When a cDAQ (I'm using both a 9184 and 9188) chassis is energized (or the host computer is rebooted) it is programmatically read as reserved (by either MAX or LAbVIEW program). To gain control of the chassis, one has to either use MAX (MAX deosn't save or remember the previous reservation) and reserve it or programmatically force the reservation in the LabView code. In addition, if a chassis is reserved by a different host, another host can force the reservation by itself programmatically. Both of these can be accomplished by using the reserve chassis function with the 'Override Reservation' input set to True. This really is not a good method - it's effectively a hostile-takeover of the hardware (I've tried this and I can literally reserve hardware that is actively being used by another host).

I would recommend the following firmware/driver/software updates/corrections:

1. When a chassis is power-up it should be in an ‘unassigned’ state. Basically it will be in 'standing-by' waiting for a job/task.
2. When a host interrogates the chassis it should only be able to ‘reserve’ it if it is in the ‘unassigned’ state. Once the chassis is reserved by a host it is locked to it until it is either unreserved by the host or power is cycled to the chassis and it reboots, returning it to the unassigned state.
3. When interrogated, a ‘reserved’ chassis should provide the identification of what host has reserved it. This would allow redundant or multi-host configurations to find each other and do things like handing-over a chassis between hosts. This is useful if a host error is detected (redundant host system) or a host needs to be taken offline for service and the process can’t tolerate extended interruption (and it's useful to do this programmatically).
4. The chassis firmware and functions in DAQmx should be updated or augmented consistently to support 1,2, and 3.
5. There should be example code showing how to implement these features

We use often the NI CompactDAQ 9234 for sound measurements.

Our standard microphones with iepe amplifier have a noise level of about 16 dB(A) and sensitivity of 40...50 mV/Pa.

The noise of the 9234 is about 50μV rms, corresponding to a sound level about 32 dB(A). So we can use this microphones only for measurement above 35 dB(A).

A better version of a card 9234 with 2 ranges 5V and 0.5 V would be very useful. The noise in the lower range should of course  not exceed the range of 5...10 μV (12..18 dB(A)).

And many monitoring systems have only one Microphone, so we use only one channel of the 9234.

For this cases would be a lower priced one channel card OK.

A two channel card would be perfect: two channel measurement of one microphone signal in both ranges. The  sound level program can measure from 20 dB(A) ... 136 dB peak without range switching.