Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intercontinental Real-Time Surround-Sound Full-Scr...

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the now-thats-a-lotta-buzzwords dept.

phrawzty writes "According to CBC, "Researchers, musicians and engineers at McGill University in Montreal, have made I nternet history. They set up the first intercontinental netcast of a live concert in surround sound and full-screen video, Wednesday night." " Thats a whole lotta buzzwords to basically say that we're one step closer to having actual good video over the internet. The freaky part is the long term goal: mimicing environments down to floorboard vibrations to allow musicians to perform together from around the world.

30 of 84 comments (clear)

  1. "internet history" by potaz · · Score: 2
    I doubt very much that if anyone ever compiles a book on "internet history" such a small landmark would be included.

    First spam, first porn site, that's the stuff people are interested it... by the way , does anyone know these things?

    --
    dinosaur comics
    1. Re:"internet history" by istartedi · · Score: 3

      In 1992, I was on USENET (no web) and somebody posted an animated picture of a woman doing something with a Coke bottle, if you catch my drift.

      The poster was soundly thrashed by the entire newsgroup. People lamented that "if this kind of thing is allowed, the Internet might be shut down". The poster was rumored to have lost net priveleges after that.

      This was certainly not the first porn on the Internet, but it was my first experience of USENET porn. It's interesting how attitudes have shifted.

      BTW, the only way we could view pictures was to uudecode (by hand) cat the (usually several) files, and then utter curses if we didn't have the proper viewer installed. I never went through the trouble to decode the picture, I just saw respondants objecting to it.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  2. How will they deal with lag by ch-chuck · · Score: 2

    even with speed-o-light satellite links a musician in one continent will be out of time with the others....

    --
    try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    1. Re:How will they deal with lag by TheTomcat · · Score: 2

      I think they could deal with lag at the mixer.

      F'rinstance
      Instrument on channel is in Australia. 2.5 seconds of lag, delay all other channels for 2.5 seconds.

      This could also work on the monitoring system, delay the musicians' mixes by different amounts, based on where they're from.

      I'm SURE it could work, given the right ammount of bandwidth, and latency (or lack thereof).

      Big stadium, and outdoor shows often already use a delay in their separate house mixes when running more than one set of speakers, so that the people at the back (in front of, say, 2 SETS of speakers) don't hear an echo.

    2. Re:How will they deal with lag by MythMoth · · Score: 2
      A good musician shouldn't have too much trouble with this

      There are plenty of organists playing in large churches and cathedrals who don't get to hear what they're playing until they're several seconds further into the piece

      With a conductor it would be perfectly practical, though probably not as good as a conventional performance.

      --
      --- These are not words: wierd, genious, rediculous
    3. Re:How will they deal with lag by Golias · · Score: 2
      A good organist knows what their performance will sound like, so not being able to hear themselves is an obstacle they can deal with.

      It's different for an ensemble, because in order to create a musical expression, you need to be able to hear each other. Otherwise it would be like Fred and Ginger filming their dance moves in two different studios and having a digital effects guy patch them together.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    4. Re:How will they deal with lag by TheTomcat · · Score: 4

      Ok, I've gone through this whole thing in my head again, and I'm pretty much wrong. Silly me.

      Here's what WOULD work:
      A guitarist is playing his guitar in Japan. As far as he knows, nobody else is playing with him. He is the leader. He can't hear the other musicians.

      It's possible for other musicians to join in. That is, I can play with any musicians who are within the lag period of the guitar.

      Example: guitarist plays in Africa. 5 seconds of lag between him, and me, in Canada. Some dude in South america joins in on drums. He's only 3 seconds lag from me, and 2 seconds lag from the guitarist, so he can hear himself, and the guitarist (albeit, 2 seconds AFTER the guitarist plays). He can't hear me. I, though, can hear both of them, 3 seconds after the drummer plays, and 5 seconds after the guitarist, so I can play my bass along with them. Neither of them can hear me.

      I know that this really isn't an ensemble, or a 'band', but it would work, so long as you don't try to pump bass back to the guitarist, which would be 10 seconds too late.

      Sorry for being dumb earlier (-: I wish it was Friday.

  3. Latency! by Coz · · Score: 2
    Musicians performing together from around the world? How, pray tell, are they going to be synchronized?

    You might be able to let people watch a performance where all the musicians are sync'd by the "performance coordinator," but if you're piping the sound of a drummer in Montreal to a bass player in LA and a guitarist in Geneva, the noises those two make will NOT be in sync with each other, let alone the keyboardist in Hong Kong. As a collaborative tool for live performances, this ain't gonna work - for studio work, it sounds great, though. One question - is a week of this kind of bandwidth and technology any cheaper than just putting the performers on a 747 and flying them to Mussel Shoals?

    --
    I love vegetarians - some of my favorite foods are vegetarians.
    1. Re:Latency! by Golias · · Score: 5
      You could sync them up by having them hear a "click track" (i.e. a bunch of electronic metronomes that were synchronized in the same room and then shipped out to them) and not hearing each other. Then you would have all of the sound sources sent to a mixer that has delays built in to each track so they can sync up the incoming tracks according to the distance from the broadcast studio where each player is performing.

      Of course, that would not at all be the same as "playing together", but it would be almost as good as a typical commercial multi-tracked recording, which would be good enough to produce plenty of hype.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    2. Re:Latency! by dsplat · · Score: 3
      You could sync them up by having them hear a "click track" (i.e. a bunch of electronic metronomes that were synchronized in the same room and then shipped out to them) and not hearing each other. Then you would have all of the sound sources sent to a mixer that has delays built in to each track so they can sync up the incoming tracks according to the distance from the broadcast studio where each player is performing.


      In fact, the "click track" could contain timestamps. Those timestamps would be transferred to the data within the packets containing the music (as opposed to being the timestamps on the packets themselves). Then the mixer doesn't have to have the delays preconfigured. It can mix the packets based on the "click track" timestamps that arrived with the music.

      The ultimate test will be an astronaut on the moon singing along with ground control on Earth. All of them will be in sync and none of them in key.
      --
      The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
    3. Re:Latency! by Coz · · Score: 2
      Right - you could do "studio-type" work, but not "performance." Problems in the sync are worked out by the producer in post-processing, but for live performance... the Olympic example the other guy gave is good, they were synced (I believe to atomic clocks (GPR receivers)) and the TV producers mucked about with the lags and delays to get the "simultaneous performance" effect, but I've performed with large choirs and orchestras - the feedback from the people around you matters, a lot. The lag from folks singing the same thing from around the world (maybe a quarter second, if you're lucky, varying a lot from site to site) could REALLY screw up that feeling of unity and coherence that makes a live performance great (for the performers as well as the audiences).

      The example in the story is good - Master's classes where they can "teleperform" to Big Names, and listen to the Big Names perform back, and get feedback - valuable stuff. Would I want to be trying to accompany Yo-Yo Ma in London from the opera house in Sydney? Ummm.... no.

      I just thought of another use for this - imagine the Who's studio sessions getting piped out over the Internet, so anyone who wanted could jam "with them." Be hard to get the feedback to them and have it mean anything, but all of us wannabes could really ruin our guitars that way :-D.

      Of course, Lars would hate it.

      --
      I love vegetarians - some of my favorite foods are vegetarians.
    4. Re:Latency! by carlos_benj · · Score: 2
      During the opening ceremonies of the Olympics in Nagano, Japan, musicians from all over the world performed Beethoven's "Ode to Joy" in sync. Granted, they had to use broadcast delays to compensate for the large distances that signals had to travel, but it worked.

      I'm certain that was done via satellite. On the net those delays are subject to change dynamically. They may be able to start together, but without dedicated end-to-end bandwidth I don't see them (or should I say 'hear them') ending together. 'Course, you could always call it Jazz.

      --

      --

      As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.

  4. Terrible! by Superb0wl · · Score: 2

    I _knew_ that my battle.net was really slow the other day....Damn bandwidth whores.

    -Superb0wl

    --
    -Superb0wl
    It's not that I'm lazy....it's that I just don't care.
  5. floorboard vibrations? by korinthe · · Score: 2

    and how soon does the floorboard become flexible and wearable?

  6. Gotta love a university... by Ron+Harwood · · Score: 2

    ...that considers Hi-fi internet broadcasts to be a worthwhile research project.

    And since it's in Canada, tax payer money funded it... :)

    --
    BlackNova Traders
  7. Yeah... BUT. by sulli · · Score: 2
    The facility hop between musicians is enough that musicians won't be able to respond to each other (e.g. jam together) in any meaningful way. 2.5sec is 1-2 measures, depending on the tempo. So it will be very, very "cold" and rehearsed - you might as well just mix 'em together in a studio off DATs Fedexed in.

    sulli

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
  8. from the musicians point of view by Emugamer · · Score: 2

    As a Ex-concert violinist and a great music lover of all types, all I can say is it isn't the real thing. Perhaps in the not-so-distant future, when PCs can handle the 100 terabyte/sec downloads something close to the real thing can be apreciated. but there is so much more to alive performance then just audio and sound. I mean CDs have very shitty sound even on very expensive high fidelity equipment compared with going to a live performance, and they want us to be happy with mp3s? I think this will be to agonizing to hear. until you can record a audiovisual concert and play it back locally after touchup and make it seem like you are actually there why try and make it seem that you are actually there 1000 miles away? this is just way to fire ahead of the times

  9. Intercontinental Coordination Blues by dbthomas · · Score: 2
    The website was pretty vague about what exactly they did to get the music matched up.
    Think of this as a problem similar to the one DJ's face when mixing songs. When you beat match between two records, there has to be a person (DJ) who serves as the conductor between the two. Without the conductor, the music can get out of synch and end up sounding horrible.
    Musicians at the various locations will have to play along to a prerecorded version of the music or with a metronome. (Playing along to headphones is common for drummers in the recording studio.) The video could then be synched up at a seperate location by matching the time stamps and then broadcast from there.
    While this seems like cheating, synching up the music instantly with no delay and beat-matching will be nearly impossible.

    --
    "These are the days that must happen to you." -Walt Whitman
  10. Re:Making concerts easy for artists. by gwernol · · Score: 5

    I wonder if we're ever going to reach a point where artists just record a concert once and have it broadcast to venues all over the world, instead of actually travelling.

    Also, it's not like being at a big concert is all that different from watching on a big screen - you don't exactly touch the artist.

    I've got to disagree. There are a number of things that being at a live concert/gig/performance has over a recorded event. There's the reaction of the rest of the crowd. This is hugely important - experiencing the crowd dynamic, jumping into the mosh pit, digging the froody groove with the rest of the acid-washed hipsters. Being there in the company of like-minded fans. Absolutely essential.

    Then there is knowing that what you are experiencing is a one-off performance. This band aren't ever going to sound quite the same as tonight. The vocals will be particularly raw because they're on zero hours sleep and pumped full of vodka. That happy-poppy solo is going to be particularly sweet because the keyboardist just got laid. That sort of thing. This is the essence of human contact between you and the performers.

    You are never going to successfully reproduce this remotely, because the core of the experience is that you are right there at that particular time with that particular bunch of people listening to that particular group play that particular song. This is why listening to a live concert recording is almost exactly the opposite experience to being at the same concert.

    --
    Sailing over the event horizon
  11. Who's the suckers now? by MartyJG · · Score: 2

    I seem to remember a story right here on /. just a couple of weeks ago laughing at people who fell for a major scam supposedly involving concerts over the net in full-screen video.

    Is this another case of technology proving people wrong as soon as their words have been spoken?

    --
    insignificant sig
  12. Wow... by Electric+Angst · · Score: 2

    Mix this technology with the recently discovered fact that the speed of light can be broken, and you've got the makings for an experience that, while using the net, doesn't focus around it. That's pretty cool.

    Of course, all the typical disclaimers about how the development will take forever should be included here...

    --
    Feminism is the wild notion that women are human beings.
  13. Re:Making concerts easy for artists. by Golias · · Score: 3
    Shortly before writing the story and lyrics for The Wall, Roger Waters of Pink Floyd made the observation that most stadium rock concerts had more in common with a Nuremberg rally than an orchestra performance. It's not really about the music, so much as it is about seeing your "teen idols" on the stage, shouting out the words of the songs along with them, and standing among 50,000-or-so people all expressing the same emotion.

    Artists have already taken to projecting themselves on massive screens, a logical extention of the huge wall shadows and Big Suit used by the Talking Heads in the Johnathan Demme concert movie "Stop Making Sense", or the massive portraits of Stalin and Chairman Mao that were once hung on buildings during political appearances.

    It would be interesting to see if the crowd would react as strongly to a projected image knowing that the artist is not actually on stage at all. (Bono of U2 sang a couple of songs from the backstage dressing room during the ZOO-TV tour, and the crowd seemed to go along with it).

    I'm betting that somebody from the Disney corral of kiddie-stars (Brittany Spears, N'Sync, etc.) will be the first to try it. Their performances are pretty much phoned in anyway.

    --

    Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

  14. some links by mikpos · · Score: 2
    The smarty man behind the project is apparently Jeremy Cooperstock who has a small page about the project. He also seems to be working on a number of other projects of a similar nature.

    Also, a person by the name of Wieslaw Woszczyk seems to be involved in the project, and has done a lot of research on various aspects of sound recording, sound mixing, especially involving the Internet 2.

    Couldn't find any specifics on the technology other than it uses Dolby 5.1 digital sound, and a couple places elude to the fact that it's the same system used in digital movie (as in the big white screen) playback.

  15. Exactly why mp3 will work by bluecalix · · Score: 2

    ...Because fans will always want to go to the live show - the place where 90% of musicians actually make their money! Give the songs away as mp3 - offer for sale albums to the hardcore fans, sell merchandise and go on tour. Cut out the wasteful and sanitizing Record Companies for good.

    --
    e x p e c t d e l a y . c o m
  16. A message not about lag by vslashg · · Score: 2
    Why are all the high-rated posts about lag? I would have expected more people to comment that the entire concept is absolutely ridiculous.

    Concerts are a great experience; much more than just viewing the performers and listening to the music. Imagine your favorite group, with each member in a different corner of the world. Imagine watching it on your home theatre system. Once you got past the novelty of the whole thing, do you really think it would be nearly as enjoyable as a live show?

    All it seems like we're talking about here is a sort of HD-MTV. Who cares? Give me a real concert, with real performers interacting with the crowd. Give me a show at a site packed with a crowd who is as into the music as I am. Give me the onstage interplay between the musicians, for god's sake.

    The discussion here should be about the amount of bandwidth and audio/video compression. That's the interesting and impressive thing. It'd be more interesting than discussing that a researcher's pipe dream is a pipe dream. (Or maybe it's just me. :-)

  17. my experience by Tiro · · Score: 2
    The freaky part is the long term goal: mimicing environments down to floorboard vibrations to allow musicians to perform together from around the world.

    The concept is very damn cool.

    I'm the band Defenestration of Vish*, and we just lost Nathan, a great guitarist who is passionate about music and is an all-around cool guy. He is now in China (the Communist part) and the band is struggling on without him. It has been a traumatic experience for all.

    Hopefully, in the future, technology can prevent people from going through such a separation.

    *You haven't heard of us [yet :]

  18. Re:Specs? by rillian · · Score: 2

    Well, judging by this page pointed out in another thread, they're probably just streaming (Dolby) AC-3. No details about the network part, but the compression spec is here or here.

    Same stuff that's on a lot of DVDs.

    Just as a head's up, there's a plan to add a more flexible surround encoding to the Ogg Vorbis audio format.

  19. Hype Translation Service by StevenMaurer · · Score: 3

    Since Babelfish doesn't yet have a Hype-eeze to English converter up and running yet, I will translate it directly:

    According to CBC, Researchers, musicians and engineers at McGill University in Montreal, have made Internet history.

    Translation: We've done something not very remarkable on the Internet. Any company that tries to use this as a business model will be history.

    They set up the first intercontinental netcast of a live concert in surround sound and full-screen video, Wednesday night. Thats a whole lotta buzzwords to basically say that we're one step closer to having actual good video over the internet.

    Translation: We've managed to broadcast a concert in a screen that doesn't look crappy in a tiny 1 1/2" by 2 1/2" box on your PC; it looks crappy (with tons of compression artifacts) on screen the size of your TV!

    The freaky part is the long term goal: mimicing environments down to floorboard vibrations to allow musicians to perform together from around the world.

    Translation: The freaky part is that they are so clueless that they can't think of any application of Video over IP except for a physically impossible, economically impractible, and totally useless excercise of trying to get musicians on different contenents to overcome variable lag to play together.... badly.

    I work in the real TV/video industry. Video Over Ip is a technology looking for a way to bilk investors and then die.

    1. Re:Hype Translation Service by StevenMaurer · · Score: 2

      Actually, no.

      It all comes down to what people will pay for.

      What IP gives you over traditional media is interactivity. People will pay for interctive audio: that what phones are. They will pay for interactive "reading": web use (it's an amazing improvement over libraries). But there's precious few who will pay 10 times as much for interactive video as interactive audio. All the use cases are already covered by technologies that are as good or better than what can be done using TCP/IP networks.

      The only thing unique about this concert, for instance, is that it is being done over TCP/IP. "International concerts" are done via TV every day, and nobody goes wow!. Broadcast TV also does it faster and cheaper than TCP/IP as well.

      Some technical advances will change the industry, but IP Video is not going to replace TV - ever.

  20. Obvious use ... by alleria · · Score: 2

    As with any new technology, the obvious uses are, well ... obvious. :-)

    I'm sure that most guys would agree that having virtual strippers in-house, on-demand would be, well, quite something. Eh? ;)