D-MPX and new IP-MPX…for LEIF….!!!!

[quote author=”Modulator”]Well, i don’t know why would you need to have the BBP at the studio, if you can have it at the transmitter site. It’s also easier to transmit good quality stereo audio to the transmitter site than the whole multiplex losslessly! 192khz 16bit takes more bandwidth than 2x 44.1kHz 16bit, and that can be even reduced by some fancy audio codec!

What about reliability of the STL? When a nice fluffy cloud comes to block the WiFi, then you’re not even transmitting pilot nor RDS, just pure.. nothing! BBP at the transmitter site however solves this, and the only thing that is affected, is the program content =)[/quote]
I agree with this.

Also rocco, please read about some of the upcoming features in Breakaway versions that are planned, in the status update topic (announced). You’ll see there is an option (additional charge) to have full remote control over BBP, as well as STL option (additional charge) for sending lossless audio to BBP across a network, with very robust connection.

There is literally no reason at all to not have BBP at your transmitter, and as noted above (and a bunch of reasons I can add) it’s the best idea.

Nice! Those Bullets (http://ubnt.com/bullet) look good, and seems to have good performance. Maybe I should have couple of those..

I’m wondering that could my STL software written in Python manage with low latency..

Exactly. If you’re gonna have a PC at the transmitter site anyway, do the stereo coding on that pc instead.

It’s absolutely possible to transmit MPX over internet (The Omnia.9 remote does, and so will the future Breakaway remote) for monitoring, but there is no point in using it for broadcast, at this point.

And, why would you want to multicast the MPX?

Nono, why would you want to *multicast* the signal?

Look up Multicast on wikipedia if you don’t know what it means — it has very specific meaning, and is the opposite of what you want to do for an STL.

Oh, I see. Yes, it’s technically possible, but it’s easier to just run breakaway at each TX since you have a PC there anyway.

///Leif

Ookay.. Sorry that I’m resurrecting this old thread, but there’s a question that has been popping up on my mind recently: Where is the free software based audio transmission? Edcast could evolve to create low latency (AAC-LD or CELT (from creators of Vorbis) ?), end-to-end link, or would it radiorio?

I’m just a hobbyist really who doesn’t do real broadcasting nor have money/insanity to buy hardware encoders..
But still! 8)

[quote author=”Dj Buik”][quote author=”Modulator”]Ookay.. Sorry that I’m resurrecting this old thread, but there’s a question that has been popping up on my mind recently: Where is the free software based audio transmission? Edcast could evolve to create low latency (AAC-LD or CELT (from creators of Vorbis) ?), end-to-end link, or would it radiorio?[/quote]

I think the latency is not much of an issue here. The audio link must be robust.
Maybe with a failover line or something, so you no have a ‘dead air’ broadcasting.[/quote]

True, but I can’t understand why couldn’t that be achieved with a software based solution? For example if you use a point-to-point WiFi-link as a primary path, you could additionally have an 3G modem which would receive lower quality stream from Internet, and thus being a failover line, so I think possibilities are endless.. Also, being a software, it would simplify both ends of transmission, broadcast processing and STL both in a same box (Breakaway!). Thus, if you have fixed private connection like fiber or copper, the only place of failure is most likely the PC.

Also, do you know many stations which have an failover line? Here in Finland, we have this almost-nationwide station called NRJ (yes, originated from France), which has a transmitter near my home and is using a satellite based STL as a only program source. Okay, I’m from Finland, not the most advanced country in radio business, but still 😀 8)