Wireless Monitors over Wi-fi?

BigMonka

Has anyone seen (or even tried) the Audiofusion wireless monitoring system? http://audiofusionsystems.com/how-audiofusion-works/
I've seen a few bits online of people using a Beta version of it and apparently it doesn't have the latency issues that I would have expected. Sounds like it could be a brilliant way to get individual monitor mixes.

digitalscream

Hmmm...not convinced about the "no latency" thing. Even over wired gigabit, you get about 1ms latency - add wireless to that, with all the congestion and bandwidth-sharing, and even under ideal conditions it's going to add 2-3ms, without even considering the intermediate processing and interface latency.

With that said, it's a great idea, and I'm happy to be proven wrong!

digitalscream

"...but the 'Fusion' part is really about bringing that sound...together...by fusing it together, it brings the musicians together"

So...it's a mixer, then?

Seriously, they could've thought about that one a lot harder. Looks like it's a software-only solution, so the system performance is going to be heavily-reliant on the laptop's wireless driver performance.

Danny1969

How does the laptop receive an audio stream that enables it to allow you to have the monitor mix of your choice  ? The only way it can do that is if it recieves a digital stream like Madi, ASIO etc ..... so properly not gonna be much use to you if your bands giging on ol skool analog  a Peavey XL600 or Soundcraft Powerstation etc

If your on any of the current bunch of digital mixers then you can already use your phone to set your monitor mix. I appreciate this system negates the need for a IEM transmitter and receiver but  like digitalscream I can't believe they can get the latency low enough. I mix via wifi all the time and there is way to much latency with something like digital desk -  normal router and iPad to monitor audio - for mixing it's fine but even a slight latency in IEM's sounds strange and off puting 

Cabicular

I'd be interested in trying it though

Trude

Very interesting.  As it's a software product, presumably there'll eventually be a demo version to try, so at least we can see if it works well enough before committing to buy.

Just make sure your phone is well charged before the gig!  And hopefully there's a feature built in to prevent your Mum from phoning you for a chat whilst you're just about to nail that big solo.....

BigMonka

I've been accepted on the Beta Trial for this, so I'll let you know how I get on!
Sounds like the final product launch is less than a month away - although initially only runs on a Mac and iphones

octatonic

We can't even get under 2ms with high end Dante ethernet audio interfaces at 48khz.
To get under that you need to go to 96khz or 192khz, or use Pro Tools HDX.
I call BS, but also happy to be proven wrong.

digitalscream

octatonic said:

We can't even get under 2ms with high end Dante ethernet audio interfaces at 48khz.
To get under that you need to go to 96khz or 192khz, or use Pro Tools HDX.
I call BS, but also happy to be proven wrong.

Not only that, but here we have wireless networking - and all the crap that goes with it - to contend with. Chief amongst those problems is the fact that packet latency over consumer-grade wireless networks varies wildly with time depending on how congested the local frequency bands are. You might get slightly better performance (for now) with 5GHz, but...relying on it for a monitoring solution? Colour me really unconvinced.

octatonic

digitalscream said:

octatonic said:

We can't even get under 2ms with high end Dante ethernet audio interfaces at 48khz.
To get under that you need to go to 96khz or 192khz, or use Pro Tools HDX.
I call BS, but also happy to be proven wrong.

Not only that, but here we have wireless networking - and all the crap that goes with it - to contend with. Chief amongst those problems is the fact that packet latency over consumer-grade wireless networks varies wildly with time depending on how congested the local frequency bands are. You might get slightly better performance (for now) with 5GHz, but...relying on it for a monitoring solution? Colour me really unconvinced.

Indeed.

Dante is quite amazing as technologies go.
1 ethernet cable will give you 128 channels of bidirectional audio and only use 10% of the bandwidth available, which means it is good on converged networks (voice/audio/video/data.

The issue is latency- even the best system available cannot get below 2ms at 48khz with a 32 sample buffer, so some Dante enabled products, such as the Focusrite Red series, give you the ability to monitor off hardware.

If they can really do this with 5ghz at better than 2ms latency then sign me up.

digitalscream

EDIT: Forget it, made a basic maths error. I am ashamed.

BigMonka

The above posts are why I've signed up to the Beta ;-)
It really does sound too good to be true - which things normally are if they sound it, but having seen comments from other beta testers it seems like people are impressed.

I guess a couple of questions are:
- in a live gigging environment how low an audio quality are you willing to put up with?
- in the same live environment what level of latency becomes unusable?

digitalscream

BigMonka said:

The above posts are why I've signed up to the Beta ;-)
It really does sound too good to be true - which things normally are if they sound it, but having seen comments from other beta testers it seems like people are impressed.

I guess a couple of questions are:
- in a live gigging environment how low an audio quality are you willing to put up with?
- in the same live environment what level of latency becomes unusable?

Are you under NDA, and are there any details you can give us? I'm thinking...

- Is there a hardware component, or is it app-only?
- Is it iPhone-only, or does it include Android?

I'm guessing that details about latency etc are definitely going to be under NDA...

digitalscream

Hmmm. Looking at a few links on their Facebook page, it seems that the SoundCaster software is OS X-only. That's a shame, and it probably means the client software is iOS-only.

octatonic

BigMonka said:

The above posts are why I've signed up to the Beta ;-)
It really does sound too good to be true - which things normally are if they sound it, but having seen comments from other beta testers it seems like people are impressed.

I guess a couple of questions are:
- in a live gigging environment how low an audio quality are you willing to put up with?
- in the same live environment what level of latency becomes unusable?

How long is a piece of string? (the one in my pocket is 12cm).

A good drummer can feel 4ms, so that means the round trip would ideally need to be under that.
You'll get 0.5ms from the converter (in both directions) so the rest of the chain needs to be under that.

This is the chain:

Source (amp/drum kit/voice) -> microphone -> A/D stage -> DAW buffer/mixer->D/A stage ->headphone

When direct monitoring is enabled this is basically what happens:

Source (amp/drum kit/voice) -> microphone -> A/D stage -> interface mixer -> D/A stage ->headphone

The way Pro Tools HD/HDX does it is using a technique called Time Division Multiplexing, which is best illustrated here:




By combining multiple input signals into a single channel with very high bit depth you can move data more efficiently.

octatonic

Here is a better explanation of TDM:

http://www.cis.rit.edu/~ejipci/Reports/ProToosHD_and_TDM.pdf

Danny1969

Here's the real question ..... how do you get an separate multi channel audio stream into their software unless your using a digital desk that supports, Asio, Madi, Dante etc...... a left and right from an ol skool analog  desk isn't going to allow you to set your own mix 
So I don't really see what it's trying to achieve

digitalscream

digitalscream said:

Hmmm. Looking at a few links on their Facebook page, it seems that the SoundCaster software is OS X-only. That's a shame, and it probably means the client software is iOS-only.

OK, on looking around their FB page a bit more, PC/Android versions are 3/4 months out.

Danny1969

Ah just had a good read ... it does need a digital source so unless you have a desk with a digital source out it's useless .... 

"After you’ve connected your instruments to the digital audio source such as the soundboard at a venue, connect your laptop to the digital audio source"

All it can do is take the place of the IEM  transmitter and receivers in as much as it can send the audio over wifi .... that's still a cool feature and could save bands money if the latency is low enough and the band have a digital desk already

digitalscream

Danny1969 said:

Ah just had a good read ... it does need a digital source so unless you have a desk with a digital source out it's useless .... 

"After you’ve connected your instruments to the digital audio source such as the soundboard at a venue, connect your laptop to the digital audio source"

All it can do is take the place of the IEM  transmitter and receivers in as much as it can send the audio over wifi .... that's still a cool feature and could save bands money if the latency is low enough and the band have a digital desk already

No, you just use a USB interface into the laptop where the software's running - at least, that's my understanding from all their pretty pictures. It requires an aux send from all your gear, or an alternate mic system next to the house mics.

Danny1969

digitalscream said:

Danny1969 said:

Ah just had a good read ... it does need a digital source so unless you have a desk with a digital source out it's useless .... 

"After you’ve connected your instruments to the digital audio source such as the soundboard at a venue, connect your laptop to the digital audio source"

All it can do is take the place of the IEM  transmitter and receivers in as much as it can send the audio over wifi .... that's still a cool feature and could save bands money if the latency is low enough and the band have a digital desk already

No, you just use a USB interface into the laptop where the software's running - at least, that's my understanding from all their pretty pictures. It requires an aux send from all your gear, or an alternate mic system next to the house mics.

So you could have an analog desk with lets say ..... 12 aux sends which can feed an audio interface ( with 12 simultaneous inputs) or you could use mic splitters on every mic used and feed that into an audio interface  ... Whichever way you look at it the software needs the audio on a TDM or ASIO stream before it can split the signal into individual mix's for the performers and send that over wifi. 
It's interesting but needs a lot of gear to work, where a normal digital desk needs next to no external gear but does require individual IEM transmitters and receivers to work.