Jamulus alternatives

[corrados]

Despite the fact that the community performing online jam sessions and rehearsals has grown significantly during the pandemic, it is still a very small community compared to the number of musicians in the world. So, I definitely do not see Jamulus alternatives as an enemy but as a help to grow the online jamming community. It's similar to, e.g., virtual reality. Compared to the number of gamers in the world, just very few actively using virtual reality. To spread the information that this is a great technology, it requires multiple alternatives.

So, I want to use this Issue just as a source of information. Please do not use this Issue to talk bad about any software mentioned here! I am sure, all of the alterntives do their job well and as usual, every software has its pro and cons. We should focus on a technical discussion, e.g. what are the strengths of each solution.

I start with a list of software I know (and actually this list has grown lately):

• JamKazam

  • commercial software
  • peer-to-peer concept
  • has a lot of features (jamtracks, social features, great audio quality, etc.)
  • offers a special hardware "Jamblaster"

• SoundJack

  • closed source software but free of charge
  • peer-to-peer and client-server (client-server was added recently)
  • exists for a very long time, driven by a professor, had received some fundings

• JackTrip

  • uncompressed audio
  • sophisticated algorithms to, e.g., adjust sampling rates, etc.
  • recently a foundation has been created

• SonoBus

  • open source, peer-to-peer

• HPSJam

  • open source, client-server concept (very similar to Jamulus)
  • uncompressed audio for better audio quality
  • just recently created, still in an early stage

• Software which is not maintined anymore or in process of restarting the service:

  • eJAMMING AUDiiO
  • sofasession

[drummer1154]

@gilgongo / @chrisrimple How can I

add yourself to the disclosure notice on the Talk page

Where to start from for this? My own page or the page with our table?

On https://koord.live/ they differentiate between "RealTime" and "Interval" Sessions - what about taking over this wording or at least update the footnote [b] to read 'For an explanation of "delayed sync" (AKA "interval") method see ...'?

[gilgongo]

@drummer1154 You only need to declare COI if you are making edits to the page. In which case edit the Talk page and the flag at the top. Otherwise best to suggest edits on the Talk page. And yes, we could change the wording (also BTW I think I screwed up the table heading footnotes as they don't link properly).

[drummer1154]

OK, thx, will wait a bit as suggested.

[chrisrimple]

I wonder if we can close this comment now and move all discussion to the Talk page on Wikipedia?

[gilgongo]

Yes, that's probably best. @corrados Do you agree?

[corrados]

Yes, good idea. So, I'll close this now.

[gilgongo]

As prophesied, the article has been nominated for deletion :-)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Comparison_of_Remote_Music_Performance_Software

I'll cast a vote...

[hselasky]

Maybe we can move the content here: https://wiki.thingsandstuff.org/Jamming

[hselasky]

FYI https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/2020-linuxquestions-org-members-choice-awards-131/music-collaboration-platform-of-the-year-4175687384/

[gilgongo]

I think we have some decent grounds to contest the deletion and I've stated that case like a Wikilawyer. But let's see how the vote goes. It may be we can put the table into that other page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Networked_music_performance

[drummer1154]

FYI: "This article was nominated for deletion on 24 December 2020. The result of the discussion was keep." "Sandstein 10:24, 9 January 2021 (UTC)"