Hi: IceShare looks quite promising, not sure where they're at as regards actual code. http://www.iceshare.org Geoff. --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request at xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
Le dim 29/02/2004 à 22:55, MacSym a écrit :> About the new broadcasting methods, is the multicast technology already > available? I have heard only few providers are equipped with multicast > enabled routers.It's not already available for "mass-broadcasting" such as unicast broadcast :-( We are trying multicast in partnership with an ISP, but... it's limited to this ISP's network, that's why we cannot leave unicast streams... <p>> What about p2p streaming, is it really reliable? When I see Peercast's> statistics, only few stations have more than 10 listeners currently > connected... Do you think p2p streaming could support an "unlimited" > number of listeners or is it only a utopia? Anyway, I am not sure many > listeners would be attracted by p2p streaming until a reliable Applet > is available. I mean, I know only few users that are ready to install > additional software to listen to online music.I don't really believe on the reliability of peercast. It's a great idea, but there are so many people with ADSL broadband connections@home, and who use their bandwidth for download, or "classic" p2p such as kazaa or whatever... That's why I think it's hard to rely on home connections. Greets, -- Clément Cavadore www.frequence3.org Webradio Francophone --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
At 03:55 PM 2/29/2004, you wrote:>Hi Oddsock, > >Like Clement, I am sure Nullsoft is still "offering" AOL's bandwidth since I >think Nullsoft is not part of AOL anymore. About the new broadcasting >methods, is the multicast technology already available? I have heard only >few providers are equipped with multicast enabled routers.People have been chasing multicast for many years now, and honestly it's no closer to reality than it was 4 or 5 years ago (really, the same points were made back then - multicast is a great solution, but limited to certain ISPs and not widespread - people have been saying that for 4 or 5 years).. So if you ask me, multicast will never happen, so you probably can't count on it.>What about p2p >streaming, is it really reliable? When I see Peercast's statistics, only few >stations have more than 10 listeners currently connected... Do you think p2p >streaming could support an "unlimited" number of listeners or is it only a >utopia? Anyway, I am not sure many listeners would be attracted by p2p >streaming until a reliable Applet is available. I mean, I know only few >users that are ready to install additional software to listen to online >music.the "listener-bandwidth-sharing" aspects of p2p broadcasting has had about 2 years now to mature. I've talked with people at Abacast, peercast, etc and they've all said the same thing... "We've got it licked, we have a viable solution"...however, it's been 2 years now since it all started surfacing, and I don't really think we are much closer than we were to a viable solution now then we were back then. This is not saying that it won't EVER happen, but my feelings is that if it hasn't happened (taken off) by now, there is a good chance it never will. o where does that leave broadcasters ? Well, it's fairly simple...it leaves them in the same place that terrestrial broadcasters are...you gotta make money to offset your operational costs. Terrestrial broadcasters do it by buying up large numbers of stations and selling Ad time to large numbers of listeners. They have other methods as well, but I think that one is pretty much the largest. Internet broadcasters can recoup some of their costs by offering services unique to internet broadcasting. Digitally Imported is a good case of a major broadcaster re-couping costs by offering a "premium service" which listeners pay for. And Digitally Imported also uses the technique of combining stations into a single offering (similar to the way Terrestrial stations buy up other stations). Additionally, smaller broadcasters (with not as much momentum as DI for instance) can also deal with costs by <plug> using open-source software such as icecast, coupled with patent/royalty-free codecs like vorbis which provide great sounding streams at half the bandwidth requirements of mp3.</plug> oddsock <p>--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
Hi Clement, Geoff, Eisele, Stefan and Oddsock; Thank you very much for your instructive answers. I guess the debate on streaming new techniques is now opened! Max -----Original Message----- From: owner-icecast@xiph.org [mailto:owner-icecast@xiph.org] On Behalf Of oddsock Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 8:25 PM To: icecast@xiph.org Subject: RE: [icecast] bit/bytes At 03:55 PM 2/29/2004, you wrote:>Hi Oddsock, > >Like Clement, I am sure Nullsoft is still "offering" AOL's bandwidth sinceI>think Nullsoft is not part of AOL anymore. About the new broadcasting >methods, is the multicast technology already available? I have heard only >few providers are equipped with multicast enabled routers.People have been chasing multicast for many years now, and honestly it's no closer to reality than it was 4 or 5 years ago (really, the same points were made back then - multicast is a great solution, but limited to certain ISPs and not widespread - people have been saying that for 4 or 5 years).. So if you ask me, multicast will never happen, so you probably can't count on it.>What about p2p >streaming, is it really reliable? When I see Peercast's statistics, onlyfew>stations have more than 10 listeners currently connected... Do you thinkp2p>streaming could support an "unlimited" number of listeners or is it only a >utopia? Anyway, I am not sure many listeners would be attracted by p2p >streaming until a reliable Applet is available. I mean, I know only few >users that are ready to install additional software to listen to online >music.the "listener-bandwidth-sharing" aspects of p2p broadcasting has had about 2 years now to mature. I've talked with people at Abacast, peercast, etc and they've all said the same thing... "We've got it licked, we have a viable solution"...however, it's been 2 years now since it all started surfacing, and I don't really think we are much closer than we were to a viable solution now then we were back then. This is not saying that it won't EVER happen, but my feelings is that if it hasn't happened (taken off) by now, there is a good chance it never will. o where does that leave broadcasters ? Well, it's fairly simple...it leaves them in the same place that terrestrial broadcasters are...you gotta make money to offset your operational costs. Terrestrial broadcasters do it by buying up large numbers of stations and selling Ad time to large numbers of listeners. They have other methods as well, but I think that one is pretty much the largest. Internet broadcasters can recoup some of their costs by offering services unique to internet broadcasting. Digitally Imported is a good case of a major broadcaster re-couping costs by offering a "premium service" which listeners pay for. And Digitally Imported also uses the technique of combining stations into a single offering (similar to the way Terrestrial stations buy up other stations). Additionally, smaller broadcasters (with not as much momentum as DI for instance) can also deal with costs by <plug> using open-source software such as icecast, coupled with patent/royalty-free codecs like vorbis which provide great sounding streams at half the bandwidth requirements of mp3.</plug> oddsock <p>--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered. <p>--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
On Mon, 1 Mar 2004, oddsock wrote:> Additionally, smaller broadcasters (with not as much momentum as DI for > instance) can also deal with costs by <plug> using open-source software > such as icecast, coupled with patent/royalty-free codecs like vorbis which > provide great sounding streams at half the bandwidth requirements of > mp3.</plug>All very true points (and that goes for the parts of your email I did not quote here as well) But Ogg Vorbis, for all it's quality and capabilities, is going to continue to be limited to a comparatively small following of people. Lets not forget that many of our listeners are not as technically inclined as we'd like them to be. Many will look at you like you have five heads if you ask them if they know what a "codec" is. Grandma just wants to go to her NPR webcast station, click [>] and hear something. Confront her with a "Unknown MIME Type: audio/ogg" message and she'll likely not realize that she needs to download a plugin for whatever player she's happening to use, which would likely what ever came as a part of the OS on the computer she bought from Dell or HP. Worst case is that she decides it's not worth the trouble and picks up her knitting. That's one less listener for the webcaster. My point in this is that Ogg Vorbis needs a long-overdue shot in the arm in terms of marketting. That is, marketting to the people who supply the popular media apps... Apple and iTunes. Microsoft Media Player. Audion. WinAMP. /dale --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 01:25:00PM -0600, oddsock wrote:> the "listener-bandwidth-sharing" aspects of p2p broadcasting has had about > 2 years now to mature. I've talked with people at Abacast, peercast, etc > and they've all said the same thing... "We've got it licked, we have a > viable solution"...however, it's been 2 years now since it all started > surfacing, and I don't really think we are much closer than we were to a > viable solution now then we were back then. This is not saying that it > won't EVER happen, but my feelings is that if it hasn't happened (taken > off) by now, there is a good chance it never will.Any idea if this is a technical or a social problem? -r --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
Hi Oddsock, Like Clement, I am sure Nullsoft is still "offering" AOL's bandwidth since I think Nullsoft is not part of AOL anymore. About the new broadcasting methods, is the multicast technology already available? I have heard only few providers are equipped with multicast enabled routers. What about p2p streaming, is it really reliable? When I see Peercast's statistics, only few stations have more than 10 listeners currently connected... Do you think p2p streaming could support an "unlimited" number of listeners or is it only a utopia? Anyway, I am not sure many listeners would be attracted by p2p streaming until a reliable Applet is available. I mean, I know only few users that are ready to install additional software to listen to online music. Does anyone know about such an open source Applet or ActiveX? I know www.chaincast.com is selling such a solution but it's only targeted to windows users because it's an ActiveX that streams WMA... Cheers, MAX -----Original Message----- From: owner-icecast@xiph.org [mailto:owner-icecast@xiph.org] On Behalf Of Clement Cavadore Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 5:38 PM To: icecast@xiph.org Subject: RE: [icecast] bit/bytes Le dim 29/02/2004 à 17:27, oddsock a écrit :> for most stations that have this kind of listener capacity, they are > getting bandwidth from AOL/Nullsoft. Nullsoft had (may still have) a > policy of offering free bandwith to stations they hand-picked. They > were tapping into the rather huge amount of bandwidth that AOL had, and > thus could offer the kind of listener capacity you are seeing.I don't think they still have this policy... since they don't reply to my E-mails... maybe one day, who knows.... :)> Alternatively, many stations also operate on bandwith donations (people > offering relays because they like the station)....I'd say most (if not > all) stations that have high listener capacity are operating using one > of these two mechanisms.I dont't think there are many stations who are able to pay for so much bandwidth... in our case (Frequence3, see below), we rely on bw donation... but it's quite hard to get some, because of the prices, so we should go and try to use new broadcasting methods (multicast, or oggvorbis)... <p>Greets, -- Clément Cavadore www.frequence3.org Webradio Francophone --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered. <p>--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
EISELE Pascal
2004-Aug-06 14:23 UTC
[icecast] bit/bytes <= broadcasting : the state of art ?
Hi, Our webradio (Let's Go Zik - http://www.letsgozik.com) works with donation and partenship. I think it's the only way to keep a webradio alive for the moment... We are making our radio in a associative way... It's quite hard to "find" listeners. Currently we are nearly broadcasting for 60 simultaneous listeners (and approx. 5000 differents listeners per months)... The problem is the same for everybody : bandwith ! Multicast is not a reliable solution for the moment because operating systems such as Windows doesn't support it yet (Windows 95,95,ME,NT). Moreover, the worldwilde web is not multicast ready yet ! The P2P broadcasting is not the solution, I think... Here (in France), connection speed are 512 Kbps for download and 128 Kbps for upload. So, a listener couldn't re-send correctly the stream to another. Moreover, P2P broadcasting increase delay between the "real sound" (that are encoded at the studio) and the sound heard by listeners... I think that a Java Applet for P2P webradio should be great but it's not possible... Java Applets cannot be connected to something different from the server that they come from. In fact, it's possible but you must "sign" the applet with a official and valide certificate. Such certificates costs 200$ or euros per years... Bests regards, Pascal EISELE (alias Lemmings) http://www.letsgozik.com <p>Geoff Shang wrote:>Hi: > >IceShare looks quite promising, not sure where they're at as regards actual >code. > >http://www.iceshare.org > >Geoff. > >--- >8 ---- >List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ >icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ >To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' >containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. >Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered. > > >--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.