Post 9: Experiment 1, Ninjam approach continue

Having a static latency, even though it might be many second, does not allow us to have the phasing effect. However this amount of latency suggest an alternative approach to creativity that I will discuss in later posts. Latency in Ninjam is variable meaning that the redistribution of sound through the network differs from client to client. This was noticeable since I control both locations A and B. Sending sounds from A to B has different latencies in sound that travels from B to A. This trigger more questions and thinking about the way that Ninjam works. As an extended part of experiment 1 or rather the transition to experiment 2, I monitor the uploading and downloading allowance that I have from my house network. I have done this using four wireless laptops all connected to the same wireless router that distributes the Internet. Specifications of three from the four laptops have been mentioned in earlier posts. The fourth laptop has the following specifications

Laptop 4:

Model Name: PowerBook G4 15"
Processor Name: PowerPC G4 (1.1)
Processor Speed: 1.5 GHz
Memory: 1 GB
Mac OS : 10.5.2


The following are screen shots made from measuring the download and upload speed from the http://www.speedtest.net/. Time and date are at the upper right of the screen shots. There was big difference doing the measuring at 20:00 and 1:00 am.

Laptop 1MacBook, White (location A)



Laptop 2 PowerBook G4 12”(location B)



Laptop 3 MacBook Pro (recording laptop use in previous posts)



Laptop 4 PowerBook G4 15”



There was more than 1Mb/s difference in downloading speed between laptop 3 and 4 at 20:00. Notice the difference in downloading for laptop 4. Going back to the recording I found some very interesting observations as well. I have done two sets of recording. The first set was done at 12:15 and the other on the 17:10 on 18th of May 2009. At the first set I have recorded sound from the source of location A and the output form location B. So I have record in a vary the signal that was feed in to the laptop at location A and then then the same signal that came out from laptop and location B. I have done the same thing for the other location. Recorded sound from the source at location B and the output form location A. The recording was done using two separate channels for each laptop/location. The difference between the recorded sounds is the latency. To make thing clearer, the recorded sounds are:

1. One channel with no latency since is recorded from the laptop straight to the sound card.
2. The other is the audio signal that travels over the Internet from one laptop to the other and then recorded to the sound card.


Recording session set 1


Time 12:15
Date: 18 May 09
Place: Home

Latency from location laptop A to location laptop B was 4 sec and 9 frames. The following video shows this.



Latency though from B to A was 3 sec and 15 frames. The following video shows this.



Recording session set 2

Time 17:10
Date: 18 May 09
Place: Home

The recording material shows there is a change in latency. Latency from location laptop A to location laptop B was 2 sec and 15 frames. The following video shows this.



Latency though from B to A was 3 sec and 15 frames. The following video shows this
.

All the videos show that in Ninjam time performance is also an issue that could be used in compositions. As we saw with the difference in download and upload speeds during different time and using Ninjam in different times during the day can give different outcome. In the next post a new experiment/ composition will be presented using the latency that varies between the laptops and time during the day.