Show HN: Low-latency jamming over the internet • Hacker News Board

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

#41

Post by tomxor » Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 3:30 PM UTC

It's good that latency is considered to be so critical, but for the same reason I'm sceptical that this would work well for the majority beyond quite local ranges with very good internet connections i.e some kind of fiber... which most people don't have, although I realise a lot of the tech crowd is unaware of this (most of the worlds user end points are some kind of DSL or cell network with a 20-40ms minimum).

If anyone has tried playing a processing heavy software synth on a pc in real-time you will have experienced how unplayable it is as soon as latency goes beyond 10-20ms - you can't play music if there is noticeable delay between your fingers and ears, and we are much more sensitive to sound latency, it would be the same problem trying to play in time with each other.

I like the idea, but feel like the internet isn't there yet for the majority of users, and latency hasn't exactly been improving at a great pace. I expect it will still be useful in internet rich areas like city to city.

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

#42

Post by fenesiistvan » Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 3:32 PM UTC

weepy wrote: post #19

andai wrote: post #12

Hey, are you using Opus for audio? I remember the whole reason Opus was so cool, is that it was the first codec that combined low latency with high quality. Most voice chat software uses Opus nowadays so I'm surprised to hear existing solutions are so bad.

Yes Opus - the other benefit is that it can handle a degree of missing packets which is very handy.

And that feature adds ~20 msec more latency

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

#43

Post by k__ » Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 3:42 PM UTC

NikolaNovak wrote: post #34

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...

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…

The sarcastic tone was because it felt like someone tried to help by saying "just replace your convenient infrastructure with something much less convenient and everything will be okay"

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

#44

Post by bob1029 » Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 3:43 PM UTC

rytill wrote: post #36

erinaceousjones wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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.

> It’s impossible to get some people to use wires.

Indeed. Perhaps we don't worry about those people anymore. If you are interested in a high quality experience but don't want to satisfy the prerequisites, you are not entitled.

WiFi is never going to provide a reliable, ultra-low-latency streaming experience for the average person. This isn't a "we can but we won't" type of problem where, with just a bit of extra effort, we can somehow magically solve all of the deficits.

Yes, there are scenarios where WiFi is indistinguishable from ethernet, but those are exceedingly rare in my experience.

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

#45

Post by weepy » Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 3:50 PM UTC

tomxor wrote: post #41

It's good that latency is considered to be so critical, but for the same reason I'm sceptical that this would work well for the majority beyond quite local ranges with very good internet connections i.e some kind of fiber... which most people don't have, although I realise a lot of the tech crowd is unaware of this (most of the worlds user end points are some kind of DSL or cell network with a 20-40ms minimum). If an…

Actually I can jam with ease with my friends in London from Denmark. That's over 1000km. And if you don't believe me - check the testimonials on https://sub.live ^_^ Also you have a much lower tolerance of latency for your own actions that other people's. I'm hopefully going to record a video this weekend to show everyone!

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

#46

Post by weepy » Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 3:51 PM UTC

analog31 wrote: post #35

weepy wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You could - but you can also just drag in an audio loop already.

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

#47

Post by weepy » Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 3:53 PM UTC

grepfru_it wrote: post #40

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 :(

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 t…

That sounds really crazy bad. Europe here so I don't know much about US - but I've had US people use it an report good experience - so dunno.

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

#48

Post by spmurrayzzz » Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 3:53 PM UTC

This is very cool (former touring musician turned software engineer here!)

I'm curious about the networking/UDP side of this. How are you handling retransmits? Do you treat this like a video game would and just keep sending the latest data? Or doing something more advanced like forward error correction?

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

#49

Post by NikolaNovak » Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 3:53 PM UTC

k__ wrote: post #43

NikolaNovak wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The sarcastic tone was because it felt like someone tried to help by saying "just replace your convenient infrastructure with something much less convenient and everything will be okay"

But that's exactly true. It's a matter of what you are optimizing for - convenience or performance.

There's any number of things WiFi isn't the perfect answer for.

Ultimately, in today's world, if you want to jam with musicians not in your room, some non zero effort will be required. Presumably you have setup you audio interface, music interface, microphones, software, mixer, midi and asio, etc etc etc... Honestly, for me at least, Ethernet is the least inconvenient or nerdy or annoying aspect of home studio :-)

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

#50

Post by fragmede » Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 3:58 PM UTC

enlyth wrote: post #37

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.

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.

PCIe (vs USB) is but one of many factors. Which frequency is the wifi on? how busy is the spectrum there? What features does the router support (MIMO, Wifi 6, etc)? I'm happy for you that the difference between wifi and wired is 1 ms, but that experience is far from universal.

Ping is also a singular piece of detail. Ping between two mediums can change by 1 ms but have a huge effect on throughput and jitter? Which affects streaming over the Internet a great deal despite not being so obviously linked.