Suggestion to improve the Broadcast

Status
Not open for further replies.

wangstramedeous

Registered
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
I'm not very strong on the technical side so this might not be an easy feature but...

I don't get why afterhours doesn't support and integrate metadata and ID tagging into the radio. Sometimes the info for which track is playing is available only if you go digging through the live set forums. Some of the diligent djs have the lists ready before their shows even start which is a godsend. I don't mind the system right now (actually I do) but how much sweeter would it be to take a look at winamp or WMP and see right away what was playing?
 
Last edited:
I may not be one of the staff..but this is what I think.
Tagging every track in advance would mean the staff would have to continually run after the DJs for their tracklists, which means more work. I think they're content with the workload they have right now :p./

Also some DJs do not always have a tracklist ready and/or song tracks are left as ID-ID.

Another thing is tracks that are not yet released but the label wants to give people a little taste of what's coming up by so and so artist. I guess you can tag it as not revealed..but still..

Besides, by doing this people have even less of a reason to check the forums and maybe sign up.
It kinda sucks to have over 1000 people listening but only 5-15 people on the forums..So far the only times this station gets many people on the forum is when there are big events or awaited artists playing.
 
I may not be one of the staff..but this is what I think.
Tagging every track in advance would mean the staff would have to continually run after the DJs for their tracklists, which means more work. I think they're content with the workload they have right now :p./

Also some DJs do not always have a tracklist ready and/or song tracks are left as ID-ID.

Another thing is tracks that are not yet released but the label wants to give people a little taste of what's coming up by so and so artist. I guess you can tag it as not revealed..but still..

Besides, by doing this people have even less of a reason to check the forums and maybe sign up.
It kinda sucks to have over 1000 people listening but only 5-15 people on the forums..So far the only times this station gets many people on the forum is when there are big events or awaited artists playing.


very strong reasons why were not doing this :) thank you tarek :hug:
 
I may not be one of the staff..but this is what I think.
Tagging every track in advance would mean the staff would have to continually run after the DJs for their tracklists, which means more work. I think they're content with the workload they have right now :p./

Also some DJs do not always have a tracklist ready and/or song tracks are left as ID-ID.

Another thing is tracks that are not yet released but the label wants to give people a little taste of what's coming up by so and so artist. I guess you can tag it as not revealed..but still..

Besides, by doing this people have even less of a reason to check the forums and maybe sign up.
It kinda sucks to have over 1000 people listening but only 5-15 people on the forums..So far the only times this station gets many people on the forum is when there are big events or awaited artists playing.

More than a fair assessment and I certainly appreciate the hard work that goes into it. I can't come up with any ideas that could simplify the process as is (again limited tech knowledge) and still encourage participation. Wishful thinking aside, I doubt its as easy as just typing the info on the go.

How about making the lists consistent through each thread? Most threads do it where the 2nd or 3rd post lists the tracks. Some get updated throughout the thread. Reserving the 3rd post for track lists a possibility for consistency sake? I'm just bouncing ideas around.
 
More than a fair assessment and I certainly appreciate the hard work that goes into it. I can't come up with any ideas that could simplify the process as is (again limited tech knowledge) and still encourage participation. Wishful thinking aside, I doubt its as easy as just typing the info on the go.

How about making the lists consistent through each thread? Most threads do it where the 2nd or 3rd post lists the tracks. Some get updated throughout the thread. Reserving the 3rd post for track lists a possibility for consistency sake? I'm just bouncing ideas around.

most DJ's edit their main thread on page 1, some DJ's put full track list at end of the show, and some like to do it live as the show flows...

So it all depends on the style of the DJ what they wanna do, and there are the ones that wont post the track list. So users try to ID all the tracks, its fun :)
 
haha canuck...sorry just a little chuckle I got from that...
 
Ever try Montreal? I hope to live in that city soon.
 
Didn't think you'd have come to live in Canada or North America at all. 20 years is quite the commitment.

wangstramedeous..is there anything special you're expecting to get from Montreal? :friends:
 
In regard to broadcast improvement, I agree with Tarek 100%.

Something to add, it would be nice if more work can be done on the 48K stream. During the EOYC, we had a major cable damage in the region, which affected the internet speed severely, so the 48K was my last and only hope to catch the event.

what I noticed:

1- Even when connect through 48K, it streams on 60K, 80K ..etc.. which is higher than 48K, and thus, the nasty buffer happnens again. (I used Winamp and RealPlayer, and still the same results)

2- Sometimes, 96K stream, gives me a better experience than 48K stream, in term of buffers, which is strange to me.

other than that, I would say, long life to the 48K stream:)

hope I was clear with what I said.

and, yeah, unfortunately, I haven't lived in Canada yet :)
 
In regard to broadcast improvement, I agree with Tarek 100%.

Something to add, it would be nice if more work can be done on the 48K stream. During the EOYC, we had a major cable damage in the region, which affected the internet speed severely, so the 48K was my last and only hope to catch the event.

what I noticed:

1- Even when connect through 48K, it streams on 60K, 80K ..etc.. which is higher than 48K, and thus, the nasty buffer happnens again. (I used Winamp and RealPlayer, and still the same results)

2- Sometimes, 96K stream, gives me a better experience than 48K stream, in term of buffers, which is strange to me.

other than that, I would say, long life to the 48K stream:)

hope I was clear with what I said.

and, yeah, unfortunately, I haven't lived in Canada yet :)


very weird, i just checked and 48k its steady 6k/sec | 48k... i dont see why it would be 80k/sec... our 48k server is only in austria.. so if your routing is bad to austria this could cause the buffer.

192k and 96k servers are spread out all over the world.
 
If I can add ... and TBH, over the last few weeks, I am facing intense buffering and at times, the stream just "Times Out". From my connection point of view ... my band width is steady and same as before .. but I just dont get it ... and this would be the first time in the last 1 yr am tuned into the 48 kbps stream.
 
If I can add ... and TBH, over the last few weeks, I am facing intense buffering and at times, the stream just "Times Out". From my connection point of view ... my band width is steady and same as before .. but I just dont get it ... and this would be the first time in the last 1 yr am tuned into the 48 kbps stream.

what do connect to ? 192k or 96k 48k?
 
Oops! forgot to mention .. its the 48 kbps AAC stream
 
Not right now .. but at many occasions. Let me observe a bit more and check the ping replies too..
 
we should get a relay server in india :) you got any friends dhumketu ? :)
 
very weird, i just checked and 48k its steady 6k/sec | 48k... i dont see why it would be 80k/sec... our 48k server is only in austria.. so if your routing is bad to austria this could cause the buffer.

192k and 96k servers are spread out all over the world.

Ok, got it now, it was the routing to Austria which cause the buffers with 48K and not with other links.

Regarding the stream rate, here is a screen shot showing RealPlayer, you can see clearly that it is streaming on 65K, and the rate differs every time I connect, I remember, I had to try many time in order to get the 40-48K stream (sometimes it goes up to 100K)

I am just feeding back, nothing serious I am suffering at the moment, since my connection is been restored and back to the 192K stream :).

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top