Registered: 07/11/01
Posts: 29756
Loc: Westborough, MA, USA
Or any other software with which you can play remotely with others?
The band I was in whose name is [redacted] has been asked to see if we can live-stream a concert to Kabul for our former colleagues. This JamKazam.com looks like it will work - anyone have any experience with it, or any other software? Any other ideas?
Thanks!
_________________________ The internet, and the whole technology sector on which it floats, feels like a giant organ for bullshittery—for upscaling human access to speech and for amplifying lies. - Ian Bogost
Professor Truth T. Sweetness says,"Mind your manners!"
MooseboyMooseboy
That's "MR. Asshole" to you, buddy!
Loquacious Planeteer
Registered: 04/24/99
Posts: 37201
Loc: Black Mountain Hills of Dakota
'cat, I haven't tried Jamkazam specifically, but just from the facts of public switched network latency, it won't be like playing in the same room.
There used to be some company named "Rocket Jam" or something like that, who claimed that using their software was just like playing next to somebody. I called them out on it and they backed off their claim.
However, having done my techie soapbox, I'm gonna check out Jamkazam.
_________________________
"My fingers go wiggle wiggle and the music goes jingle jangle and the crowd is happy"
I think the primary use of these services is so that FlatCat can have Mooseboy add a guitar part to his recording, and interact with him like he's "in the room". Not so that Flat and Mooseboy can play together each on their own instrument "like they're in the same room".
I briefly looked at them, and then reconsidered simply because the prices I charged to do stuff was pretty dependent on my doing it whenever I wanted.
Registered: 07/11/01
Posts: 29756
Loc: Westborough, MA, USA
No, actually, it is the type of thing where people are playing at the same time together.
I am looking for a mechanism to be able to have the Kabul band play together from however many - five, six, maybe - locations for the benefit of our colleagues over there now. This looked like one way to do. I don't think you can have audio at the same time on Zoom, it's a 1 by 1 focus, I think, so that won't work.
Any other ideas welcome
_________________________ The internet, and the whole technology sector on which it floats, feels like a giant organ for bullshittery—for upscaling human access to speech and for amplifying lies. - Ian Bogost
Professor Truth T. Sweetness says,"Mind your manners!"
MooseboyMooseboy
That's "MR. Asshole" to you, buddy!
Loquacious Planeteer
Registered: 04/24/99
Posts: 37201
Loc: Black Mountain Hills of Dakota
Originally Posted By: Popmann
I think the primary use of these services is so that FlatCat can have Mooseboy add a guitar part to his recording, and interact with him like he's "in the room". Not so that Flat and Mooseboy can play together each on their own instrument "like they're in the same room".
So in your example, pop, it's no different at all from sending tracks to somebody via email or Dropbox.
That's the position they'll back off to if you really press them. But the ad copy doesn't specify this at all. They make it seem as if it's what 'cat is trying to do, temporal simultaneity.
_________________________
"My fingers go wiggle wiggle and the music goes jingle jangle and the crowd is happy"
It's not the same as Dropbox.....unless you're also on FaceTime or a cell and have organized that everyone will sit down together (apart) during the process.
It's "buffered real time"....which is fine for directive collaboration. If you have someone playing drum tracks on your track-you get to hear them play.....you can stop them....and say "why don't we try half time on that B section"....and they can try that....then you can discuss what the Royal "we" thought of that.
It's very different from Dropbox....someone downloads and imports it....records a track and sends it back to DB for someone to download and import and listen to then give feedback via....? Cell will be fastest....but, again....5min song will take min of 15-20min per take. vs taking 5min+ buffer (30seconds?) per take.
It's GREAT for that TYPE of collaboration. It's MUCH more functionally like they're sitting on your studio directing you. Two musicians playing at the same time is a different level of need for timing completely.
Registered: 09/27/00
Posts: 19109
Loc: Sacramento, CA, USA
Originally Posted By: Popmann
It's "buffered real time"
Wondering if they figured a way to handle the buffering in the cloud such that it feels like real time for all of the participants. I can't get my head around how that might work.
We do conference calls all the time at work with participants around the world, and delays/echoes are a constant annoyance.
_________________________ "Bobby, I'm sorry you got a head like a potato. I really am."
MooseboyMooseboy
That's "MR. Asshole" to you, buddy!
Loquacious Planeteer
Registered: 04/24/99
Posts: 37201
Loc: Black Mountain Hills of Dakota
Originally Posted By: Popmann
It's "buffered real time"....which is fine for directive collaboration. If you have someone playing drum tracks on your track-you get to hear them play.....you can stop them....and say "why don't we try half time on that B section"....and they can try that....then you can discuss what the Royal "we" thought of that.
And that's NOT what they're selling. Not at all.
Quote:
See bands using JamKazam to play together in real time from different locations over the Internet, and hear the actual audio from their headphones from these sessions. Learn about the major features of the JamKazam service, and see it working in action. And get stoked about playing, creating, and enjoying more music with more friends than ever possible!
What part of this baloney sales tactic don't you understand? Watch their promo video, for instance. It clearly states, "With Jamkazam, musicians can play together in real time over the internet":
_________________________
"My fingers go wiggle wiggle and the music goes jingle jangle and the crowd is happy"
Registered: 09/27/00
Posts: 19109
Loc: Sacramento, CA, USA
Maybe they are buffering "my tracks" in the cloud before anyone (even you) hears them, so everyone is playing along with a buffered version. Still one would have to be the master... Maybe the buffering is clever enough to make delays reasonable to "most" people?
If they offer a free trial... Why not?
_________________________ "Bobby, I'm sorry you got a head like a potato. I really am."
Wondering if they figured a way to handle the buffering in the cloud such that it feels like real time for all of the participants. I can't get my head around how that might work.
We do conference calls all the time at work with participants around the world, and delays/echoes are a constant annoyance.
Not unless they invented a time machine. If they did, I've got better uses that this for it.
I've been reading about these systems/software and it seems if you are 25 miles apart you might have a better chance of it working than if you were 3000 miles apart.
I bet 'remote jamming software' has been the most frequently searched term submitted by musicians in the past week or so.
MooseboyMooseboy
That's "MR. Asshole" to you, buddy!
Loquacious Planeteer
Registered: 04/24/99
Posts: 37201
Loc: Black Mountain Hills of Dakota
Okay, I just got off the phone with a buddy of mine that is (I know it sounds unbelievable ) even smarter than I am at this kind of stuff. He said that Jamkazam is actually useable.
I went through every reason why it can't work with him, and he said, "Yeah I know, I said every one of those things too, but it seems to work."
So I'm going to get busy and do my homework… and then set up a session with him.
_________________________
"My fingers go wiggle wiggle and the music goes jingle jangle and the crowd is happy"
_________________________
"On religion, the common man finds it to be true, the wise man finds it foolish, and the wealthy man finds it useful." -Seneca The Younger ~76AD
Registered: 07/11/01
Posts: 29756
Loc: Westborough, MA, USA
I set up an account but haven't tried it yet. two guys in the band tried it out and it sounds like they were successful, but I have been sick so I missed their invitation.
Maybe this weekend or something.
_________________________ The internet, and the whole technology sector on which it floats, feels like a giant organ for bullshittery—for upscaling human access to speech and for amplifying lies. - Ian Bogost
Professor Truth T. Sweetness says,"Mind your manners!"
Me and a friend tried doing this on Face-time, Facebook, Zoom, and Whats app last night. When it's all said and done, one person has to count the song off (be the initiator) and play it and turn off his headphones. The other guy can play along as desired. The delay was too much for both guys to play and monitor the mix simultaneously. We tried and managed to play about 5 seconds before starting to laugh.
MooseboyMooseboy
That's "MR. Asshole" to you, buddy!
Loquacious Planeteer
Registered: 04/24/99
Posts: 37201
Loc: Black Mountain Hills of Dakota
Update~ just tried it with my buddy, it failed miserably as I suspected. HOWEVER, he was on wifi. So he's going to run a long network cable in a couple of days and we'll try it again.
_________________________
"My fingers go wiggle wiggle and the music goes jingle jangle and the crowd is happy"
Registered: 07/11/01
Posts: 29756
Loc: Westborough, MA, USA
The website is pretty specific in saying you need to run an ethernet cable and that it won't work well on WiFi.
_________________________ The internet, and the whole technology sector on which it floats, feels like a giant organ for bullshittery—for upscaling human access to speech and for amplifying lies. - Ian Bogost
Professor Truth T. Sweetness says,"Mind your manners!"
I can't see, at this time, how this can possible work even plugged in. Some floaty surreal music with welcomed unexpected results would be fun and possibly workable. But a tight funk track? No way.
_________________________
We're all gonna lose an eye!!!
#1651302 - 04/03/2005:13 PMRe: Anyone try Jamkazam?
[Re: E Beau]
MooseboyMooseboy
That's "MR. Asshole" to you, buddy!
Loquacious Planeteer
Registered: 04/24/99
Posts: 37201
Loc: Black Mountain Hills of Dakota
E Beau, across town. And he moved himself later on last night, plugged directly into the router. Still didn't work all that well. The latency shown between us within Jamkazam was about 76ms.
So the "in the same room" comparison could be stretched, as long as the room was about eighty feet wide and you were against opposite walls
_________________________
"My fingers go wiggle wiggle and the music goes jingle jangle and the crowd is happy"
Registered: 09/27/00
Posts: 19109
Loc: Sacramento, CA, USA
Originally Posted By: Mooseboy
The latency shown between us within Jamkazam was about 76ms.
That's got to feel weird. When I'm playing a virtual instrument by myself, I notice latency > 5ms. My brain seems to be able to compensate up to about 12ms, but it takes some getting used to. >15ms is intolerable.
So maybe this app is OK for going over chord changes together, maybe playing slow ballads? Seems like it would be impossible to play anything tight.
_________________________ "Bobby, I'm sorry you got a head like a potato. I really am."
MooseboyMooseboy
That's "MR. Asshole" to you, buddy!
Loquacious Planeteer
Registered: 04/24/99
Posts: 37201
Loc: Black Mountain Hills of Dakota
Originally Posted By: Xenophile
[quote=Mooseboy]When I'm playing a virtual instrument by myself, I notice latency > 5ms. My brain seems to be able to compensate up to about 12ms, but it takes some getting used to. >15ms is intolerable.
Same here. More than 5ms sounds like flanging if it's on my own voice.
_________________________
"My fingers go wiggle wiggle and the music goes jingle jangle and the crowd is happy"
