Event A/V Wishlist

[cbale2000]

Originally Posted by Metonym

I would highly suggest getting a mic just for ambient crowd audio. It makes the stream feel more alive when the GA or MC isn't talking.

The problem with this is copyright. A mic that pics up the crowd will inevitably pick up the music, which will result in streams or archives getting muted or taken down. In my experience streaming services like YouTube are HIGHLY sensitive to even the slightest bit of background music.

In fact the thing I was going to suggest adding to the list was "A way to separate audio from game announcers and field sounds from music", as this has been one of the biggest issues when running our event streams. Thankfully, basically any sound board with an auxiliary output (that can be individually adjusted on each channel) will have this capability, but it's something you have to be aware of when you're planning.

[Metonym]

Originally Posted by cbale2000

The problem with this is copyright. A mic that pics up the crowd will inevitably pick up the music, which will result in streams or archives getting muted or taken down. In my experience streaming services like YouTube are HIGHLY sensitive to even the slightest bit of background music.

In fact the thing I was going to suggest adding to the list was "A way to separate audio from game announcers and field sounds from music", as this has been one of the biggest issues when running our event streams. Thankfully, basically any sound board with an auxiliary output (that can be individually adjusted on each channel) will have this capability, but it's something you have to be aware of when you're planning.

Streaming on Youtube is obviously economical, but I think it should be avoided by any FRC stream because there is a chance of the audio getting shut down. Livestream.com and Twitch are better alternatives, however the former does cost money. The music is usually an important part of the production, taking it away from the stream just hurts the end quality of the production.

In terms of archives, if you could record a version without the music that would be ideal, but that isn't always possible, so if the audio has to be taken out of the video you can do so quite easily with FFMPEG. The video itself is more important than what the GA/MC are saying.

[AllenGregoryIV]

We use a mixer to pull the GA/MC and game sounds and send that to the stream.

This post isn't just for making the stream better this is also for making the whole event better.

Honestly most people don't watch off-season streams. (Our stream last year had max 65 concurrent views). I want to make the stream as well done as possible but not at the expense of the archive footage or being able to DVR the live stream. Youtube's big benefits in my opinion are the ability to DVR and change quality easily and also being able to have a full archive of the event forever. Plus we live split matches and upload to YouTube during the event as well.

[Metonym]

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV

We use a mixer to pull the GA/MC and game sounds and send that to the stream.

This post isn't just for making the stream better this is also for making the whole event better.

Honestly most people don't watch off-season streams. (Our stream last year had max 65 concurrent views). I want to make the stream as well done as possible but not at the expense of the archive footage or being able to DVR the live stream. Youtube's big benefits in my opinion are the ability to DVR and change quality easily and also being able to have a full archive of the event forever. Plus we live split matches and upload to YouTube during the event as well.

Learn to use compression on the mixer board for the GA/MC. It prevents them from clipping (kinda, that has more to do with gain) and getting too loud too quickly.

[maths222]

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV

I'm starting to prepare for our off-season event in June and I'm putting together a list of things I would like to be able to do with the A/V setup.

Goals

• Inexpensive

Could you offer a general ballpark of what you are thinking inexpensive means to you? I've heard people use it to mean a bunch of different things, so a general notion will help me make better suggestions.

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by maths222

Could you offer a general ballpark of what you are thinking inexpensive means to you? I've heard people use it to mean a bunch of different things, so a general notion will help me make better suggestions.

I'm not looking for ideas of how to implement features (like not specific products, etc). I'm looking for features to implement. I am looking for a much more theoretical look at how events are run and how they can be improved in the future. Things like instant match uploads, that are properly tagged and linked to The Blue Alliance. Ways to improve audience engagement both at the venue and watching on the live stream. For this discussion cost shouldn't be an issue but the answer shouldn't be hire a bunch of people to it either.

[maths222]

Originally Posted by cbale2000

The problem with this is copyright. A mic that pics up the crowd will inevitably pick up the music, which will result in streams or archives getting muted or taken down. In my experience streaming services like YouTube are HIGHLY sensitive to even the slightest bit of background music.

In fact the thing I was going to suggest adding to the list was "A way to separate audio from game announcers and field sounds from music", as this has been one of the biggest issues when running our event streams. Thankfully, basically any sound board with an auxiliary output (that can be individually adjusted on each channel) will have this capability, but it's something you have to be aware of when you're planning.

I have a minor correction to this statement. THE streaming service YouTube is sensitive to background music. In my experience, none of the others are. From my observations recently, here is my ranking of streaming providers (with notable caveats):

1. LiveStream - $200/month cost for embedding, unlimited archival, viewer-hours, no ads, etc (Only $42/month if embedding and analytics are not concerns); No automatic content filtering; User-selectable quality; Single stream at a time
2. YouTube - Free, unlimited archival, no ads, multiple angles; content id for audio; must create new event every time the stream is restarted
3. Twitch - Free, no ads; no archival; very cluttered interface
4. DaCast - Embeddable only; price probably comparable to LiveStream, but depends on viewership; no filtering; archival separate cost
5. Ustream - Ad-free paid by viewer-hours; limited archival; not very good player; ads are intrusive

Please comment on these evaluations. I only have hands-on experience from the backend with YouTube and Ustream; my other comments come from reading about the services, along with the viewer experience.