Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-26 Thread bukharin
Generally it works quite well, and the interface to sync/unsync is good. However, sync has a number of issues which prevent it from being as 1st-class as the rest of the system - so, thanks very much for working to improve it! A few comments about things that could be better: 1) gapless + sync

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-26 Thread SadGamerGeek
I have 2 SB3s in different (yet quite close) rooms, both running wirelessly (from 6.5.1 SS on Linux FC5). When synced for music (usual stuff - album tracks 3-5 minutes each), I haven't noticed a problem. I frequently use AlienBBC to Listen Again to (UK) BBC Radio 4 shows though, and I do

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-26 Thread SadGamerGeek
bukharin;197654 Wrote: - fast forwarding/rewinding when players are sync'd is not usable - syncing a player to a player which is already playing something should just join in rather than forcing the other player to start the current track again. This sounds petty but it's not when tracks

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-25 Thread pbjbryan
I'm synching two players, and I'd like to adjust the time delay between them to minimize echo. Is there some way like a plugin or hidden player setting to do this? I'm currently synching an SB3 and a computer running SoftSqueeze 3.3. All files are lossless (flac), and I have high-quality digital

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-25 Thread andyg
The problem with a set delay is that there's going to be a variance in the amount of network delay each time the players sync up at the start of each track. This is even worse for wireless networks. -- andyg andyg's

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-25 Thread CatBus
For what it's worth, here is my experience with synchronization. In general, things actually work very very well. I do have two problems, however: 1) The current sync implementation breaks gapless playback and inserts a very audible gap between consecutive tracks. I understand (and agree)

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-25 Thread upstatemike
I usually sync between 8 and 10 players, all wired, and do not have any problems with drifting except on Internet Radio streams. I do have a problem where the playlist will get stuck between songs when players are synced. It never happens with a single independent player. -- upstatemike

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-25 Thread andyg
CatBus;197588 Wrote: 2) Syncing between SB3 and Transporter doesn't work with native Ogg playback, so I have to transcode to FLAC. Not a big deal in itself (and an easy enough workaround), but this may indicate a problem in how the basic sync process currently works, because the sync

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-13 Thread awy
My work on improving the synchronization system is progressing. I'd like some feedback from people who use synchronization regularly as to what actual problems they have. Also, people who have tried to use it and found it inadequate for their purposes – your feedback would be good too. I'd like

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-13 Thread aubuti
I'm glad you're working on this, because sync was a major attraction in deciding to go with SD, but it has always been a roll of the dice for me. I have two wired SB2s and a wireless SB3, although the sync problems show up even if I connect the SB3 via ethernet. Sometimes the sync is fine, other

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-13 Thread Ken
I have two SB2s permanently synced. One in the living room and one in the kitchen. I have others but all used independently. The two synced SB2s are wired and play mainly flac and occasional MP3 albums. The server is Windows XP box with 2.5GHZ processor and 500MB memory and doing not much else.

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-03 Thread awy
So which of the above tends to be the real cause of the problem? I guess that (3) could be tackled by forcing a re-sync whenever an under-run is detected. Does (2) happen? If so, what are the clock tolerances on the different devices? -- awy

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-03 Thread awy
Hmm, 10-20ms, perhaps it is doable. I realise that both getting the initial sync precise and then maintaining it would best be done with firmware support. I suspect that firmware change may be needed in the end but here is an outline of how it could possibly be done without it. On my LAN at

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-03 Thread awy
A couple of simple firmware enhancements could possibly be helpful. - Have each ACK include the player's 1kHz clock tick value - Have a -start-playing (unpause) at clock-tick value- command - Have a -pause for N clock-ticks- command Using the mechanism described in the previous message

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-03 Thread amcluesent
Given the the speed of sound in air is 345 m/s, even a 10m separation of Squeezeboxes (one upstairs, one downstairs) would result in the distant sound being delayed ~29ms to someone at the local player. -- amcluesent

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-03 Thread andyg
Each time you send a 'stat' request to the player ($client-requestStatus), you do get back the player's tick value in ms since last reboot (jiffies). See Slim::Networking::Slimproto::_stat_handler. stat is called once per second while the player is playing. -- andyg

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-03 Thread Peter
awy wrote: Hello, I'm giving some serious thought about how to improve the multi-player synchronization problem. In particular, the issue that players can get out of synchronization with each other. Good, there's room for improvement. To make sure that I am starting in the right place,

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-03 Thread awy
I guess that I have been concentrating on the SliMP3 protocol (as I only have SliMP3s, no SBs). Reading Slim::Networking::Slimproto I see that the stat response seems to include loads of good stuff. How accurate is the 'elapsed_seconds' measure (presumably only integral seconds) and is the

Re: [slim] Looking at improving multi-player synchronization

2007-04-02 Thread andyg
Yes you've touched on all the right issues. The most delay the human ear will tolerate is something like 10-20ms I believe. What needs to happen in order to have better syncing is to use a synced clock with millisecond-resolution on all players and the server, using NTP, SNTP or something