Show HN: Working on a new network transport for PulseAudio and ALSA • Hacker News Board

Re: Show HN: Working on a new network transport for PulseAudio and ALSA

#41

Post by voldacar » Sun, May 05, 2019, 8:48 AM UTC

gavv42 wrote: post #37

voldacar wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is 100ms really low latency?

I agree, calling it low was not quite correct. See the thread above: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19828567 I didn't perform serious testing on latencies below 100ms yet. I've added to my todo that we should investigate the minimum supported latency.

I wish you luck with your project! sorry if my comment was snarky but a lot of modern software seems to essentially not care about latency or responsiveness, and it's something that bothers me more and more these days

Re: Show HN: Working on a new network transport for PulseAudio and ALSA

#42

Post by kbumsik » Sun, May 05, 2019, 3:56 PM UTC

gavv42 wrote: post #2

A brief summary. I'm working on Roc, a toolkit for real-time streaming over the network. Among other things, it provides command-line tools and PulseAudio modules that can be used for home audio. It can be used with PA, with bare ALSA, and with the macOS CoreAudio. The main difference from other transports, including PulseAudio TCP and RTP streaming, is the better quality of service when the latency is low (100 to 30…

How did you measure latency? I'm thinking to contribute a similar project that has 1~2seconds of delay but I don't know what tools I need to use to benchmark latency.

Re: Show HN: Working on a new network transport for PulseAudio and ALSA

#43

Post by gavv42 » Sun, May 05, 2019, 6:21 PM UTC

voldacar wrote: post #41

gavv42 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, calling it low was not quite correct. See the thread above: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19828567 I didn't perform serious testing on latencies below 100ms yet. I've added to my todo that we should investigate the minimum supported latency.

I wish you luck with your project! sorry if my comment was snarky but a lot of modern software seems to essentially not care about latency or responsiveness, and it's something that bothers me more and more these days

Thanks :)

Re: Show HN: Working on a new network transport for PulseAudio and ALSA

#44

Post by gavv42 » Sun, May 05, 2019, 6:28 PM UTC

kbumsik wrote: post #42

gavv42 wrote: post #2

A brief summary. I'm working on Roc, a toolkit for real-time streaming over the network. Among other things, it provides command-line tools and PulseAudio modules that can be used for home audio. It can be used with PA, with bare ALSA, and with the macOS CoreAudio. The main difference from other transports, including PulseAudio TCP and RTP streaming, is the better quality of service when the latency is low (100 to 30…

How did you measure latency? I'm thinking to contribute a similar project that has 1~2seconds of delay but I don't know what tools I need to use to benchmark latency.

That small experiment in my post does not include a correct latency estimation. I just configured all three transports with the desired latency. Actually I'm thinking about writing a tool for such benchmarks that will measure the overall latency (PA + network + PA).