4 ms·
Regular ethernet can do much better than .9 ms / ft, but it would indeed require some buffer size tuning to a level most consumer routers/switches wouldn't allo
by xxpor 5y ago
Regular ethernet can do much better than .9 ms / ft, but it would indeed require some buffer size tuning to a level most consumer routers/switches wouldn't allow.
Or even better: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut-through_switching https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut-through_switching
- exabrial 5y agoThe real problem with Dante is the buffering required, the wire speed is more than sufficient. Ethernet Packets are "best effort", making latency less predictable. Let's say your original source could be heard by the audience. The audio can travel from source, to mic, be digitized, transmitted over IP, arrive at console, be digitally mixed, then transmitted over IP to speaker, then broadcast at an unknown distance from the source. How much latency occurred there? The trick is to get the original source wave to roughly line up with the time the amplified wave leaves the PA speaker, otherwise weird echos are heard by the audience at best, and awful band-specific noise cancellation happens at worse.
- cormacrelf 5y agoIt's designed for big studio buildings and stadiums. Surely they need latency correction anyway, so the design didn't need to fix it? And you'd think slapping timestamps on all the packets would make it pretty easy to calculate the latency.