TO> I prefer the BSS active splitters, myself. Of course 24 channels of that
 TO> sort of thing doesn't come cheap. The transformers aren't ideal, but
TS> That's enough in my book to wonder why not go one step further and
 TS> switch to preamps on stage and fiber optic snakes.
 TO>  Now that would be expensive! It is also an unnecessary A to D 
onversion
 TO>  and back again. This is not ideal, unless you are running a digital
 TO>  console, or very long signal runs, where you are less likely to notice
You could easily MUX 5,000 channels of 32 bit conversion at 100,000 bps 
sampling onto a single fiber, and run the signal 50 feet or 5,000 miles with 
infinite splits, adds, and drops, with no ground loops or degradation.  
(Thinking of telco SONET OC-48 standards as to fiber utilization).  The fiber 
would be just a little less work to handle than all buy the skinniest snakes. 
 
Given the costs of digital gear as they're dropping, a basic fiber snake 
should soon be cheaper than a quality analog one with splitters.  Looking at 
some of the digital mixers starting to drop in price, manipulating signals as 
digital from transducer to power amp should soon be practical.  For now, that 
level of digitization would have less artifacts than a couple hundred feet of 
twisted pair at mic level.  
Terry
--- Maximus 2.01wb
---------------