Video conference?

[lightsource]

Hi all,

 

We have the possibility of an event coming up in a few months time, in the North East of England, where the organisers want to do a live video link to Canada.

 

We'll need Video + Audio Canada to UK, but probably Audio only back to Canada. All realtime (or as close as possible).

 

Audio will be run to FOH PA, and there will be projector screens on the stage. (Unknown resolution at present).

 

The whole thing is hypothetical at the moment, we're just lookong to see weather it's financially dooable, without a NASA style budget :unsure:

 

2 Questions.

 

Firstly, what's the best way to do it? Unsure of the Venue's infrastructure at this moment.

 

Secondly, any one know any companies specifically based in the North East, who could handle the comms side of things.

[themadhippy]

skype? video even works on a 3g dongle

[bruce]

Skype might do the job. A proper H.323 codec would be better. ISDN's a bit "old fashioned" these days, but still worth thinking about, as it's guaranteed bandwidth. Having said that, I've not used ISDN though choice for years!

 

 

Video is easy, cos you don't get feedback. Be careful with the lighting - make sure the presenter is well lit, but the screens are not.

 

Audio can be more tricky. You'll have several local sources - get them close-mic'd if possible - and incoming audio from the "other end". All needs to be fed to the local PA to allow your local audience to hear both sides of the dialogue. However, you need to feed all your local sources, but NOT the incoming audio, back to the codec. If your mixer has group outputs, that shouldn't be a challenge.

 

Echo cancellation isn't the problem these days that it once was - modern codecs have good cancellers built in. But try to avoid making major changes to the audio setup (eg muting/unmuting mics) during the session, as the echo canceller will "train" to the room, and if you change the audio setup the canceller may want to retrain.

[lightsource]

You'll have several local sources - get them close-mic'd if possible - and incoming audio from the "other end"

 

Basically, it's a Music Convention, with a live hook-up to a Canada based 'Talent' for a Q&A session. At this end we'll probably have a Show Host, and a couple of roaming Radio Mics.

 

If your mixer has group outputs, that shouldn't be a challenge.

 

The Mixer is an A&H GL2800-32, and will have plenty of spare out's

 

Thanks for the advice so far.

[durian]

quicktime broadcast has worked for us in the past between paris and uk

 

http://www.apple.com.../resources.html

[arthursleep]

Hi,

 

I can supply codecs and experience in this if you need help. Based just outside Edinburgh.

 

Feel free to PM me if you want to chat through it.

 

Cheers

 

Pete

[smalljoshua]

If Skype is good enough for the BBC's Sunday morning live, then I would've thought it was good enough for most tasks such as this.

 

Josh

[david.elsbury]

I'm sure Skype would be OK, it's just the quality of the internet connection that makes the difference. If you can get a business-grade, guaranteed bandwidth service that would provide more reliability. In NZ I'd recommend "UBS" (unbundled bitstream service) but not sure what the equivilent is in the UK.

 

David

[Jivemaster]

Without sending an OB team to Canada you are stuck with retail available units and maybe "CCTV" type resolution for the vid

[sleepytom]

Yeah the main issue is the vision mix in canada - if you have a pannel of Canadians to deal with then you'll need at least a canadian camera operator, if not a full OB team with vision mixer etc etc.

 

If it's just a single Canadian then they can just use skype on a decent laptop with webcam (macbook pro is a reliable choice)

 

Audio wise feed a "mix minus" into your local skype client - ideally get the Canadian(s) to use IEMs (or earbud headphones) and a decent mic rather than the inbuilt one in the laptop.

 

Whereabouts in Canada? I know a few people over there who could possibly help at that end.

[AHYoung]

Ive done this, and you either do it the expensive way and get guarenteed results with next to zero latency by using VC ideally over isdn which allthough low bandwith is guarenteed which an IP connection isnt especiallya temp one, You will need someone to sort things out at both sites as its specialist stuff, so it wont be cheap, but it will be cheaper than a satelite Or you use skype and dont try to pretend its anything other than a clunky , latent lo res link up. You will be able to see the person talking and the audio should be inteligible at least. Older viewers will be reminder of every" Live via satellite "broadcast from years ago. Skpe worked for the events ive worked on and its universal so easy to impement at both ends. The other option is to try a hybrid system as people are more sensitive to lo quality audio than video, you can use a telephone based audio conferencing system over a standard phone line for the sound and a webcam / skype for the pictures.

[lightsource]

Cheers for all the replies, budget is low, so the Skype route is probably the best solution to look at.

 

 

Whereabouts in Canada? I know a few people over there who could possibly help at that end.

 

Anywhere between Philadelphia (USA) and Toronto (Canada), It's a travelling day on a tour :(

[Bobbsy]

One major thing to consider is that both ends need to be able to produce a "mix minus" feed in terms of audio: you want Canada to send just their local audio to you (minus the heavily delayed return of your audio) and you send them only your audio, not theirs in return. Any decent mixer with enough auxes can handle it--but have a long chat with the other end to make sure they understand what's required. We used to do this sort of thing almost every day (albeit in full broadcast quality via satellite or undersea fibre) and the number of times the left-ponders would claim to be able to handle it then get the audio wrong was astounding.

 

Other things to consider:

 

-will you be using earphones for the participants to hear each other or monitor speakers? Earphones are preferable for obvious reasons but sometimes not possible.

 

-with earphones, consider having a method to do an override to feed control room instructions to the earphones: things like "we're coming to you next" or "the next question will be the last" are frequent requirements. If there's a moderator at one or both ends, they MUST have keyed talkback in earphones so you can give them the inevitable "fill--we've lost the circuit" or "wind up this guy--he's boring" sort of cue.

 

-you'll need some form of technical coordination line (maybe even just phone) in addition to the programme stuff. A dedicated coordinator/producer at the other end is almost essential. If the far end becomes a multicamera shoot, consider a way to tie into their production talkback so you can talk to them directly.

 

-have a plan for what will happen if/when you lose the trans-Atlantic link. Some pre-planned questions the moderator can throw in or maybe even some pre-recorded video you can cut to are good ideas.

[lightsource]

Cheers for that Bobbsy, some good points I hadn't considered.

 

Just out of interest, if we do go down the Skype approach, what sort of delay would be expected between transmission and reception?

[Bobbsy]

With Skype, a half second of delay each way (i.e. a total of a second) is not unusual and I've experienced it being even more. Remember that, with Skype and other VoIP systems, the packets of data can travel by a variety of routes and the differences are handled by a substantial amount of buffering built into the system. This amount of delay is far from unworkable (we dealt with that sort of thing all the time in TV satellites); it's just something you have to be prepared for.