05-22-2020, 05:39 AM
I wrapped up my LAN testing, for now. I’m not going to layout numbers but just general observations. I compared JamKazam with Jamulus because Jamulus has a sever app allowing me to dedicate a PC as a server to connect to from all the local clients. JamKazam does not.
Since JK does not allow you to point directly to other clients over LAN, you accept the outcome. I have two Macs and Interfaces and two JK accounts. Internet is required since JK won’t connect without one. It requires a valid IP. With both Macs wired to the router there as very minor latency and I considered it tolerable for playing. Switching one Mac to WiFi, with the router only a few feet away the latency was unacceptable. JK is obviously routing the session through the WAN instead of keeping everything INTRANET. At this point I would look for other options.
Jamulus on the other hand can be configured to keep everything INTRANET by specifying one of the client machines as the server. There was less latency but the Noise level was high. It was not something I could note control. I did not experience it with JK
Since JK does not allow you to point directly to other clients over LAN, you accept the outcome. I have two Macs and Interfaces and two JK accounts. Internet is required since JK won’t connect without one. It requires a valid IP. With both Macs wired to the router there as very minor latency and I considered it tolerable for playing. Switching one Mac to WiFi, with the router only a few feet away the latency was unacceptable. JK is obviously routing the session through the WAN instead of keeping everything INTRANET. At this point I would look for other options.
Jamulus on the other hand can be configured to keep everything INTRANET by specifying one of the client machines as the server. There was less latency but the Noise level was high. It was not something I could note control. I did not experience it with JK