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

Online Jamming and Concert Technology

online.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 31 posts

Re: Online Jamming and Concert Technology

#11

Post by MintelIE »

nanomonkey wrote: post #2

Any amount of latency seems like too much latency when jamming with others. I could see how this would work with audio engines like SuperCollider, but I'm curious how one goes about this for live recordings.

A couple decades ago when virtual instruments started to become realistic on home computers, I did extensive testing and to my ear, anything over 8ms is too much delay. Obviously one would like no delay at all, but there is a point beyond which you can hear the delay and some folks will find that unacceptable.

Your ISP and their ISP have a certain amount of delay or lag which can't be avoided, but it's possible to improve your delay on your own side of the cable / dsl / fiber modem by using Ethernet instead of Wifi. My Wifi router (a slightly older, last-model Apple unit) introduces about 10-12ms all by itself.

Re: Online Jamming and Concert Technology

#12

Post by kitotik »

somedudetbh wrote: post #4
nanomonkey wrote: post #2

Any amount of latency seems like too much latency when jamming with others. I could see how this would work with audio engines like SuperCollider, but I'm curious how one goes about this for live recordings.

Latency is kind of funny in the context of jamming. Sound only travels about a foot per millisecond. An orchestra pit is thirty or forty feet across. A big festival stage can be thirty feet across. So we have these pretty ordinary situations where there's about thirty milliseconds of latency between when a drumstick strikes a head and a guitar player hears it. Of course, in a modern live pop performance there's all t…

Orchestras are playing (primarily) composed and prewritten music where deviating from the script would imply a poor musician. They look to a single source (the conductor) for tempo and dynamic cues.

“Jamming” is much more dynamic, and uses a combination of audio and visual cues to work.

The problem with even fantastic network latency in the 10ms range is this gets multiplied by the number of participants, and quickly turns into a shitshow.

The only approach I’ve seen that even sorta works is the approach ninjam took with a hard coded and pre determined latency. It’s not the same as a real improv session with real humans in the room, and has obvious limitations, but can at least give a little of the same experience without the uncanny valley.

Re: Online Jamming and Concert Technology

#13

Post by ownedthx »

robotmay wrote: post #6

I've used JamKazam ( https://www.jamkazam.com ) a few times recently to play folk music with some friends. The sort of music we play relies very heavily on listening to each other and improvising, and surprisingly it _just about_ works on JamKazam. It's certainly not perfect, but we're not going to be hanging out in pubs together any time soon. The important number is round-trip latency, and we found that around 25ms…

JamKazam founder here. Happy to come across a user!

We see that too: 25ms one-way latency is the max to stay in sync, and that includes both internet + audio device encode/decode, which gets eaten up quite fast!

We are looking at providing an optional premium networking service to offer a faster connection as an alternative to the open internet. Nothing too expensive, like $10/month is the goal. Hope that gets you and your friends under that magic threshold when it's available, if you try it out.

Re: Online Jamming and Concert Technology

#15

Post by [deleted] »

ownedthx wrote: post #13
robotmay wrote: post #6

I've used JamKazam ( https://www.jamkazam.com ) a few times recently to play folk music with some friends. The sort of music we play relies very heavily on listening to each other and improvising, and surprisingly it _just about_ works on JamKazam. It's certainly not perfect, but we're not going to be hanging out in pubs together any time soon. The important number is round-trip latency, and we found that around 25ms…

JamKazam founder here. Happy to come across a user! We see that too: 25ms one-way latency is the max to stay in sync, and that includes both internet + audio device encode/decode, which gets eaten up quite fast! We are looking at providing an optional premium networking service to offer a faster connection as an alternative to the open internet. Nothing too expensive, like $10/month is the goal. Hope that gets you an…

[deleted]

Re: Online Jamming and Concert Technology

#16

Post by ajakate »

foobar_ wrote: post #9

You can use ninjam, reaper and audio hijack for audio syncing but video syncing seems problematic.

ninjam works very well for audio syncing, but the problem I've run into is that (at least with the default settings) it seems to sync everything a measure behind, i.e. you play to what others played one measure ago. This works well for jamming, but playing a song with chord changes was hard to coordinate.

Re: Online Jamming and Concert Technology

#17

Post by mwcampbell »

I know of a musician who has been performing online shows for the past couple of months. He does them solo, just singing and playing guitar. He streams video using OBS Studio and Crowdcast.io, and all of us attending the show participate through text chat. His video has a latency of about 30 seconds, presumably because it's using a typical RTMP + CDN setup, designed for non-interactive broadcasts. So sometimes after he finishes a song, there's an awkward moment, because even though we're sending our equivalent of applause through the chat, he won't see it for another 30 seconds. He knows about the latency, and he believes it's necessary for a reliable, high-quality stream. So he just tries to carry on like it's not there. But I wonder if it's possible to do better. FWIW, his most well-attended show so far had ~170 people watching, and the audience is usually much smaller.

Re: Online Jamming and Concert Technology

#18

Post by tasty_freeze »

ajakate wrote: post #16
foobar_ wrote: post #9

You can use ninjam, reaper and audio hijack for audio syncing but video syncing seems problematic.

ninjam works very well for audio syncing, but the problem I've run into is that (at least with the default settings) it seems to sync everything a measure behind, i.e. you play to what others played one measure ago. This works well for jamming, but playing a song with chord changes was hard to coordinate.

A given channel has two controls: tempo (because there is an audible click track to keep people in sync) and a repeat duration. To make it work, either (a) it has to be a modal jam (no chord changes), or (b) play 12 bar blues and set the latency to 12 bars.

Re: Online Jamming and Concert Technology

#19

Post by fallingfrog »

ownedthx wrote: post #13
robotmay wrote: post #6

I've used JamKazam ( https://www.jamkazam.com ) a few times recently to play folk music with some friends. The sort of music we play relies very heavily on listening to each other and improvising, and surprisingly it _just about_ works on JamKazam. It's certainly not perfect, but we're not going to be hanging out in pubs together any time soon. The important number is round-trip latency, and we found that around 25ms…

JamKazam founder here. Happy to come across a user! We see that too: 25ms one-way latency is the max to stay in sync, and that includes both internet + audio device encode/decode, which gets eaten up quite fast! We are looking at providing an optional premium networking service to offer a faster connection as an alternative to the open internet. Nothing too expensive, like $10/month is the goal. Hope that gets you an…

Hi, I clicked on the learn more link for the jamblaster and it’s a dead link?

Re: Online Jamming and Concert Technology

#20

Post by ownedthx »

fallingfrog wrote: post #19
ownedthx wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JamKazam founder here. Happy to come across a user! We see that too: 25ms one-way latency is the max to stay in sync, and that includes both internet + audio device encode/decode, which gets eaten up quite fast! We are looking at providing an optional premium networking service to offer a faster connection as an alternative to the open internet. Nothing too expensive, like $10/month is the goal. Hope that gets you an…

Hi, I clicked on the learn more link for the jamblaster and it’s a dead link?

wince

We need to take that section/link down.

We did do a KickStarter for the JamBlaster, made ~200 and shipped them.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1091884999/jamblaster-t...

But we are not in a position to be focusing on custom hardware.

... a dedicated device is half the puzzle. That, and a low-latency network connection to your peers. You have those two and you can get a reliable experience.

Post reply on HN