Forums > MaxMSP

strange problem :/

May 28, 2011 | 5:10 am

hi.

I am trying to send a simple cycle~ tone from one machine to another using jit.catch~ and jit.release~

it works on one single computer for example

computer 1 :

(cycle~ 500)—(jit.catch~)—(jit.release~)–(meter~) = o.k!!

also if I insert udp like this on computer 1:

(cycle~ 500)—(jit.catch~)-(udpsend 127.0.0.1 99)-(udpreceive 99)-(jit release~)–(meter~) = all works o.k !!

I can run the same test on computer 2. Also the LAN is fine, i can send bangs using udp, so that all works also.

So everything seems ready for a test between the two machines to send the tone.

so now i try by placing this on:

computer 1:

(cycle~ 500)—(jit.catch~)-(udpsend 10.10.10.1 99)

computer 2:

(udpreceive 99)–(jit.release~)–(meter~) = fail !!

I can see the info arrive on computer 2 at (udpreceive 99) but the (jit.release~) will not convert this data back into audio. A print out of the info received at udpreceive 99 on computer 2 shows that the data is correct. just the same as a print out on a single machine.

Anyone have any ideas why this might be?

I am flummoxed :/


May 28, 2011 | 6:45 am

What happens if you choose a different port number (eg 9999)?


May 28, 2011 | 6:45 am

What happens if you choose a different port number (eg 9999)?


May 28, 2011 | 4:17 pm

hi : )

Still the same if i change IP and ports, the information is being sent across LAN..the udpreceive is receiving the info fine, it seems.(I use a print to see what is there, it looks exactly the same as what is being sent across). but the jit.release~ will not turn the info back into audio.

jit.release does work on computer 2 because I have tested it by sending jit.catch~ info from the same machine.

So everything works, except only the sending machine at present can decode. Even though my other computer can receive the information sent ,it cannot decode it. it seems the info from catch has a hidden ID embedded so only the one machine can decode?

very unusual. : ?


May 28, 2011 | 4:17 pm

hi : )

Still the same if i change IP and ports, the information is being sent across LAN..the udpreceive is receiving the info fine, it seems.(I use a print to see what is there, it looks exactly the same as what is being sent across). but the jit.release~ will not turn the info back into audio.

jit.release does work on computer 2 because I have tested it by sending jit.catch~ info from the same machine.

So everything works, except only the sending machine at present can decode. Even though my other computer can receive the information sent ,it cannot decode it. it seems the info from catch has a hidden ID embedded so only the one machine can decode?

very unusual. : ?


May 28, 2011 | 4:40 pm

I have just tried sending jit.catch~ information back the other way also, from machine 2 to 1; and although the info is received, jit.release~ will not work once the info has gone across LAN.

Are there any other ways to convert and send audio across Lan, to save band width , low latency is not an requirement, i just wish to make a simple intercom type system for voice.

thanks for help : )


May 28, 2011 | 4:40 pm

I have just tried sending jit.catch~ information back the other way also, from machine 2 to 1; and although the info is received, jit.release~ will not work once the info has gone across LAN.

Are there any other ways to convert and send audio across Lan, to save band width , low latency is not an requirement, i just wish to make a simple intercom type system for voice.

thanks for help : )


May 28, 2011 | 8:30 pm

finally i figured it out.I needed to add (jit.net.send) after jit.catch~ to prepare it for its travels.and (jit.net recv) on the receiving machine before jit.release~

running at approx 2.7 mbps for a mono channel. : /


May 28, 2011 | 8:30 pm

finally i figured it out.I needed to add (jit.net.send) after jit.catch~ to prepare it for its travels.and (jit.net recv) on the receiving machine before jit.release~

running at approx 2.7 mbps for a mono channel. : /


May 29, 2011 | 6:37 pm

that’s what I was about to suggest, so you can use the matrix inlet/outlet of jit.net.send/recv. udpsend must be formatting it in some way that mangles the matrix, I don’t know…

Good to know it’s working, that’s pretty cool! How’s the fidelity at the other end? Things rolling along quickly enough that you don’t get cracks and pops?


May 29, 2011 | 6:37 pm

that’s what I was about to suggest, so you can use the matrix inlet/outlet of jit.net.send/recv. udpsend must be formatting it in some way that mangles the matrix, I don’t know…

Good to know it’s working, that’s pretty cool! How’s the fidelity at the other end? Things rolling along quickly enough that you don’t get cracks and pops?


May 29, 2011 | 6:54 pm

hi seejayjames.: )

yeah it sounds fine. I haven’t analysed in detail or ran any special test, just played a wav file from one machine to another. it sounds great so far. i only need a low quality signal , but this sounds top notch. :)

2.7mb sec is quite steep for the mono channel, I was wondering to find a way to realtime convert an audio channel inside max to a lower bitrate and send that data across LAN instead.

There is an oggPRO external at http://www.nullmedium.de/dev/oggpro/ not sure if it is possible to send across a home LAN network? or whether one needs to send out to a special server then back or what not? maybe the server can be at home,not sure ? also there is no mention of cost. so I kinda left that option and carried on searching.

thanks :)


May 29, 2011 | 6:54 pm

hi seejayjames.: )

yeah it sounds fine. I haven’t analysed in detail or ran any special test, just played a wav file from one machine to another. it sounds great so far. i only need a low quality signal , but this sounds top notch. :)

2.7mb sec is quite steep for the mono channel, I was wondering to find a way to realtime convert an audio channel inside max to a lower bitrate and send that data across LAN instead.

There is an oggPRO external at http://www.nullmedium.de/dev/oggpro/ not sure if it is possible to send across a home LAN network? or whether one needs to send out to a special server then back or what not? maybe the server can be at home,not sure ? also there is no mention of cost. so I kinda left that option and carried on searching.

thanks :)


Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)