ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Audio Fusion WiFi Monitoring  (Read 3022 times)

Nathan Riddle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1853
  • Niceville, FL
    • Nailed Productions
Re: Audio Fusion WiFi Monitoring
« Reply #10 on: April 24, 2019, 03:19:56 pm »

It's simply another option. Not for everyone but certainly can be useful if you know the limitations.
 I wonder if you get one of those lighting to Ethernet adapters it would work as a wired IEM system...

True.

Wired latency is a bit different... good idea.

I don't have any Apple hardware to do a test... but it would be free/easy to measure if someone had that available...?
Logged
I'm just a guy trying to do the next right thing.

This business is for people with too much energy for desk jobs and too much brain for labor jobs. - Scott Helmke

Andrew Broughton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1742
    • Check Check One Two
Re: Audio Fusion WiFi Monitoring
« Reply #11 on: May 06, 2019, 05:45:18 pm »

So I measured the latency. I got around 24ms. The interesting thing is it will drift. It went down to as low as 21 and as high as 26. This was tested with a ubiquiti bullet and an iphone 5s.

Perhaps it would be faster if I used newer devices.

LOU
They claim their latest update has fixed (meaning un-changing) latency now.
No measurements yet on wired connection; I'm not ready to pay for the POE -> Lightning device just yet, and really the WiFi applications are much greater, IMHO. However, if the latency on a wired connection is sub-5ms they may just have something - it'd be the lowest-cost personal mixer setup, on a Dante system, if you already have a Mac and iOS devices...
Logged
-Andy

"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle..."

http://www.checkcheckonetwo.com
Saving lives through Digital Audio, Programming and Electronics.

Lou Kohley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 126
Re: Audio Fusion WiFi Monitoring
« Reply #12 on: May 07, 2019, 12:29:45 am »

They claim their latest update has fixed (meaning un-changing) latency now.
No measurements yet on wired connection; I'm not ready to pay for the POE -> Lightning device just yet, and really the WiFi applications are much greater, IMHO. However, if the latency on a wired connection is sub-5ms they may just have something - it'd be the lowest-cost personal mixer setup, on a Dante system, if you already have a Mac and iOS devices...

When was this update released? I updated to the April 16th release and my measurements were with that version. I didn't see fixed latency in the last release notes. Is there a version newer than what I'm using?

LOU
Logged

brian maddox

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2578
  • HeyYahWon! ttsss! ttsss!
Re: Audio Fusion WiFi Monitoring
« Reply #13 on: May 07, 2019, 01:42:32 pm »

So I measured the latency. I got around 24ms. The interesting thing is it will drift. It went down to as low as 21 and as high as 26. This was tested with a ubiquiti bullet and an iphone 5s.

Perhaps it would be faster if I used newer devices.

LOU

The verbage they are using in all their online references to latency is "there is no PERCEIVED latency".  Given that it is in the low to mid 20ms range i believe they are using the Haas "perceived delay" reference point of 30ms-ish as their justification.  Which, okay, whatever.

I will say that i've sometimes had success with performers for whom latency at their IEMs was an issue actually ADDING delay to change the comb filtering point in their head to a different, less objectionable frequency.  Maybe in some cases 25ms is better than 2ms.  Who knows.

I agree that calling this "pro" is stretching the definition, but that ship [misusing the word "Pro"] sailed a long long time ago.  I do think they are going to sell TONS of these to churches who are currently using truly horrible solutions for IEMs and they'll probably work just fine.
Logged
"It feels wrong to be in the audience.  And it's too peopley!" - Steve Smith

brian maddox
bdmaudio@gmail.com

'...do not trifle with the affairs of dragons...

       ....for you are crunchy, and taste good with ketchup...'

Lou Kohley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 126
Re: Audio Fusion WiFi Monitoring
« Reply #14 on: May 07, 2019, 02:03:16 pm »

The verbage they are using in all their online references to latency is "there is no PERCEIVED latency".  Given that it is in the low to mid 20ms range i believe they are using the Haas "perceived delay" reference point of 30ms-ish as their justification.  Which, okay, whatever.

I will say that i've sometimes had success with performers for whom latency at their IEMs was an issue actually ADDING delay to change the comb filtering point in their head to a different, less objectionable frequency.  Maybe in some cases 25ms is better than 2ms.  Who knows.

I agree that calling this "pro" is stretching the definition, but that ship [misusing the word "Pro"] sailed a long long time ago.  I do think they are going to sell TONS of these to churches who are currently using truly horrible solutions for IEMs and they'll probably work just fine.

Churches would be the target market for this. You can get 4 channels of iem for the price of one. Everyone gets to mix themselves on their own phone. The latency would be a trade off but as previously mentioned it would be a step up from most setups.

A big advantage I see is the lack of RF coordination needed when using these. Churches especially have tons of wireless that they don't understand how to use. However they will spend money on an IT professional to make sure the networks function. This puts those iems in their wheelhouse.


I see it being useful for techs like myself that already have an interface for recording/smaart setup. Or for the tablet mixing crowd (myself included here too.)
If you have already spent the time and money to get a solid wireless network for show control adding a cue iem on your phone is super easy.

I agree that I would not use this in a mission critical application but it has potential.

LOU
Logged

Andrew Broughton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1742
    • Check Check One Two
Re: Audio Fusion WiFi Monitoring
« Reply #15 on: May 07, 2019, 02:04:30 pm »

Horses for Courses.
I see a lot of potential not in replacing wireless IEMs, but for alternate mixes - A2 wireless techs, back line techs, stage managers, backstage feeds, etc.

The wired system needs to be tested for latency to see if it would be usable on stage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Logged
-Andy

"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle..."

http://www.checkcheckonetwo.com
Saving lives through Digital Audio, Programming and Electronics.

brian maddox

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2578
  • HeyYahWon! ttsss! ttsss!
Re: Audio Fusion WiFi Monitoring
« Reply #16 on: May 07, 2019, 03:50:38 pm »

Horses for Courses.
I see a lot of potential not in replacing wireless IEMs, but for alternate mixes - A2 wireless techs, back line techs, stage managers, backstage feeds, etc.

The wired system needs to be tested for latency to see if it would be usable on stage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

agreed and agreed.

it's an interesting concept.  kinda an aviom over WiFi.  It could be useful for IFB feeds or Paging or all kinds of other stuff.  The fact that the user can combine channels however they see fit could have all kinds of interesting applications.

i'm gonna download it and fiddle 'cause i like playing with free stuff...
Logged
"It feels wrong to be in the audience.  And it's too peopley!" - Steve Smith

brian maddox
bdmaudio@gmail.com

'...do not trifle with the affairs of dragons...

       ....for you are crunchy, and taste good with ketchup...'

Andrew Broughton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1742
    • Check Check One Two
Re: Audio Fusion WiFi Monitoring
« Reply #17 on: May 07, 2019, 07:28:55 pm »

When was this update released? I updated to the April 16th release and my measurements were with that version. I didn't see fixed latency in the last release notes. Is there a version newer than what I'm using?

LOU
Maybe I misunderstood what they told me, but it seems the latency should be "fixed".

Logged
-Andy

"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle..."

http://www.checkcheckonetwo.com
Saving lives through Digital Audio, Programming and Electronics.

Jim McKeveny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Re: Audio Fusion WiFi Monitoring
« Reply #18 on: May 08, 2019, 09:47:06 am »



I will say that i've sometimes had success with performers for whom latency at their IEMs was an issue actually ADDING delay to change the comb filtering point in their head to a different, less objectionable frequency.  Maybe in some cases 25ms is better than 2ms.

Tail wagging dog ? Are we now delaying real-time speed-of-light transmissions to match latency-encumbered sliced/diced/delayed digital?
Logged

brian maddox

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2578
  • HeyYahWon! ttsss! ttsss!
Re: Audio Fusion WiFi Monitoring
« Reply #19 on: May 08, 2019, 09:49:38 am »

Tail wagging dog ? Are we now delaying real-time speed-of-light transmissions to match latency-encumbered sliced/diced/delayed digital?

yes.
Logged
"It feels wrong to be in the audience.  And it's too peopley!" - Steve Smith

brian maddox
bdmaudio@gmail.com

'...do not trifle with the affairs of dragons...

       ....for you are crunchy, and taste good with ketchup...'

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Audio Fusion WiFi Monitoring
« Reply #19 on: May 08, 2019, 09:49:38 am »


Pages: 1 [2] 3  All   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.173 seconds with 22 queries.