Leaving aside the power issue for now and with regard to multichannel audio
for shows as opposed to home use. I had some walkie talkies that had a
range of one KM with admitedly terrible audio (surely this could be
improved) . Whereas Senheiser in ear monitors have a  really short distance
range of around 40 metres and use much higher electromagnetic frequencies
((863 mhz) . Why is it something cant be done with the same sort of range
as the walkie talkies but for.multichammel audio (according to wikipedia
30 - 400 mhz)   ?


On Wednesday, 29 May 2019, Wim <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dante/AVB have a latency under 5 ms, transporting many channels, even @96
> kHz. It can be done. Just not wireless.
>
> The major problem with wireless lays in the re-authentication that occurs
> after a preset period. That takes up to several hundred millisecs. Not a
> problem for a download, or viewing a webpage. Big problem for low-latency
> streaming. Running without any encryption makes it less, but then you also
> need a good S/R on the wireless side to stop it from having other problems,
> like switching channels, or speed.
>
> Apple's solution for AirPlay is having a big buffer in their devices. I
> believe the old Airport Express has 1 to 4 MB allocated for streaming
> buffer, resulting in seconds of latency. Not a problem for playback.
>
> BT is even far worse, and the range is too limited.
>
> I've tried most of the possibilities, with Apple devices, Raspberry Pi and
> ESP8266. It works. It's just not reliable. I've used it for a little while,
> for recording in forests, where there's no neighbouring wifi to be found.
> I've reverted back to VHF wireless mics. Less of a hassle.
>
> Just my 2 eurocents.
>
> Wim
>
> Op wo 29 mei 2019 om 17:41 schreef mgraves mstvp.com <[email protected]>:
>
> > Agreed. Most of what I think of as the "local signal processing" is quite
> > speedy. Packetization delay is never less than 20 ms. Transmission delay
> > dependent upon the network and distance. Poorly designed network elements
> > lead to buffer bloat, which increases latency dramatically.
> >
> > The very latest DECT chipsets are able to deliver a 12.5 kHz audio path
> > from a microphone. Not sure how that's done. DECT is quite opaque. It
> > remains the most common approach to a real-time wireless link built
> > specifically for streaming audio.
> >
> > Michael Graves
> > [email protected]
> > http://www.mgraves.org
> > o(713) 861-4005
> > c(713) 201-1262
> > sip:[email protected]
> > skype mjgraves
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sursound <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Chris Woolf
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2019 10:29 AM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [Sursound] wifi audio (was Re: Deconstructing soundbar
> > marketing B.S.)
> >
> >
> > On 28/05/2019 19:47, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> > > Le 28/05/2019 à 13:48, mgraves mstvp.com a écrit :
> > >
> > > ....
> > > The latency is not only caused by the packetization; the transmission
> > > chain looks like:
> > >
> > > (microphone -> ADC -> encoding -> BT transmission) -> (BT reception ->
> > > decoding) -> (SIP + encoding -> IP transmission) -> (IP reception ->
> > > SIP + decoding) -> (DAC -> loudspeaker)
> > >
> > True enough, but the ADC, encoding, decoding and DAC elements can be
> > reduced to <3ms (as happens with some of the best recent digital radio
> > mics), which does indeed indicate that the intermediate stages are the
> ones
> > that really do the harm.
> >
> > A while back I had to make a short range speech reinforcer for a friend
> > with a damaged larynx. It had to use an analogue pathway because no
> > (affordable at the time) digital path had anything like low enough
> latency
> > to permit normal, unstilted conversation. A target figure ~has~ to be
> <10ms
> > to avoid disturbing speech, and for most people/environments must be
> <<5ms.
> > I find it laughable that "low latency" frequently seems to mean 30-50ms.
> >
> > Chris Woolf
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> > https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sursound mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
> > edit account or options, view archives and so on.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sursound mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
> > edit account or options, view archives and so on.
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20190529/54bacb40/attachment.html
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Sursound mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20190530/33d69a2e/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Reply via email to