Dolby stuff. Do you realize that a CP50 was in the $5,000 (US) price range in the 1980s? There were, on average 20% or less Dolby Stereo titles that were released when it was the regular processor. Most of the Oscar contenders were mono...even the likes of The Terminator was mono.

In any event. Yeah, I think Q-SYS can benefit both the small and large operator but it depends on what they are doing with their theatre. If you are just going to run 5.1/7.1 titles with nothing fancy, no people interaction and probably just passive crossover speakers, the CP950 will do you just fine.

There may also be a perception that Q-SYS locks you into their Ecosystem (and they won't do anything to stop that belief) but you don't have to use everything Q-SYS...you can use any amplifier that supports AES67 or Dante (and analog). You can use an iPad with the free app instead of a touchscreen or, just like with current servers, go full web browser only.

[Marcel Birgelen]

I don't think Film-Tech needs to host a broad A/V or "Integration" forum on Q-SYS. That is already covered...by Q-SYS themselves in their "Communities" forums. I think Film-Tech should keep it cinema specific. One reason I've started the blog was to have a cinema-specific, cinema-centric viewpoint with respect to Q-SYS.

Yeah, I totally understand that viewpoint. It won't fix the issue of lack of interaction though. As you already implied: The cinema service industry is already a considerable niche and part of that niche is represented here.

As for cinema being a complete island...on sound, the only part that was, was really in the optical preamp (often mic preamps would work fine) the Dolby NR and the 2:4 decoder. What made a cinema processor cinema is putting all of the pieces in 1-box (or collection of boxes...e.g. CP200) and making it both durable and serviceable. Most everything in a traditional cinema processor could be field repaired...it was modular. But make no mistake, when I came into the industry, there were a lot of theatres using the likes of Bogen PA amplifiers as the sound processor (mono). Only the rich kids could get Dolby stuff. Do you realize that a CP50 was in the $5,000 (US) price range in the 1980s? There were, on average 20% or less Dolby Stereo titles that were released when it was the regular processor. Most of the Oscar contenders were mono...even the likes of The Terminator was mono.

Cinema has never been a complete island, off course, but it certainly was more isolated than it is today, even if many of it is in the head of those that worked for the industry. But I feel that that mindset is still there though. We still use "cinema speakers", we're using "DCP" as a distribution format for movies, etc. While I agree that this somehow limited the ways you could cheap out on doing cinema, I think those reasons are now mostly void. Anyone wanting to cheap out can get a "DCI setup" (projector, server and sound processor) from Ebay for sub $10K now. What's left is a technology stack that's increasingly dependent on just a handful of suppliers, of which nobody is really sure about the long-term commitment to this industry. NEC, Christie, Barco, QSC... they could all turn their back on their cinema products tomorrow, just like Sony did. It's clear that QSC is slowly watering down their cinema offerings. Even Dolby's commitment might not be endless. But I'm getting philosophical in an otherwise technical thread.

Getting back on topic (pun somewhat intended): I think it would be great to have those blogs collected somewhere in a list on this forum or this site, other than having them distributed over the Q-Sys Corner thread. It could be as simple as starting a new topic and listing them there, the first post being the index. The problem though, is that there is a limit on the time you can edit a post. I'm not too familiar with the details of vBulletin, but maybe there could be an exception configured for this.

Finally, regarding the history of cinema sound... I distinctly remember The Terminator being mono. If I remember correctly, this was more of a budget decision by James Cameron though. In 1984, thanks to Star Wars, there were quite a few more houses that could play "Stereo", compared to five years before. I guess we at least need to partly thank George Lucas and the people around him for that.

Back in 1996, the place I worked during a summer job, we had one small room that operated on a jerry-rigged setup based on two Sony Home Cinema sets, both as amplifier and speakers... The sound was distinctively awful in that room. The only somewhat respectable piece of tech at the time in that room was the JSX-1000 alongside the Vic-8...

Mono has long been the only constant factor in cinema sound. Isn't Woody Allen still mixing his movies in mono as of today? Something a lot of people don't even know: Many big venue and festival PA systems are also mono-only, still to this very day...

[Steve Guttag]

We do a fair amount of integration work in multi-use venues. The lack of knowledge in the A/V industry for how to properly set up a cinema projection and sound would astound most. It looks like things are similar, but they really aren't. The closest an A/V person gets to a cinema sound system is either in a "fancy" boardroom, perhaps a home-theatre (if their company does those) or a school auditorium. But it is strictly consumer knowledge and how they try to tune is "frightening." And, of course, they'd like to just use line-arrays for things that have no business using line arrays. Likewise on projectors. For the most part, they are in the flat-screen biz now with just big auditoriums getting some form of projector that needs to be, pretty much, ready to go, out of the box. They are not going to color calibrate it or have a spectroradiometer in their test kit.

In cinema, we are in the point-source business of sound. Any time you go away from that, you lose localization. We play through vinyl screens with little holes. We have an established "curve" that we are all trying to be respectful to (within the tolerance limits). This is carried from the dub stage through to the theatre. That is all lost on the the other sound people. Event the surround speakers are often quite different in need (both mounting, power and dispersion). Yeah, throughout the years, I've used non-cinema stuff within cinemas or multipurpose venues that allowed me to create the cinema experience in a non-traditional cinema environment...of which it would all be lost on a typical A/V integrator.

As for company pull-backs on cinema. That has always been a risk. How dependent, at the moment, are we on Texas Instruments making the DMD devices? If every cinema in the world were to buy a new projector every year, that would amount to less than 600,000 units. For a company like TI, we are into their typical "sample run" size of things for most other catalog items. The realities are, we try to keep existing technology as long as possible and with DLP projectors, that is looking like 10-20 years (I swear the Christie CP2000S/SB will never die) which probably nets us something on the order of 10,000-20,000 DMD chips a year for the industry. Those are scary-low numbers to sustain chip production. And it is single-source.

QSC/Q-SYS world is not in cinema. What we offered back in the analog days was channel count. Most theatres are going to need at least 6 with 12 being the most common (7.1, biamplified with a bridged or dual subwoofer system). Multiply that out by the number of screens in the world and we represent millions of channels of amplifiers and speakers. While that's nice...most of those amps and speakers are, now, already sold/installed and rarely replaced except for failure (QSC amps are often going strong 25-years or more later). Their bread is buttered in the zoom/team room where they get to sell tons of technology including cameras and the whole integration of it all...with just a few speakers/amp channels. And, that stuff is expected to be refreshed at a much faster cycle than cinemas. If it breaks in 5-7 years, who cares, it needed to be updated anyway.

The only things that QSC has that is cinema specific now are:

• DPM Cinema Processors (who here is using them?)
• DCA Amplifiers (goes with the DPM processors and they are probably the most popular single line of amps in the industry.
• DCIO/DCIO-H for Q-SYS.
• Speakers...and that lineup has been paired down in the last couple of years, a lot. Most/All of the low-line (300 series) is gone. The short lived 200 series is gone. They even nixed the 2-way 400 series, the SC-422. If that speakers isn't making its selling numbers, it is because nobody putting for any effort to sell it. It competes directly with the JBL 4722 and most every other 2-way double-15 screen channel. My guess is, the SC-2150 cut in on its numbers because it gets to boast "3-way," can be wired passive or biamp, is shallower. I've said it before and I'll say it again, a good 2-way beats a moderate 3-way, every time. Then again, the SC-424 (4-way) is my favorite speaker in QSC's line up.
  
  QSC has also dropped the single-18 subwoofers (except for the flyable SB-118F). That isn't too big a deal as there are very rare instances when a single-18 makes sense. Inexplicably, they dropped the SR-1000. For us, it definitely fit a large portion of theatres. It was priced well and tuned up well. I also liked that its ports didn't face up into the ceiling. They're just consolidating and I doubt that when anything becomes obsolete that they'll come up with new product to replace it (cinema wise).

Note, before Q-SYS, we were already using Rane for DSP within cinemas and screening rooms. So, using non-cinema-specific equipment is nothing new there either. It seemed, though, with the "c" versions of Cores and the DCIO family, QSC was jumping in with both feet to bring Q-SYS to cinemas. And then Covid.

As for the Blogs, I do post them on Linked In. #QSYSForCinema. Their article format is more conducive for them.

I suspect, here, if they were to be collected in one place, it would be the Warehouse like the Film Notes for Reel People. But that isn't my call and I don't know how big the interest is at all. I don't know how long I'll go either and they are all in PDF form so it would be possible to make them available, at some point. There is a discussion about having them in their own section over on Q-SYS Communities but nothing firm on that yet. Again, I don't know how many cinema people are attracted to that site and part of what I'd like is for people to see what Q-SYS can do for them over a plain-jane cinema processor. If you are over in Q-SYS Communities, odds are, you are already using Q-SYS.

[Marcel Birgelen]

Any clue what you're going to do when you eventually retire?

I'm obviously not inferring anything.. But, just maybe someone around here should write a book... Something akin the "Cinema Tech Bible".

While there is a lot of knowledge available on this site, it's not really structured and a lot of knowledge is confined to the minds of the people working in the industry.

If you want, for example, become a programmer, there are thousands of books to choose from, the same for almost any profession or skill I can think of right now. But if you want to become a cinema technician, there is not really any defining literature that gets you started.

[Steve Guttag]

If you want to be a programmer...ask yourself. Can you out-program AI? Do you think so in a year? Do you think so in 5-years? That will be a lost art just as assembly programming has. Things have gotten so fast/cheap, the advantages of hand coding at the assembly level is all but gone.

I have thought about a book. The title is already picked "From Nitrate to Bitrate." Like documentaries, the audience is a very small one.

I don't know about other industries but this one has always seemed to be filled with techs that seemed to pick up on wrong way about 80% of the time. If there is a fast bad habit to capture, they do. I can't tell you how many times in my career I heard people proclaim that "that's the way we always have done it." Or some old person taught them something and therefore it came down from the lord. Never once did they ask why. Never once did they seek out how to be better. Then again, there is always someone out there that will do it for less and exhibitors subscribe to the Ghostbustersphilosophy of "we're ready to believe you." That is, if I design a system that is correct for your theatre (right projection and sound) and someone else comes up with some bottom tier crap that makes light and sound, they're ready to believe that they are equivalent enough "four our customers" to go with the crap. Why else do projector companies quite absurd specs based on 1.8 gain screens? There is no way your theatre meets SMPTE specs with a screen gain above 1.3 unless it is curved properly for the gain and then you pick up geometric issues. Yet...I hear people selling the higher gain screens as a means to saving money and somehow their screens magically don't adhere to physics and hot spot (or nobody complained).

Now look what you have done. You've got me started. I've crossed over into bitter-old-man syndrome. Get off my lawn!

[Steve Guttag]

Correction to the Core 26f announcement. I claimed that it had an LCD screen. It has an OLED. I'm sure that was keeping you up at night:

image.png
image.png

[Marcel Birgelen]

Thanks Steve... I can sleep now.

If you want to be a programmer...ask yourself. Can you out-program AI? Do you think so in a year? Do you think so in 5-years? That will be a lost art just as assembly programming has. Things have gotten so fast/cheap, the advantages of hand coding at the assembly level is all but gone.

I've studied Computer Science & Mathematics and did some extra courses in Electrical Engineering... Back then, that choice was rather simple, it was were most of my interest was. If I'd choose again, right now, I wouldn't know. I actually "toyed" with neural networks back in the day, but even the "supercomputers" back then weren't nearly fast enough to do the stuff we do today. A single, high-end graphics card nowadays outperforms the biggest supercomputers in the world of a few decades ago...

I used programmer as an example, because even before the Internet was as common as it is now, you could find quite some self-training material to eventually become a somewhat decent programmer in certain languages. For cinema, that's much harder, there is no "The C Programming Language" (considered by many to be the de-facto C bible) for cinema technology. If you want to learn something in this field, then you either learn it from someone else or by slowly working through the information publicly available. Maybe you follow a training or two from some manufacturers, if they're available in your region, that is.

As for AI: There is a lot of training material for programming out there, there is far less material available for cinema technologies. If you ask ChatGPT or any big model out there a coding question, chances are you get a pretty decent answer. A simple question like "Does the Dolby CP950 have a multi-channel Analog input?" was long-time answered incorrectly by ChatGPT, only the more recent versions of GPT-4o got it right.

Meanwhile, we trained our own model on much of Dolby's documentation a while back, you see a clear improvement, although not yet perfect:

No, the Dolby CP950 does not have discrete multi-channel analog inputs (like 5.1 or 7.1).

Here's a breakdown of its input capabilities:

1. Primary Inputs: The CP950 is designed to accept digital audio formats as its main source:
   • Dolby Digital (AC-3) / Dolby Digital Plus (E-AC-3) / Dolby TrueHD: Via HDMI or SDI (embedded).
   • Dolby E: Via AES/EBU or SDI (embedded).
   • PCM (AES/EBU, SDI embedded): Stereo or multi-channel (up to 7.1).
   • AES3id (coax): Primarily for legacy Dolby Digital cinema content.
2. Analog Inputs: The CP950 does have analog inputs, but they are limited:
   • Mic/Line Inputs: Typically 2-4 channels (often configurable as mic or line level). These are intended for auxiliary sources like microphones, CD players, or background music systems – not for the main multi-channel soundtrack playback.
   • Legacy Analog Bypass: Some configurations might have a dedicated analog bypass input for very specific legacy uses, but this is not a standard multi-channel input (it's usually stereo or mono).

Why no multi-channel analog inputs?

• Cinema Focus: The CP950 is a cinema processor designed for modern digital cinema distribution (DCPs) and broadcast workflows (using Dolby E), which rely entirely on digital audio formats.
• Digital Standard: Discrete multi-channel analog inputs are largely obsolete in professional cinema environments due to the advantages of digital (quality, metadata, ease of distribution).
• Predecessor Feature: The previous model, the Dolby CP750, did have discrete 5.1 analog inputs to accommodate older formats like CDS (Cinema Digital Sound) or legacy players. The CP950 was designed after these formats became obsolete.

What if you need to input multi-channel analog?

1. Use the CP750 (if available): If you absolutely need integrated multi-channel analog inputs for a cinema application, you would need to source a used Dolby CP750.
2. External Analog-to-Digital Converter: You would need an external device to convert the multi-channel analog signal into a digital format the CP950 can accept, such as:
   • AES/EBU: Using a multi-channel ADC that outputs multiple pairs of AES3 signals.
   • Dolby E: Using an encoder (like a Dolby DP600 or similar) to encode the analog into the Dolby E stream, fed via AES/EBU or SDI.
   • Embedded SDI: Using an ADC/embedder to put the digital audio into an SDI video signal.

In summary: The Dolby CP950 is built for a digital workflow and lacks the discrete multi-channel analog inputs found on its predecessor, the CP750. Its analog inputs are for auxiliary sources only.

Still, this AI model won't design a room for you, much less build it for you. It can be a useful tool though. Eventually, AI may take over those niches too, but there is still a considerable amount of training data needed to fill in all those niches. That's what many people are missing about the current state of AI. It may win from you with Jeopardy every single time, but most models out there are generalists, not specialists.

I have thought about a book. The title is already picked "From Nitrate to Bitrate." Like documentaries, the audience is a very small one.

I'll commit to buying one copy. I don't know if that's a real motivation or not.

I don't know about other industries but this one has always seemed to be filled with techs that seemed to pick up on wrong way about 80% of the time. If there is a fast bad habit to capture, they do. I can't tell you how many times in my career I heard people proclaim that "that's the way we always have done it." Or some old person taught them something and therefore it came down from the lord. Never once did they ask why. Never once did they seek out how to be better.

I guess that kind of mindset is pretty common in any industry that tends to move slowly. Part of it is also due to the fact that the way knowledge is passed on is from person to person, so one person learns the other person's bad habits. While that's true for many industries, I guess those niche industries suffer the most from some kind of "knowledge stagnation". But, if you look at e.g. the IT industry, there stuff is moving so fast, you end up with something like the reverse of this: People are implementing stuff even before they know if it will actually work, because it was sold to the customer... I've lost count the times I've seen sales making up fancy solutions, just to rake in the bonus and leaving the technical team with working out how to fit it all together.

Now look what you have done. You've got me started. I've crossed over into bitter-old-man syndrome. Get off my lawn!

I'm not sure why this comes up and also not why I'm writing it down either... But, I had one of those stupid automatic lawnmowers once, you know, those that essentially just mow your lawn in a random pattern. Since it needed to mow a considerable amount of "lawn", it was of a respectable size for a robot lawnmower... It required a "perimeter fence" (a wire buried around the edge of the lawn). If the electricity on that fence failed while it was mowing, the thing would escape like the dinosaurs from Jurassic Parc (hence it got the nickname T-Mow) and start mowing someone other's... well, everything. Including the neighbors flower perk. That thought me a very real lesson of trying to keep off other's lawn...

Anyway, sorry for going so far off-topic in your Q-Sys hangout. :P

[Steve Guttag]

I'm surprised that it (AI) got into SDI as a viable source on a CP950. It does not have an SDI input (that I know about). It does have a two AES3-id (BNC coax). And yes, you can decode Dolby-E. Those with SDI infrastructure would need to de-embed the AES from the SDI, I believe. And if you wanted to use Dolby-E as a means to getting multi-channel analog audio into a CP950, what might that workflow be using new available equipment?

Back in the day, at the AFI/Silver, which has extensive SDI infrastructure due to its design era, in order to move mulit-channel audio, we did use Dolby-E because every theatre had a Dolby-E decoder (two, actually...the DMA-8 as well as a DP572). The designers of the system really only allowed for switching 1 (maybe 2) AES3-id for any device. So, Dolby-E allowed for using that switching infrastructure. We just put in a DP571. The sources were limited but Digi-Beta, HDCAM and D5 were the popular users with HDCAM being the biggest one. Eventually HDCAM-SR made it in but, as most know, that was pretty much the end of the line for tape-based media, particularly when Sony couldn't supply blank tapes.

In any event, while it is nice that the CP950 can decode Dolby-E, I'd think that it is coming along for the ride for any legacy machine that might be hooked up and would get far less use than an actual analog mulit-channel input. Multichannel analog to HDMI has better possibilities but even that is convoluted (and expensive), to say the least.

[Steve Guttag]

Okay...where were we? Oh yeah. Q-SYS!

Version 10.0.0 was released June 2, 2025 and includes these updates and resolved issues.

Note, there are some serious deprecations on this one too. Most notably, the I/O Frame will not be supported in QDS 10 and beyond. The other one likely to affect existing system updating is the TSC-7 (w or t). There are others but I know those two will affect our installations. This really puts a barrier to using "legacy" systems, like the DCA amplifier, if you want to use the Dataport features (full monitoring plus speaker protection). There are plenty of means to get analog audio to DCA and other amplifiers but without the Dataport features.

You could turn a Core 510 (i or c) into a "peripheral" and load IT with Dataport or any other I/O card (while they last or sourced in the usual places like eBay) since the 510 is supported in QDS 10. Alternately, for now, you could use a Core Nano as a bridge. Have the Nano feed I/O Frames and use QLAN transmitters/receivers as well as Control Links for moving the audio and other information between the Nano and the primary Core running the system. Naturally, this gets it all a bit convoluted. But, if you wanted to use a Core X10 to run a 10-plex and you have DCA amps in some (or possibly all) screens, the Core Nano could handle moving the audio between the two QDS environments. Or, just use QIO, if you are okay with single network and don't need the Dataport benefits.

New Product Support
Core 24f
I/O-Core 24f
Server Core X20r
Server Core X10
VisionSuite Accelerator (VSA-100)

Licensing Changes

In v10.0, there are several important updates to our licensing structure that aim to streamline and enhance user experience. For detailed information, visit Licensing.
Scripting Engine
UCI Deployment
Microsoft Teams Rooms UC Integration License
Q-SYS Capacity Scaling License for Core Nano and Core 8 Flex
Multi-Track Playback

Video

Mediacast Output Component
VisionSuite Designer

Control

Improved Layer Presentation
Sequencer Component
When Component
Proxy Server Configuration
Flexbox Added to UCI Toolbox
Block and Text Controller Enhancements

Streaming I/O

ST 2110 Audio Receiver and Audio Transmitter

Q-SYS Designer v10.0 introduces new Streaming I/O inventory items: the ST 2110 Audio Receiver and ST 2110 Audio Transmitter. These components, found under Inventory > Streaming I/O, support SMPTE ST 2110-compliant audio streams with optional network redundancy and offer both manual and NMOS connection modes for enhanced flexibility and integration with third-party devices.

Management

Generate CSR relocated in Core Manager
Secure Communication Tab added in Core Manager and Peripheral Manager
Administrator > Paging improvements

Resolved Known Issues

• Amplifiers: Resolved an issue causing SPA-Q amplifiers to not be designated as amplifiers in the inventory.
• Amplifiers: An issue causing the inversion of polarity in the PL-SUB15 has been found and resolved.
• Video: Resolved an issue causing NV-21-HU unstable connection upon initial connection of an M1/M2 MacBookPro.
• Video: The issue where the NV-21-HU would continue to authenticate and encrypt video with a USB-C source even when HDCP mode was set to OFF has been resolved.
• Video: The issue where the NC-12x80 imaging stopped working has been resolved.
• Video: The issue with the NV-21-HU USB-C device drawing too much power and causing Compromised error messages has been resolved.
• Video: The issue of no video output when using a display with NV-21-HU HDMI output has been resolved.
• Video: An issue causing NC-20x60 exposure setting to revert after a Core reboot has been resolved.
• Video: Resolved an issue where NV-21-HU device would not present video or detect peripherals via USB-C.
• Video: Resolved frame misalignment when connecting an HDMI source to the NV-21-HU HDMI.
• Video: The issue with NV-21-HU video bridge distortion when Camera Traffic Shaping was enabled has been resolved.
• Video: The issue with the Peak Frame Bitrate control not staying in sync with the USB Video Bridge and the selected NC Series camera has been fixed.
• Video: The issue causing NC-12x80 cameras to intermittently go offline has been resolved.
• Video: Resolved NV-21-HU USB-C connection delays of up to a 1 minute for USB video to appear, intermittent video display, non-fuctional USB Bridging, and valid format failures.
• Video: The issue with camera previews getting stuck when while switching between different cameras in a dividable room setup has been resolved.
• Video: Resolved an issue causing CSS Styles to not be applied on TSC-101-G3.
• Video: Resolved an issue that required a USB Soundcard to be added to a design to enable USB-C audio input on an NV-21-HU.
• Control: The issue that caused the media display camera feed to not update after switching cameras when using a Video Bridge in a UCI connected to a Mediacast Router has been resolved.
• Control: Resolved an issue where Designer would freeze when using Ctrl+F to open the Find box in the Named Controls.
• Control: Resolved NC-110 camera preview not displaying properly on the TSC-50-G3 and TSC-70-G3 in portrait orientation.
• Control: Resolved the issue where TSC panels took a long time to load the UCI.
• Control: Resolved the issue where the UCI Viewer crashes when navigating pages.
• Control: Resolved an issue where Designer could become unresponsive when attempting to wire inputs on a Status Combiner component with a high input count (≥ 50).
• Control: Resolved the issue where the bold version of the font Open Sans did not work when specified through CSS styling.
• Control: Resolved an issue that would cause the Legacy Script Editor to display Lua comments in the same color as if, then, else, local, and do words.
• Control: Resolved an issue that could cause QDS to unexpectedly close when selecting the first UCI in a design.
• Control: Resolved an issue that could cause QDS to unexpectedly close when opening a UCI containing an orphaned control with a very narrow width (6).
• Platform: The issue with the HID connected status reporting on Core 110f, where the connected status remained active even after the USB device was removed, has been resolved.
• Platform: Resolved the issue where the PTPv2 announcement packet message length field did not account for the length of TLVs (Type-Length-Value elements), causing PTP4l machines to fail in decoding the announcement message.
• Platform: Resolved the issue where pen testing caused high CPU usage on the Core, leading to system lockups and unresponsiveness.
• Platform: Resolved an issue that would cause design lockups and performance issues with larger designs.
• Platform: Resolved the issue where the Core SSH service was potentially at risk to the Terrapin Prefix Truncation vulnerability (CVE-2023-48795).
• Platform: Resolved an issue that could cause PA Router to show an incorrect source with Core to Core Paging.
• Platform: Resolved an issue that could cause incorrect (green/connected) status reporting for some peripherals when connected to LAN B.
• Platform: Selector component combo box now populates correctly if the Selector is inside a Channel Group.
• Platform: Resolved an issue that could cause a Core or PA Router to hang during certain PA Remote API (PARAPI) call sequences.
• Platform: When pushing a large design to a Core that has insufficient storage, an "Insufficient storage" message now appears in status window instead of a "500 Internal Server Error".
• Platform: Combo boxes now work as expected when dragged into the schematic and grouped with other controls.
• Platform: Resolved an issue that could cause CX-Q amplifiers to become unresponsive after many months due to increasing RAM usage.
• Platform: Unterminated signal names are now properly listed in the Inspector pane.
• Platform: A security vulnerability related to the SSH service has been addressed.
• Platform: In Peripheral Manager, text can now be selected and copied from the Status tab - for example, a peripheral's MAC address.
• Platform: Resolved an issue related to invalid Core PTPv2 announcement packet message length.
• Platform: When using the POTS Controller DTMF RX control pin, the last five digits in buffer are now properly cleared after call disconnect.
• Platform: An issue that could cause Core processing overruns and peripherals to go offline (for example, due to attempting to play a corrupted audio file) has been resolved.

[Steve Guttag]

This is the official list (I forgot that an early Core 110 can also run into a compatibility issue too.

image.png