Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Sessionwire: Live music production studio that connects you with artists anywhere

  1. #11
    Dr.Awkward Robcore's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,925
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny View Post
    Thinking of skype, I would record my part as it was bring broadcast to me as though it was a multitrack tape.

    You only ever get to play your own part. That's the trick.
    yeah, so it's more for production than for jamming.
    ...the origin of emotional sickness lay in people’s belief that they were their personalities...
    "The pendulum of the mind alternates between sense and nonsense, not between right and wrong." ~Carl Jung

  2. #12
    your cheapest wine Johnny's Avatar
    Type
    INTp
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Kamino
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by Robcore View Post
    yeah, so it's more for production than for jamming.
    That's one way to implement it without running into sync problems. Maybe you already said that...

    For anyone who wants an authentic jam experience a la a Black Crowes live concert or a Ornette Coleman free-jazz experience, you simply want to be present. Proximity to flesh-and-blood is the point there, not the obstacle IMO. You're not cuing strictly off what you hear there, but also what you see and sense where a video screen may be lacking.
    What's the difference? It's just soda, bro.

  3. #13
    Meae Musae Servus Hephaestus's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,579
    INTPx Award Winner
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny View Post
    The latency issue could be negated by everyone's real-time contribution being synced to the "receiver" rather than the "transmitter" of the data, while all the participants noodle away. Everyone would then be recording in the same spot, so to speak.
    No. That will do nothing but redefine terms. It isn't going to change the fact that you are far away from each other and it takes time for signal to travel through wires. It will also do nothing about the fact that each participant's rig has it's own latency and may well be barely on the right side of playable.
    Most of time, when people ask why something terrible happened, they don't realize they are looking for someone to blame.

    --Meditations on Uncertainty Vol ξ(x)

  4. #14
    your cheapest wine Johnny's Avatar
    Type
    INTp
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Kamino
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by Hephaestus View Post
    No. That will do nothing but redefine terms. It isn't going to change the fact that you are far away from each other and it takes time for signal to travel through wires. It will also do nothing about the fact that each participant's rig has it's own latency and may well be barely on the right side of playable.
    Ok here's a rock-and-roll band example: the click track gets recorded first. Then the drums come next, hearing the click track. Then the bass comes next, hearing the drums (better not be hearing the click track unless it's filling an intentional gap!). Then the guitar comes in, hearing the drums and bass. Then the singer comes in, hearing the drums, bass and guitar.

    The latency problem is solved, and the song gets recorded much faster than were everyone required to wait for their individual tracks to get recorded. That would allow members to re-record their parts (or perhaps layer them with more contributions incessantly) with continuous feedback from one another, every individual hearing and responding to one another's contribution as much as they want.

    You could take one song, just one song, and turn it into something pleasantly surprising this way. Of course, it wouldn't have the same kind of jam quality as if everyone were working together in the same room, but it could still be interesting.\

    It could operate just like a forum thread operates. Who cries about a latency problem here?
    What's the difference? It's just soda, bro.

  5. #15
    Meae Musae Servus Hephaestus's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,579
    INTPx Award Winner
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny View Post
    Ok here's a rock-and-roll band example: the click track gets recorded first. Then the drums come next, hearing the click track. Then the bass comes next, hearing the drums (better not be hearing the click track unless it's filling an intentional gap!). Then the guitar comes in, hearing the drums and bass. Then the singer comes in, hearing the drums, bass and guitar.

    The latency problem is solved, and the song gets recorded much faster than were everyone required to wait for their individual tracks to get recorded. That would allow members to re-record their parts (or perhaps layer them with more contributions incessantly) with continuous feedback from one another, every individual hearing and responding to one another's contribution as much as they want.

    You could take one song, just one song, and turn it into something pleasantly surprising this way. Of course, it wouldn't have the same kind of jam quality as if everyone were working together in the same room, but it could still be interesting.
    I'm not saying you can't feed things downstream in a way latency isn't an issue, but what you won't have in a successful implementation is live play. Each person down the line will be progressively more out of sync with the group than the person before. This happens whether you chain or fan the signals. Each person will only be able to play in time with whatever the signal was upstream. They won't be able to hear anything downstream, or if building a non-degenerate tree, they won't hear anyone playing at the same level.

    For those unfamiliar with degenerate trees, they're tree structures that do not fork.

    It is interesting to note how much more sensitive to latency making music is than say, gaming. Latency that is acceptable for an online shooter will leave a jam session in shambles.

    I'm really not seeing how the proposed solution to latency is any better than using a shared Dropbox.
    Most of time, when people ask why something terrible happened, they don't realize they are looking for someone to blame.

    --Meditations on Uncertainty Vol ξ(x)

  6. #16
    your cheapest wine Johnny's Avatar
    Type
    INTp
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Kamino
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by Hephaestus View Post
    I'm not saying you can't feed things downstream in a way latency isn't an issue, but what you won't have in a successful implementation is live play.
    I don't recall disagreeing with your assertion. If it seems I did, let me make it clearer. I don't disagree with you.

    But you're not going to get to this again in a live play context. Myself, I have yet to hear it ever played exactly this way again under any circumstances. It's still a recording, and therefore imprisoned, unchanging, unyielding. Live is live, and recordings are not live no matter how you sell it:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iB9bTBFEyU

    That's my ultimate point. And from there, I'm advocating Robcore's excitement that there's another way to perform and share music, live or otherwise.
    What's the difference? It's just soda, bro.

  7. #17
    凸(ಠ_ರೃ )凸 stuck's Avatar
    Type
    xNxx
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    4,443
    The way they (paramore/sax guy) demonstrate in the video isn't really any different than a video chat where they both have the same file on their own DAW. There's some streamlining for sure, but that's the extent of what that demonstrates.

    The features of hitting play on someone else's remote desktop and having that be in sync with your own, that's where the mental nightmare begins. The delays introduced by two different sets of ears, separated by 20 milliseconds, fed through two different I/Os with their own delays of 3ms at the least, that's a very tricky problem- you'd have to introduce enough latency on the recording side to catch the roundtrip in order to sync what the musician is recording on the other end, so 50ms at least if the ping is 20ms. The singer/musician wouldn't have what people recording normally have in a studio, the benefit of hearing their own playback in the recording, so things like where a vocalist would sing and have it go through autotune and verb etc, that can't happen unless the plugins are duplicated on both DAWs, and even then you wouldn't actually be hearing the same thing, rather two different versions. Nobody would be able to perform well with 50ms of delay on their own playback, it'd be like having your voice be 50 feet away from you.

    The way recordings work now is that they measure the latency (hopefully less than 10 ms) and let it happen during recording and then slide it the same distance during playback. So in the remote version, that's actually 4 nested delays- receiver hits record, backing track sends, sender hits record, new recording sends back. I don't know how the fuck they're going to solve those clock issues.

    Back to midi time code?

    But if they do solve that somehow, I'll be very interested. It's probably useful as is as a streamlining tool vs. Skype or FaceTime and google drive/dropbox/box etc.
    Last edited by stuck; 09-16-2018 at 10:11 PM.

  8. #18
    your cheapest wine Johnny's Avatar
    Type
    INTp
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Kamino
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by stuck View Post
    Back to midi time code?
    Well, more realistic than even my "trying to meet the jam fantasy halfway" fantasy.

    I couldn't help but be reminded of my own amateur multitrack tape days, though. Thanks for inspiring the memories...
    What's the difference? It's just soda, bro.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •