Is there a low cost method for doing remote broadcasts?

[joshzz]

We use to do remote broadcasts using Scoop Reporter Analog Codecs. SInce we changed our lines to digital, we can no longer use them.

It was suggested to me that a cheap way to run a remote is to install Windows Media Encoder (WME) on our laptop (we would be using satellite internet service, along with a small mixing board and two mics- for high school game) and then send it to the station . We would play it out live using Windows Media Player.... In my experience sometimes WME locks up.

Do you agree this is the best way to go or do you have another recommendation ? All the CODECS we've looked at cost at least $1,500 each and to operate them you need a pair. thanks Josh

 

[Matt]

You should look at streaming the audio through UStream or a similar service.

You begin by setting up an account online. On the sending side, you just plug your mixer into the line input on your sound card, go to your page on the service and click on "BROADCAST NOW". The webpage does all of the setup and streaming.

On the receive side, you connect to your line output, go to the service you've set up and select the stream for your broadcast. The quality is quite good. Delay-to-Live can be 30 seconds or so. The best thing is the cost . . . . $0.

We have used this to do TV on-location events, and found that if you have adequate bandwidth on the sending side and a good DSL connection on the receiving side the system works.

Later . . . .

 

[ChiefOperator]

Josh-

You should also look at Skype, especially if the broadcast is voice only. You could also look at Audio Compass,
although I have not used it myself.

http://www.audiocompass.com/

Also, take a look at an article about an engineer interfacing two VoIP telephones for low cost remotes.
Google the August 2007 newsletter of Crawford Broadcasting. Check out page 17 of the PDF.
Interesting concept...

 

[nd2023]

If you're at a high school, perhaps you could try to tap into their Internet connection. Then you could forego the satellite Internet service.

 

[Nostalgia]

You should also look at Skype, especially if the broadcast is voice only. You could also look at Audio Compass,
although I have not used it myself.
http://www.audiocompass.com/

I have spent a bit of time researching this and Skype kept coming to the top of my list. My wife uses it to keep up with the kids and the audio is pretty decent. Seems simple to use but there are connection issues from time to time.

I did have a very nice chat last week with Sam from Audio Compass and he said two magic words: bi-directional audio and serial relay closures (ok a couple of phrases). Many of the posts on this board on this subject revolve around monitoring the station output, and controlling the automation system from afar, both very real issues for unattended stations at night. His product seems to do just that. I am going to sign up for the trial and see how it works. I will be happy to share the results with the board.

 

[joshzz]

Thank you for all your great input! I particularly like ustream as it offers audio only streaming and will check out the Audio Compass. I thought skype was more for phone to phone. It too sounds like a very good product

We are looking to send audio directly to our system rather than to a phone line. I like the fact that you can bring up a browser window and then the audio starts playing.

If anyone else has other, input please be sure to share it.

The way technology is going, it might usurp expensive CODECS altogether.

Josh

 

[ABQRADIO]

Audio Compass much cheaper:

http://www.d-voicer.com/

 

[listner1]

Skype is FREE. Quality is almost transparent for voice, and there is very little delay. Enough that you can converse back and forth between the studio and the remote site. Of course this is using Skype on both ends. Obviously, if you are doing Skype to phone, than it is phone quality, but Skype to Skype sounds better than our Comrex and Tieline POTS units in music mode.

 

[joshzz]

how do you do SKype to SKype? thanks! josh

 

[rrsounds]

how do you do SKype to SKype? thanks! josh

For reliable service, you need two computers with relatively fast internet connections (ISDN speed or better), one at the remote site and one at the receiving end. Audio can be fed in and out of the computers' sound cards or USB audio boxes or what have you.
Pretty simple, actually. And it does sound much better than a phone line.

Kind Regards,
David

 

[OKCRadioGuy]

Just hooked one up today... Pretty damn cool! I'm just waiting for Skype to open up 3g skyping on the iPhone. That's when doing remote broadcasts are going to change IMHO.

 

[ok walters]

I have a guy who does a Saturday morning sports show from his home 40 miles from the station here in central Florida. His cohost is in Ohio. He calls the cohost on Skype and streams the conversation and any other sound he wants to send onto ustream and I play the ustream feed on the air. An audio only feed will only have a short delay of 2-3 seconds, so you can either hard break or send the breaks thru ustream as well.

For HS athletics, check the school for an internet connection either wireless or plugin. Then just use ustream and you are good to go. Things sure are alot easier (and cheaper or free) today than they were just two years ago.

 

[Charlie]

When people ask me about the cheapest way to get audio from A to B - the software is usually the 2nd part of the answer. The first being the method used to deliver it - I always tell people: no matter how wonderful the software: Skype, MSN, AudioTX, Barix, ToneCast or SHOUTcast - they'll all fall over on a poor DSL line. For 90% of the time, you can get away with a "domestic" line but there will be that 10% of the time when something bad happens. After all, for £10/$20 a month, what do you expect!

As a private individual writing software, mainly for fun, I have been working on something that the radio community will hopefully find useful: http://www.charliedavy.co.uk/txip.php It's currently in development but I have put plenty of information up to give you an idea of what it'll do. Out of the box: various audio formats (whichever you wish to install), text and RS232 signalling and direct control of any LAN-visible EncoDAD box. Barix integration is also planned.

If anyone wants to send/share some ideas please get in touch via my website - I know that the UK+USA have different ways of doing things so if I can include some obvious (to you but not to me) features then so much the better.

 

[Nostalgia]

Audio Compass update #1: non-compensated review!!
So far so good, actually great. Sam emailed me the keys to unlock the trial download that gave me the studio and two remote locations. Download and installation went very quick and easy. I was actually sending text messages between the two computers in the chat window in just a couple of minutes so I knew the link was complete. Setting up the audio took a little longer and a thorough reading of the online manual. A downloadable manual would be helpful. Initial audio levels were touchy but that was because I was too anxious to try it out and was using the onboard sound cards. With most of the connections redone on my computers and the new M-Audio Delta 44 sound cards installed it was time to fire up some audio. A quick phone call to Sam who suggested some settings a little different from the default settings and we were passing some good sounding audio. Granted we were doing this on the LAN here at the studio. The big test will be tomorrow when we take the remote computer up to the transmitter site and hook it to the DSL line (the only available internet in this rural area at a blazing 3mb download speed!). Still, using the G.722 codec at 44khz we were only eating up 64kbps of internet. And Sam promises some newer and better broadcast quality codecs in the future for STL applications like mine. But for remotes this is fine right out of the box.

I will let you know how the real world test works but so far I am very happy. I can really see this thing shining for remote sports broadcasts where the remote simply hits the connect button for the studio (which has been set for autoanswer) and he is on!

 

[ChiefOperator]

Hey Charlie, you have some pretty cool software!

 

[RolfTaylor]

Just a quick FYI.

In the codec world the sample rate of the codec for transmission is often not the same as the sample rate of the I/O

For example G.722 is not running at 44.1 kHz SR. It is a 16 kHz codec and that is the sample rate of the transmission itself.

Generally speaking the codec itself will be running at 16, 32, or 48 kHz.

Of course, if your house standard is some other rate (e.g. 44.1) that is rarely a problem is the I/O should be able to accomodate this.

Rolf Taylor
Applications/Support Engineer
Worldcast Systems: APT

 

[Nostalgia]

Audio Compass update 1-A!

Real world testing will have to wait until Monday. We arrived at the transmitter site only to find a phone company crew staring down into a big hole they had just dug at the edge of our property looking for a cut cable feeding our facility! Cable splicers are due tomorrow morning but actual service wont be completed until Monday.

 

[OttoM]

Hey Charlie, you have some pretty cool software!

I agree, there's some pretty cool stuff. But then I saw this:

"So does this mean txIP "phones home" ?
Yes - because txIP is designed to work on computers with internet access, it made sense to make the licensing system as flexible as possible - so each copy of txIP is validated with the licence server at runtime..."

That was a deal breaker for me.

I understand (and agree) that software vendors have to do everything they can to protect their IP but what happens if I'm at a remote - any remote - and for whatever reason my software won't run because it couldn't be "validated with the license server"?

When I do a remote I don't want success or failure to depend on a third party which I have no control over (especially one who's several hours ahead of me). This is why the dongle was invented.

 

[RealityCheckr]

I agree, there's some pretty cool stuff. But then I saw this:

"So does this mean txIP "phones home" ?
Yes - because txIP is designed to work on computers with internet access, it made sense to make the licensing system as flexible as possible - so each copy of txIP is validated with the licence server at runtime..."

That was a deal breaker for me.

Presumably this also prevents you from using it on a closed network

 

[Charlie]

Nice to see some interest in txIP - I admit that the "phone home" isn't ideal for everybody. As the software is still under development, it's not too hard to make changes like this. In fact, I hadn't actually considered private LAN/WAN usage so hands-up - I'll provide a workaround to this. The actual "phone-home" procedure is only part of the roaming licence and wouldn't occur on machines that had a normal licence code. If you're interested, it only sends the user's licence code - nothing about the computer or any personal information is stored. I would of course know the original purchaser of that code so it has a double value: I would know that somebody had got hold of their licence, or they were trying to do a number on me 8)

The dongle is in my opinion one of the easiest security features to override - as a programmer, it helps to know the tricks used so I've tried to find something a bit more secure whilst not giving the end-user a hard time each time they install a copy. It also keeps costs down. Features can be updated simply by entering a new code.

txIP was mainly aimed at STL links over the internet so I didn't see the online validation to be a big problem but you raise some valid points. When I've installed software and had to go through complex licensing routines it's always made me want to find something that is quick and painless for Joe Public.

Thanks for your input - it's appreciated.