3 ms·

Audio is rated at kilobits a second while modern networking equipment is rated at gigabits a second. So your networking equipment is multiple orders of magnitud

Audio is rated at kilobits a second while modern networking equipment is rated at gigabits a second. So your networking equipment is multiple orders of magnitude faster than your audio file streaming speed. If you’re getting audible errors from your network then literally everything you do on that network would feel like 90s dial up days and with lots of corruption. Most websites wouldn’t even load due to TLS errors. The problem such arguments as yours is that people have subjective experiences that can be influenced by a multitude of personal emotional states and they then retrofit pseudo-technical explanations for why they perceived those experiences. Or in layman’s terms, you basically just buy an expensive placebo.

ZiiS 4y ago
I aggree the placebo effect is a huge problem. I am not suggesting expensive solutions, I am just saying check your physical installation and maybe not the very cheepest hardware off AliExpress. The are lots usecases for nearly live audio where TCP stalls cause problems you would never notice browsing the web and would not be a TLS error (which is ushally how networks are 'tested' leaving the problems unfixed).
- hnlmorg 4y ago
  Live is a very different problem to home listening. Live requires near real time playback on content that is generated in real time. Whereas for any kind of pre-recorded performance, such as listening to music at home, you can read ahead and buffer. So the issues you present simply don’t exist in home set ups. And before you comment about listening to live performances at home: the broadcaster would be compressing your audio stream anyway. That would be far more impactful to your audio quality than a few dropped networking packets. Source: I used to work in broadcasting. Edit: and just to be clear, the biggest reason that live performances are sensitive to latency isn’t because of sound quality. It is because latency is distracting to the performers (eg if their ear piece is ahead of the speakers) and annoying to the viewers if different systems aren’t in sync (like with a movie where the sound is half a second behind the video). So it’s got naff all to do with satisfying audiophiles.

ZiiS 4y ago

I aggree the placebo effect is a huge problem. I am not suggesting expensive solutions, I am just saying check your physical installation and maybe not the very cheepest hardware off AliExpress. The are lots usecases for nearly live audio where TCP stalls cause problems you would never notice browsing the web and would not be a TLS error (which is ushally how networks are 'tested' leaving the problems unfixed).

hnlmorg 4y ago
Live is a very different problem to home listening. Live requires near real time playback on content that is generated in real time. Whereas for any kind of pre-recorded performance, such as listening to music at home, you can read ahead and buffer. So the issues you present simply don’t exist in home set ups. And before you comment about listening to live performances at home: the broadcaster would be compressing your audio stream anyway. That would be far more impactful to your audio quality than a few dropped networking packets. Source: I used to work in broadcasting. Edit: and just to be clear, the biggest reason that live performances are sensitive to latency isn’t because of sound quality. It is because latency is distracting to the performers (eg if their ear piece is ahead of the speakers) and annoying to the viewers if different systems aren’t in sync (like with a movie where the sound is half a second behind the video). So it’s got naff all to do with satisfying audiophiles.