• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Audio over IP

C

Chuck

I'm looking to build a backup STL system. I'm thinking of using some 5.8GHz unlicensed band transceivers from a company called Tranzeo. It's about a 15 mile hop, and the manufacturer claims they will do 20-25 easily. It's in a rural area, so I think they will work. The problem is getting audio in and out.

They use a standard 10/100 Ethernet connection. Naturally, I could use a pair of computers running Shoutcast and Winamp or whatever the favorite flavor of the day happens to be. I'd like to avoid the computer route, since I think they are just something more to go wrong. Less is more n this case.

I've come across some audio encoders and decoders by a Swiss company called Barix http://www.barix.com/audio.html These devices are about $350 to send and $300 to receive. They are just little bricks that can be assigned an IP address. They encode to MP3 up to 320 KBs. It's probably OK quality, but a little less than I'd love to have. They also interface via RCA jacks. I can get around that. You can use them to run SPDIF digital audio, but all our equipment has AES/UBU ins and outs, so that won't help a lot.

Any suggestions? Any alternatives to the Barix units? The budget is slim on this. This currently nets out about $1650 for equipment. I'd like to keep the hardware under $2000 if possible, but it is important that it actually work well too. $1650 is no bargain if it doesn't work right. I'm pretty sure the RF part will be OK. It's getting audio in and out that concerns me. I'd welcome your suggestions.

Thanks

Chuck
 
> I'm looking to build a backup STL system. I'm thinking of
> using some 5.8GHz unlicensed band transceivers from a
> company called Tranzeo. It's about a 15 mile hop, and the
> manufacturer claims they will do 20-25 easily. It's in a
> rural area, so I think they will work. The problem is
> getting audio in and out.
>
> They use a standard 10/100 Ethernet connection. Naturally,
> I could use a pair of computers running Shoutcast and Winamp
> or whatever the favorite flavor of the day happens to be.
> I'd like to avoid the computer route, since I think they are
> just something more to go wrong. Less is more n this case.
>
>
> I've come across some audio encoders and decoders by a Swiss
> company called Barix http://www.barix.com/audio.html These
> devices are about $350 to send and $300 to receive. They
> are just little bricks that can be assigned an IP address.
> They encode to MP3 up to 320 KBs. It's probably OK quality,
> but a little less than I'd love to have. They also
> interface via RCA jacks. I can get around that. You can use
> them to run SPDIF digital audio, but all our equipment has
> AES/UBU ins and outs, so that won't help a lot.
>
> Any suggestions? Any alternatives to the Barix units? The
> budget is slim on this. This currently nets out about $1650
> for equipment. I'd like to keep the hardware under $2000 if
> possible, but it is important that it actually work well
> too. $1650 is no bargain if it doesn't work right. I'm
> pretty sure the RF part will be OK. It's getting audio in
> and out that concerns me. I'd welcome your suggestions.
>
> Thanks
>
> Chuck


You might have caught my comments in an earlier thread. We are using the BARIX boxes to encode for our Shoutcast relay. Other than occaisionally getting hit with a DoS attack, its been rock solid and the encoding algorithm is awesome. Even at 32bit sampling and 84-86kps VBR, the stream sounds really good.

We are considering playing with an unlicensed device and a Barix to do remote work.
 
I'm doing the same thing. If you want to spend the money on hardware and be done with it, grab STL-IP from AudioTX. I'm looking at the cheaper option...some free software using the JACK audio interface and Speex engine.

It's a bit of work, but it'll be fun.<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
 
> You might have caught my comments in an earlier thread. We
> are using the BARIX boxes to encode for our Shoutcast relay.
> Other than occaisionally getting hit with a DoS attack, its
> been rock solid and the encoding algorithm is awesome. Even
> at 32bit sampling and 84-86kps VBR, the stream sounds really
> good.
>
> We are considering playing with an unlicensed device and a
> Barix to do remote work.
>
I'm glad to hear good words about the Barix devices. I hate to be the Lone Ranger. Since getting STL and Remote licenses is turning into a major hassle, some of this unlicensed stuff is looking pretty good. For our immediate need, latency (delay) isn't a big deal, but it might be for remotes. Is there a noticable delay?
 
> I'm glad to hear good words about the Barix devices. I hate
> to be the Lone Ranger. Since getting STL and Remote
> licenses is turning into a major hassle, some of this
> unlicensed stuff is looking pretty good. For our immediate
> need, latency (delay) isn't a big deal, but it might be for
> remotes. Is there a noticable delay?

I wish I could tell you for sure, I've never had to rely on it. My recollection is that the encoding is really pretty quick if you connect directly from the box. Definitely not an IBOC 8 seconds or the huge lags from a WMA encoder. Whether it is suitable for on-air monitoring, I don't know, since we have it relaying to a Shoutcast server, which induces a lot (1-2 min) of delay.

What we'd do is pre-record breaks and use an spread spectrum IP connection to connect to our network and system and just drop the files in place. The next time I tinker around, I'll see if it is suitable for live work.
 
Actually the delay can be more than 8 seconds. The reason is, unless you have a straight connection from the studio to the transmitter, the streaming feed will hop over different IP ports until it reaches the destination. The more hops it has to take, the longer the delay. This isn’t a problem unless you want to monitor the station’s signal while you are on a live Mic.

R

> I wish I could tell you for sure, I've never had to rely on
> it. My recollection is that the encoding is really pretty
> quick if you connect directly from the box. Definitely not
> an IBOC 8 seconds or the huge lags from a WMA encoder.
> Whether it is suitable for on-air monitoring, I don't know,
> since we have it relaying to a Shoutcast server, which
> induces a lot (1-2 min) of delay.
 
> Actually the delay can be more than 8 seconds. The reason
> is, unless you have a straight connection from the studio to
> the transmitter, the streaming feed will hop over different
> IP ports until it reaches the destination. The more hops it
> has to take, the longer the delay. This isn’t a problem
> unless you want to monitor the station’s signal while you
> are on a live Mic.
>
> R

On our LAN going directly encoder-player, I think the encoding delay is very small, but I haven't tried monitoring yet with it. When we do maintanance this weekend, I will play with it and see what we have.
 
> I'm looking to build a backup STL system. I'm thinking of
> using some 5.8GHz unlicensed band transceivers from a
> company called Tranzeo. It's about a 15 mile hop, and the
> manufacturer claims they will do 20-25 easily. It's in a
> rural area, so I think they will work. The problem is
> getting audio in and out.
>
> They use a standard 10/100 Ethernet connection. Naturally,
> I could use a pair of computers running Shoutcast and Winamp
> or whatever the favorite flavor of the day happens to be.
> I'd like to avoid the computer route, since I think they are
> just something more to go wrong. Less is more n this case.
>
>
> I've come across some audio encoders and decoders by a Swiss
> company called Barix http://www.barix.com/audio.html These
> devices are about $350 to send and $300 to receive. They
> are just little bricks that can be assigned an IP address.
> They encode to MP3 up to 320 KBs. It's probably OK quality,
> but a little less than I'd love to have. They also
> interface via RCA jacks. I can get around that. You can use
> them to run SPDIF digital audio, but all our equipment has
> AES/UBU ins and outs, so that won't help a lot.
>
> Any suggestions? Any alternatives to the Barix units? The
> budget is slim on this. This currently nets out about $1650
> for equipment. I'd like to keep the hardware under $2000 if
> possible, but it is important that it actually work well
> too. $1650 is no bargain if it doesn't work right. I'm
> pretty sure the RF part will be OK. It's getting audio in
> and out that concerns me. I'd welcome your suggestions.
>
> Thanks
>
> Chuck
>


Chuck,

My other concern would be if it's self-healing, that is the connection will be re-established in the case of a network drop, etc.

I assist a non-commercial FM and they want to feed a translator with IP-Audio, but one of the vendors is so flaky I wouldn't use them if my life depended on them.

Please keep us up to date on how you proceed.

Bill
 
> On our LAN going directly encoder-player, I think the
> encoding delay is very small, but I haven't tried monitoring
> yet with it. When we do maintanance this weekend, I will
> play with it and see what we have.

It depends on whether the encoder is using TCP (needs a huge buffer) or UDP.
 
> My other concern would be if it's self-healing, that is the
> connection will be re-established in the case of a network
> drop, etc.
>
> I assist a non-commercial FM and they want to feed a
> translator with IP-Audio, but one of the vendors is so flaky
> I wouldn't use them if my life depended on them.
>
> Please keep us up to date on how you proceed.
>
> Bill
>
I've ordered a pair of the Barix units for testing. I'll let you know how things progress. If this works, it could be very handy for lots of situations, and a real help for stations with limited budgets. Depending on the latency issue, I could see using it for remotes as well as STL applications. It ought to beat a POTs remote from the local football stadium if you can deal with the delay.
 
Check out our thursday night show that we do from a local club. We use icecast to send the programming back to the studios. The delay is only around 5-10 seconds. Then we use VRN to remote access our control room, just in case there is a problem with the stream.

Kris
WMPH PD/MD<P ID="signature">______________
http://wmph.org</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom