Le 30/05/2019 à 00:47, David Pickett a écrit :
At 22:52 29-05-19, you wrote:
Distribution to speakers using UDP multicast of a multichannel stream
could
possibly make the only time difference between channels be eventual
receiver buffering.
Just speculation...
Bo-Erik
UDP would basically help to reduce the latency, but in a noisy
environment it could help to use TCP (if latency is less of an issue).
Fons created Zita-njbridge to build a multi-channel networked system;
according to the description:
" Zita-njbridge can be used for a one-to-one connection (using UDP) or
in a one-to-many system (using multicast). Sender and receiver(s) can
each have their own sample rate and period size, and no word clock sync
between them is assumed. Up 64 channels can be transmitted, receivers
can select any combination of these. On a lightly loaded or dedicated
network zita-njbridge can provide low latency (same as for an analog
connection). Additional buffering can be specified in case there is
significant network delay jitter."
It was reported to work better with 24 bit streams:
http://qrqcwnet.ning.com/profiles/blogs/remote-rig-audio-over-ip-using-zita-njbridge-16-bit-verses-24-bit
But the question is whether it would be a fixed value and predictable,
and thus correctable.
The "no world clock sync assumed" feature of Zita-njbridge is puzzling...
Marc
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit
account or options, view archives and so on.
