Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Low-latency jamming over the internet

sub.live

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 124 posts

Re: Show HN: Low-latency jamming over the internet

#31

Post by analog31 »

capableweb wrote: post #26
weepy wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are on Windows you need to use an ASIO soundcard ?

Ah, it's possible analog31 isn't using ASIO card, I assumed they are as they seem to have tried to jam before so also assumed they were a musician and I haven't met many who doesn't use ASIO in the first place.

Ah, that's interesting. I'm using a USB audio interface. It claims to be ASIO compatible. Oddly enough I tried the same interface in different computers, and have tried other computers, but haven't dug much further than that. I've also tried all of this on a decent Ubuntu box, and I've now got it running on a Raspberry Pi 3 since the overall latency has been more less the same in all cases.

We're all analog musicians playing alcohol powered instruments. ;-) Some of us are techies, others not. While I'm a techie, that side of my life has always been somewhat separate from the musical side, so I haven't paid that much attention to the digital technology until the pandemic came along. But I'm happy to learn, especially if something simple can make it work better.

Re: Show HN: Low-latency jamming over the internet

#32

Post by weepy »

capableweb wrote: post #22
k__ wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I shouldn't use tech that is basically used all over the world for convenient internet connections to access a new tech that is basically built on top of that. Sounds reasonable...

The suggestion of a P2P mesh is only if you physically could set that up. Otherwise, using Ethernet + Fiber connection should be good enough for most. Only if you really wanna lower the latency should you invest in additional hardware.

You can play with Wifi - it's OK - but you get probably 5-10ms better latency with Wired LAN. Also I think you have a lower tolerance for latency of your own actions vs the latency of another person's.

Re: Show HN: Low-latency jamming over the internet

#33

Post by k__ »

capableweb wrote: post #30
k__ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is 30ms remotely a good latency here? I have 14ms between my Quest/PC and it feels sluggish.

From the website: > We've been able to achieve sub 20ms latency from UK to Denmark - more than 1000km ! That is pretty good latency for what it does, it's not just ICMP packages but sending/receiving audio and then all that comes with it. How are you connecting your Quest and PC? Sounds awful, my latency to friends outside the city has a shorter latency than that and they are more than 10km away from me.

That's why I don't believe those numbers.

All I've seen in shorter distances was usually worse :(

Re: Show HN: Low-latency jamming over the internet

#34

Post by NikolaNovak »

k__ wrote: post #15
capableweb wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't use WiFi? Ethernet has way less latency. Combine with everyone being in the same city/region and using fiber network and latency should be really good. Otherwise, find friends that you have visibility with and setup a P2P WiFi via antennas/radios, you'll get insanely good latency.

Yeah, I shouldn't use tech that is basically used all over the world for convenient internet connections to access a new tech that is basically built on top of that. Sounds reasonable...

I mean, ethernet/wired IS, also, a convenient standard tech used all over the world. There's any number of convenient tech out there, and not all of it is for every purpose. My Minivan is supremely convenient ubiquitous tech for my kids & family but I wouldn't use it on a racetrack. My WRX is fun for rallies but I wouldn't use it to haul cargo. My phone is a great convenient ubiquitous camera but I wouldn't use it to capture professional wedding events. etc.

WiFi is indeed a convenient tech used all around the world... for convenience, not performance. If you're gaming, if you need security, if you need reliable and consistent performance, Ethernet is pretty ubiquitous. I have couple of wires from Bell router to gaming and music computer at home, wifi for other usages.

When added to your extremely sarcastic tone to honest attempts to assist... what are you actually trying to achieve/learn here?

Re: Show HN: Low-latency jamming over the internet

#35

Post by analog31 »

weepy wrote: post #25
analog31 wrote: post #3

Thanks for making this. It looks worth giving a try. Some friends and I get together roughly weekly using Jamulus. We're playing mostly jazz standards. We have gotten latency down into the 20 ms range, when we are all in the same town. That's the ping time. Add another ~ 40 ms that seems to be eaten up by my local computer and wired home network. With that said, online jamming is hard work . I'm the bassist. Fortunat…

I did actually add a way to play a backing track for some drums or similar . It does make it much easier for everyone to stay together .

That would be nice, a click track. I suppose adding a second "user" that generates a click would do the job.

Re: Show HN: Low-latency jamming over the internet

#36

Post by rytill »

erinaceousjones wrote: post #24
k__ wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I shouldn't use tech that is basically used all over the world for convenient internet connections to access a new tech that is basically built on top of that. Sounds reasonable...

"This won't work with the commodity technology I use" (wireless LAN) "Here's some ways in which it can work using a slightly different but still as widely used commodity technology" (wired LAN) "No, that is unreasonable, wires are unreasonable" Like, it's SUCH a simple solution: use wires. That's how I can stream games from my computer to my parent's house at 1080p60 with only about 30ms latency over domestic broadba…

It’s impossible to get some people to use wires. I work in an area where a high bandwidth, low latency connection is in theory mission critical for my customers and they still use WiFi 80% of the time.

Re: Show HN: Low-latency jamming over the internet

#37

Post by enlyth »

capableweb wrote: post #10
k__ wrote: post #8

I don't get these realtime collaborative streaming services. Streaming at home via wifi is already crappy, how should this ever work with more distance?

Don't use WiFi? Ethernet has way less latency. Combine with everyone being in the same city/region and using fiber network and latency should be really good. Otherwise, find friends that you have visibility with and setup a P2P WiFi via antennas/radios, you'll get insanely good latency.

This has not been my experience, with a dedicated PCIe wifi card, the difference in latency to when I plug in the ethernet cable is about 1ms, if even that, to the point it's not worth running cables.

Re: Show HN: Low-latency jamming over the internet

#38

Post by capableweb »

k__ wrote: post #33
capableweb wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the website: > We've been able to achieve sub 20ms latency from UK to Denmark - more than 1000km ! That is pretty good latency for what it does, it's not just ICMP packages but sending/receiving audio and then all that comes with it. How are you connecting your Quest and PC? Sounds awful, my latency to friends outside the city has a shorter latency than that and they are more than 10km away from me.

That's why I don't believe those numbers. All I've seen in shorter distances was usually worse :(

Maybe because you refuse to use wires and instead use WiFi which can have really bad latency? If you really, really, really want to use WiFi, get a dedicated PCIe/external WiFi optimized for latency and you can get close to Ethernet latency.

Re: Show HN: Low-latency jamming over the internet

#39

Post by [deleted] »

capableweb wrote: post #38
k__ wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why I don't believe those numbers. All I've seen in shorter distances was usually worse :(

Maybe because you refuse to use wires and instead use WiFi which can have really bad latency? If you really, really, really want to use WiFi, get a dedicated PCIe/external WiFi optimized for latency and you can get close to Ethernet latency.

[deleted]

Re: Show HN: Low-latency jamming over the internet

#40

Post by grepfru_it »

k__ wrote: post #33
capableweb wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the website: > We've been able to achieve sub 20ms latency from UK to Denmark - more than 1000km ! That is pretty good latency for what it does, it's not just ICMP packages but sending/receiving audio and then all that comes with it. How are you connecting your Quest and PC? Sounds awful, my latency to friends outside the city has a shorter latency than that and they are more than 10km away from me.

That's why I don't believe those numbers. All I've seen in shorter distances was usually worse :(

this right here.

1 mile away, both of us have AT&T fiber, we're seeing 10-15ms response times (packet size ~1400).

100 miles away, both on AT&T fiber clocked in around 18-20ms

1 mile away, one on AT&T fiber the other on Comcast gigabit had response times around 24ms

100 miles away, one on AT&T fiber the other on Comcast gigabit had response times around 35ms

i'm hard pressed to believe you will find an american ISP that prioritizes low latency. verizon 5g home actually did some magic with their non-standard hardware where i was seeing 9ms to my in-town datacenter and 16ms to my out-of-state datacenter. when they replaced the hardware with the standards-compliant generation of hardware my latency increased to 30ms in-town (they also changed towers so that could be part of the problem, plus congestion during prime time)

i just moved where i am 6 blocks away from my friend who i did the 1 mile test with. i will retest this afternoon and update this comment

Post reply on HN