[Discuss] suggestions for low latency Internet audio conferencing software suitable for performing music?

[Jerry Feldman]

Speaking of this, The Toronto Symphony is performing Apalacian Spring from
their homes. https://youtu.be/5rzZ2F18MwI

While they all played at the same time, their videos and audios were
spliced for synchrization purposes

--
Jerry Feldman <gaf at gapps.blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix
PGP key id: 537C5846
PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB  CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846

On Fri, Apr 3, 2020, 12:48 PM Daniel Barrett <dbarrett at blazemonger.com>
wrote:

> On April 2, 2020, Rich Pieri wrote:
> >Daniel Barrett <dbarrett at blazemonger.com> wrote:
> >> How about software that lets a group rapidly record themselves
> >> individually, and share files seamlessly? Playback is all local so
> >> there's no latency issue, based on what I've read.
> >
> >While this probably works for recording music it's not at all the same
> >as an ensemble performing music or practicing together.
>
> Yes, clearly they are not the same. :-) (FYI, I've been a musician for
> 50 years.) But these kinds of packages provide an intriguing halfway
> point between individual recording (a solitary, batch-oriented affair)
> and live performance (immediate feedback) if the file sharing is rapid
> and seamless.
>
> After all, if you're singing all by yourself in a room, and you hear
> 10 of your friends' voices over a speaker at the same time, how much
> does it matter if those 10 people are actually singing NOW or if they
> finished singing 2 minutes earlier and software synched their tracks
> to your computer? The answer to that question is a personal
> preference. You lose some spontaneity (your friends can't react to
> your singing) but you gain absolute zero latency. It's a trade-off.
>
> Dan
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.blu.org
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>