• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
LATENCY, mostly TOTAL LATENCY
#31
Without making assumptions; have you;
1. Connected directly to the modem with an ethernet cable. 2. Made sure you have no other programs running including web browsers, Mail or Notes (force quit on Mac to check if there is anything still running). 3. Made sure nothing, and no one is connected to your router via wifi while you are using JK. Have unplugged any unnecessary peripherals from the modem and computer.
Also; Makes no difference to ping, but; I got a massive improvement in broadband speed by getting in touch with the service provider and complaining about the slow speed.They sent an engineer who put in an updated socket. He also re set the router which cn help a lot as I think it has a cache memory which can slow it down. I 'm not certain but I doubt there is much you can do about the ping speed. I think you can do an online check to compare service providers which might give you some info on whether you have the fastest available.
  Reply
#32
(10-08-2020, 03:38 AM)Nate Stelton Wrote: I'm just getting started with Jamkazam and have terrible total latency, as observed by others. I've been thinking of switching ISPs to the same one as my neighbor down the block and was wondering if I could use ping to compare my network latency to his. To take that further, several cohorts are also new and troubleshooting latency issues, and i would like to compare pings with them as well.

So, my question is: Would it be a useful comparison if different computers all ping jamkazam.com and report their results back to me? Or, is there perhaps a different host at Jamkazam that would be more appropriate (considering that the machine answering to "jamkazam.com" might be strictly a webserver and relatively slow)?

I do realize that pings also include latency introduced by home routers, but I think the comparison would be interesting nonetheless.

(If there's another thread that answers this question, please, somebody, point me to it.)

Thanks,
Nate
Ok, first thing to know is that PING isn't the best tool to measure latency. Since it uses a dedicated protocol (ICMP) it doesn't correctly reflect the latency of IP-based packets. As an alternative, use something like the TESTMY.NET latency test. 

But I wouldn't even bother right now as the JK team is getting close to rolling out the second phase of their network acceleration service. This will be a game changer for some of us, depending on where we are located. Hang in there for a few more weeks to see what happens.
  Reply
#33
If my latency from my provider is 25ms, can it be reduced in order to use Jamkazam, or is it pointless to even try?

i am hooked up directly to my modem, not using wifi.  This latency came from a speedtest, my provider is xfinity

Mike C
  Reply
#34
(10-13-2020, 12:06 AM)mchron1222 Wrote: If my latency from my provider is 25ms, can it be reduced in order to use Jamkazam, or is it pointless to even try?

i am hooked up directly to my modem, not using wifi.  This latency came from a speedtest, my provider is xfinity

Mike C
>>>
Just assuming you mean ping time with "my latency"?
Who/what are you pinging that gives this result?
Did you try multiple addresses? And really 'generic' ones like some google or MS servers, apart from the obvious (your isp)

If it could be reduced is between your personal situation (location/connection/network eqpt) and your ISP (modem-/router-/firmware/package deal)
Jamkazam itself will not reduce your inet speed or improve inet quality. 25ms does seem rather high/slow for just inet connection ping.
  Reply
#35
It seems that choosing the right ISP may be an important factor regarding total latency. I haven't figured out how to determine this yet. This PCMag ISP latency comparison article be helpful: https://www.pcmag.com/news/the-best-gami...s-for-2020. Also, from StuartR's recommendation, here is a Test My Latency page: https://testmy.net/latency?testALL=1.

However, to StuartR's point, most latency tests use ping, which sends/receives packets via ICMP, whereas I believe Jamkazam uses UDP/IP (true?), so pings results may be misleading. There are ping-like programs that measure latency at the UDP layer, such as hping, but I haven't tried one yet.

I thought I saw somewhere that Jamkazam used to have a test server you could use to find out if your network path was causing poor latency or jitter, but that they took it offline.

I would think the true test would be to send a UDP ping to whatever Jamkazam server(s) does the actual work, and finding an IP address for that was the main point of my query.
  Reply
#36
(10-13-2020, 01:23 PM)Nate Stelton Wrote: It seems that choosing the right ISP may be an important factor regarding total latency. I haven't figured out how to determine this yet. This PCMag ISP latency comparison article be helpful: https://www.pcmag.com/news/the-best-gami...s-for-2020. Also, from StuartR's recommendation, here is a Test My Latency page: https://testmy.net/latency?testALL=1.

However, to StuartR's point, most latency tests use ping, which sends/receives packets via ICMP, whereas I believe Jamkazam uses UDP/IP (true?), so pings results may be misleading. There are ping-like programs that measure latency at the UDP layer, such as hping, but I haven't tried one yet.

I thought I saw somewhere that Jamkazam used to have a test server you could use to find out if your network path was causing poor latency or jitter, but that they took it offline.

I would think the true test would be to send a UDP ping to whatever Jamkazam server(s) does the actual work, and finding an IP address for that was the main point of my query.
>>>
Pinging Jamkazam servers be it ICMP or per a UDP ping of any kind is not going to give you any valuable information at all. The actual jamming is done via a P2P connection between the session peers. Your audio (video) never touches the Jamkazam server(s) during a session.

if the ping time is of major importance to you, finding out your session peers IP-address(es) and pinging that would make a lot more sense. But, wouldn't it be much easier to just get online and try a jam, see what's what and take it from there ... . Cool
  Reply
#37
Thanks much to Dimitri for the insight on how Jamkazam works. Knowing that Jamkazam clients communicate peer-to-peer sheds a lot of light on the whole subject. For example, it perhaps explains why 2 players seem to be able to play together in sync while a third player drifts off the beat.

I'm still thinking that the Jamkazam clients all communicate via UDP because, since UDP is connectionless, it inherently has lower latency than TCP.

Anyway, getting back to my original post, I'm trying to determine if I should switch from my current ISP (AT&T twisted pair) to Metronet, which touts fiber to the house. My neighbor 3 doors down has Metronet, but is not a musician, so trying a jam from his house is not an easy option. Therefore I was trying to come up with another way to test if Metronet will give me better latency, before I go through all the hassle of switching ISPs.
  Reply
#38
(10-16-2020, 12:42 PM)Nate Stelton Wrote: Thanks much to Dimitri for the insight on how Jamkazam works. Knowing that Jamkazam clients communicate peer-to-peer sheds a lot of light on the whole subject. For example, it perhaps explains why 2 players seem to be able to play together in sync while a third player drifts off the beat.

I'm still thinking that the Jamkazam clients all communicate via UDP because, since UDP is connectionless, it inherently has lower latency than TCP.

Anyway, getting back to my original post, I'm trying to determine if I should switch from my current ISP (AT&T twisted pair) to Metronet, which touts fiber to the house. My neighbor 3 doors down has Metronet, but is not a musician, so trying a jam from his house is not an easy option. Therefore I was trying to come up with another way to test if Metronet will give me better latency, before I go through all the hassle of switching ISPs.

>>>
There's absolutely no discussion nor secrets about the connection protocol used by Jamkazam. It is most definitely UDP.

Fibre/fiber/glass is always going to be superior to any copper/coax connection.

As far as testing from a neighbors house; your laptop with JKZ, audio interface, headphones, any instrument and/or microphone (so not even a shopping bag full) and a knock on his door, will tell you everything ... ;-)
  Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)