1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  

Why is this not available yet???

Discussion in 'Live Sound [BG]' started by NickFromNY, Feb 11, 2013.

  1. NickFromNY

    NickFromNY Supporting Member

    Nov 2, 2010
    Long Island, NY
    Since mackie and PreSonus are using Ipods, Iphones and Ipads to control their devices, why have they not developed the ability to use your phone as an IEM device?

    for example, with Qmix on the SL boards, each person can control their own monitor mix (6 mixes on the 16.4.2, 10 on the 24.4.2), but why not be able to simply plug your headphones into your iphone, throw it in your pocket, and bam.... wireless IEM set up with monitor control all in one package on your phone. IT works reverse with Bluetooth, sending audio from the phone to a receiver... why not just reverse the path? I have no technical skill whatsoever, but this is a no brainer that PreSonus should jump on! I would use it and it would revolutionize the IEM industry for the weekend warrior musician.
  2. bongomania

    bongomania Gold Supporting Member Commercial User

    Oct 17, 2005
    PDX, OR
    owner, OVNIFX and OVNILabs
    Brings new meaning to "he just phoned in that performance".
  3. NickFromNY

    NickFromNY Supporting Member

    Nov 2, 2010
    Long Island, NY
    Trust me, some nights I wish I could just set up my phone on stage and stay home
  4. derrico1

    derrico1 Supporting Member

    Apr 12, 2005
    Charlottesville, VA
    Probably just a matter of time. But for now it's a matter of bandwidth and reliability.

    The Presonus SL and Mackie DL boards will record audio to attached computer devices. However, iOS devices aren't passing [multi-track] audio via WIFI to the mixers, and the mixers aren't pushing [multi-track] audio back over WIFI to the iOS devices.
  5. NickFromNY

    NickFromNY Supporting Member

    Nov 2, 2010
    Long Island, NY
    With an Airport express, you can send audio wirelessly over wifi from your iphone/ipad/ipod to a receiver and it is fairly reliable. I have been using one for several years... all you would need to do is reverse the process.
  6. jamiroquaisub


    Dec 28, 2012
    I looked into this from the Android end a couple of months ago thinking I could get better intonation on my upright with a bluetooth headset. Bluetooth has a .3 or .4 second delay due to compression making it unsatisfactory for live performance. They'd have to use wi-fi or a custom bluetooth spec.
  7. Hactar


    Sep 25, 2011
    Boulder, CO
    I would add that, in addition to bandwidth (audio quality) and reliability, it is also a matter of latency.
    All the applications that use bluetooth for audio (phone headsets, etc) and audio over Wifi (iTunes, live streaming, and whatnot) are tolerant of small to middling delays.
    IEMs require a very low latency, something that is not currently achievable with our wireless technology.
  8. I have read that in another post but can't figure out how to do it. Can you help me here or point me to where i can get help (for this that is) :)
  9. seamonkey


    Aug 6, 2004
    It's being jumped on.
    I have Kleernet running form the laptop to a little box that outputs to the mains.
    Digital, full frequency response, full dynamics, very little latency, and it doesn't use crowed 2.4ghz band, pairing.

    Smartphones have cell, wifi, bluetooth, etc, and I bet some eventually do offer low latency full frequency wireless audio maybe even video.
  10. Chromer


    Nov 28, 2012
    I can't see it happening over bluetooth, due to the latency inherent in that coding scheme, but it should be totally possible via wifi and audio streaming. 802.11n has more than enough bandwidth to handle a dozen or so 44.1/16 channel streams with reasonable latency. Stream it all from the mixer, let each client dial up their own mix from the channel list being broadcast. Will work great until you have a FB update or phone call come in...
  11. SirMjac28

    SirMjac28 Patiently Waiting For The Next British Invasion

    Aug 25, 2010
    The Great Midwest
  12. 1958Bassman


    Oct 20, 2007
    Be careful of what you ask- that's one step away from using the same transmission medium to send music to everyone in the audience, using their smart phones. If this were to be adopted, they could use the same source music and not have to pay a band.
  13. Chromer


    Nov 28, 2012
    That's already trivial. Hang a laptop off the SPDIF output of the mixer (or feed it with some room mics), have VLC or Winamp stream it to a re-streaming site. There will be some latency.
  14. I remember to have read somewhere that latency was an issue which they couldn't quite overcome just yet. I think I remember Rick Naqvi from Presonus saying that it is a cool idea but that so far it is not something which has been cracked.

    It would seem the obvious choice and I'm sure that they would if they could.
  15. I've often wondered this or why they haven't turned your smartphone into a wireless pack at the very least. Bluetooth receivers don't break the bank by any means and from what I've heard have pretty good sound quality. I like to imagine a world where my pre amp and wireless unit are in my phone and I'm just beaming to a class D featherweight power amp on top of my cabs.

    Maybe I'm just foolish though and this wouldn't work for some fundamental reason.
  16. Hactar


    Sep 25, 2011
    Boulder, CO
    As noted above, Bluetooth definitely wouldn't work, it simply has too much inherent latency. Wifi may stand a chance, if some sort of proprietary low-latency protocol could be designed.

    However, another issue is that of interference.
    Wifi really only has 3 non-overlapping channels (or 4 if you're in Japan, IIRC), and that means that most places you go are not going to have a completely open channel. Hence, you are going to be dealing with other in-band signaling, which can at least lower bandwidth and at worst can cause nasty drop-outs.
    Or there's the possibility of some cretin with a tinfoil dish and a 2.4GHz jammer showing up at a gig and wreaking havoc..
  17. two fingers

    two fingers Opinionated blowhard. But not mad about it. Gold Supporting Member

    Feb 7, 2005
    Eastern NC USA
    Latency = time delay

    As fast as our technology is today, it's not instant. Everything you just mentioned is digital. It requires millions and millions of codes in binary form (which means every single piece of data is converted to "1"s and "0"s). Processing, lining up, transmitting, the signal traveling through the air, receiving, decoding, streaming, amplifying, sending through speakers, and the sound traveling through the air to your ears takes a tiny bit of time.

    This is no big deal when it comes to tweaking your IEM mix. You don't even notice that when you (let's just say) boost the volume of your bass a bit it takes a tiny bit of time for that to happen. (That's why you think "Hey, if it works one way, why not the other?" But you simply don't notice the delay while tweaking your personal mix). However, when you are playing notes, in real time, trying to lock in with a drummer who is also playing in real time, every millisecond counts. IEMs run through all of this process would drive you nuts because of the tiny bit of delay involved.

    Imagine if you were singing the national anthem at a Red Sox game (GO SOX!). You are standing at the Green Monster (left field wall) and the speakers broadcasting your amazing voice were behind home plate. The only way you hear yourself is through those speakers. Your brain would not be able to compensate for the slight delay. Every time you sang a note, you would hear it a tiny bit later. You just couldn't do it. Now, that kind of delay is more physics and less about technology, but the same thing would happen only a few few away because of the "process" of converting your analog bass signal to a digital signal (those "1"s and "0"s mentioned earlier) combined with transmission times would make IEMs useless because of the delay. You would spend the entire show trying to compensate for it and would be nowhere near close to accomplishing it.

    If just your bass signal weren't enough, let's throw one more thing into the pot. Not only would your bass signal be going through this process, but everything else you potentially want in your mix would be going through it as well (vocals, guitar, keys, kazoo, and cowbell). Now, all of these things would be happening at ever-so-slightly different digital rates due to different versions of iPhones, different types of signals, distances from receivers, frequencies etc. So the tiny delay for each thing would be slightly different. Possibly not noticeable, but possibly a nightmare depending on circumstances.

    Our current digital technology is pretty amazing. But it's not instant, even though it's kind of close. Kind of close isn't close enough in this case.

    Sorry for the length but hope that helps.
  18. seamonkey


    Aug 6, 2004
    The latency of A/D => D/A takes only microseconds
    The "radio" waves travels at the speed of light.
    Line 6 and others are showing digital audio through radio conversion and all is fast, very low latency.

    And latency isn't as big of worry as many would think. A drummer hitting a cymbal that is 4ft from their ear hears a 4ms delay. Brains can compensate for realistic latency through even two line6 devices. If you purposely add say 60ms delay, you'd be amazed about how it disappears with a little practice. 60ms would be extreme today.

    Wireless mics with wireless IEM are used now.

    Now Ethernet, and computer protocols use packets. It's not meant to be realtime. It's multiple access. Devices take turns sending data. It's not guaranteed latency.

    Line6 and now other audio devices use the same 2.4ghz as WiFi and it's going to get crowded. It is now. There are WiFi wars breaking out in populated areas. Line6 isn't good about sharing, it's need a whole channel itself.

    The real problem is FTC bid off all the analog TV channels and they got gobbled up by cell phones, and wireless broadband providers. There isn't anything left for "new" markets like FOH. FTC is going to let some wireless mics use the whitespace between TV channels, but there's going to be more of "other" devices wanting to use the same radio frequencies. Highest bidder wins the frequencies.

    I expect cat5/6 to be around a long time. Digital snakes using cat6 is a big growth market. It's at the point it's cheaper than analog now for FOH.

    Maybe quantum entanglement will be available soon and it is instant, faster than light and no barrier interference problems besides black holes. :bag:
  19. chatterbox272


    Apr 12, 2012
    If you wanted to ghetto rig one most phones have FM radios built in, you could use an FM transmitter from the board and then tune in to the radio channel on your phone.
  20. gareth dunster

    gareth dunster

    Dec 8, 2009
    If you've ever tried to send audio wirelessly to accompany video and you're using an airport express you'll find there's a significant delay between the sound and video signals. I had to download a special ap with a variable delay to sync them up. We're not talking about a millisecond or two, it was unwatchable.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.