Flo S#cks, For everyone. Period. Unless you are the only person watching.. Ever..

[Fred Windish]

I had the buffering issue from Memphis during Boston but it only lasted a couple minutes.  I use a Samsung 4K TV, the latest 4K capable Roku, 8K capable hdmi cables, an up-scaling capable Marantz 1607 receiver, Sennheiser HD598 open back headphones, and a Fiio A3 amplifier. All using a 300MB RCN Cable feed.

Point is, the equipment on the consumer end can make a difference. Overall, with the exception of occasional camera operator issues, I've been very satisfied. Have to believe some complaints are due to what is receiving the Flo product at home. Certainly, Flo could juice-up their output. No, I do not work for Flo or know anyone who does.

[Jeff Ream]

27 minutes ago, Rich Cline said:

Maybe it's something we don't have control over and it's part of the authorization to watch the stream. Trying different things. No other apps running and defragged system before watching.

oh i have spent lots of time on the phone with Flo people doing all of their tests in the past. at least right now, it's been better. Not perfect but better. we'll see how it goes with shows that have more eyes on them like regionals

[Jeff Ream]

28 minutes ago, E3D said:

Not 

That was thunderstorms. Places have thunderstorms it happens but trying to blame it on a tropical storm that was not even close is a laugh. The show was on Sat , the storm was HERE on SUN at 4pm . 

The edge of what you say? Just because someone at the show says it does not make it true. 

sorry i'll go with what people actually there tell me. either way, the weather was an issue.

[jeffmolnar]

15 minutes ago, Fred Windish said:

I had the buffering issue from Memphis during Boston but it only lasted a couple minutes.  I use a Samsung 4K TV, the latest 4K capable Roku, 8K capable hdmi cables, an up-scaling capable Marantz 1607 receiver, Sennheiser HD598 open back headphones, and a Fiio A3 amplifier. All using a 300MB RCN Cable feed.

Point is, the equipment on the consumer end can make a difference. Overall, with the exception of occasional camera operator issues, I've been very satisfied. Have to believe some complaints are due to what is receiving the Flo product at home. Certainly, Flo could juice-up their output. No, I do not work for Flo or know anyone who does.

With equipment like that there's no way that you're satisfied with the extremely low bitrate. Unless that's a 37" TV or something.

[Fred Windish]

7 minutes ago, jeffmolnar said:

With equipment like that there's no way that you're satisfied with the extremely low bitrate. Unless that's a 37" TV or something.

It's a 5 year old 65 inch TV.  Yes, I am satisfied, and for many different reasons. Flo doesn't send out a 4K signal so I don't expect that . . . but I'm ready. I also buy the Blu Rays.

[N.E. Brigand]

2 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

and because of that and not paying to do so, DCI could have been sued out of business and wrote a large check after negotiations to amend for past abuses.

The law is the law, and the amount of money you think DCI gets from this is nowhere close to what it would cost to go back to doing it that way. 

We're arguing past each other. I don't dispute a single thing you write here.

But just because there's a good reason that something sucks, doesn't mean it doesn't suck.

[Cappybara]

5 hours ago, Triple Forte said:

 Here is the thing before flo marching came around they had another streaming service and it was great it was almost flawless believe it or not compared to flo a  million times  better

so that’s the problem I have is that they replaced what they had with this  inferior service 

I don't think you've ever used The Fan Network in your life if you actually believe everything you just typed

[combia1]

1 hour ago, Tim K said:

I think a great deal depends on how material is discovered. I’ve shared this before, but it is pertinent. I, like many people, including some people who post on DCP, did the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge. At the time, I lived near a traffic light and a car stopped at a red light. Music was coming from the car. The video was removed from Facebook and the audio was edited by YouTube and the reason for both was not obtaining permission for using the music, which was barely audible. My guess is videos are checked randomly and I wonder if it is done by a person or a computer. If I had the time I could have challenged it, but it was easier to do it over again.

It's checked by computer. Same way apps like SoundHound can listen to the radio and identify a song in a matter of seconds. 

Just last week, I posted a clip to my FB page. It was my kids fooling around at a festival. There was a piece of classical music playing in the background. It took less than 5 minutes for FB to strip the audio from my video clip. So even though this music was being played over speakers in a park, and was in the background, and my kids talking and telling jokes was the "loudest" part of the video, and the whole point of the video, all of the audio got stripped out. 

Edited July 19, 2019 by combia1

[combia1]

3 hours ago, bluesman said:

We are stuck with Flo for better or for worse.  Music licensing issues for both DCI and Flo are only going to get more challenging in the future.  This is one of the reasons why:

music modernization act 2019

Actually, the MMA will have little impact on what we are talking about here. It mostly covers mechanical licenses, not synch licenses. Mechanical licenses are what DCI has to obtain to produce the audio recordings only. Synch licenses are required for audio + video recordings. and those were not a part of the MMA. And the MMA might make things easier - it requires the creations of a single database of copyright holders. So now design teams will not have to check multiple sources to find out who owns the source material.

[combia1]

3 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

DCi ignored the rules for years...lots of them...and had to cut a very large check to make amends for those abuses. the amount of fans that actually want those older offerings doesn't equal the cost of continuing to get licensing fees for that content....unless you're ok paying a whole lot more money.

 

People seem to think DCI is sitting on millions just rotting in the bank. They aren't. The main goal is to kick as much of what they make back out to the corps. The return on investment to paying all these extra fees for everything everyone wants is nowhere close to helping DCI or the corps financially. It's just not there. I'd love to see it. Thank God I got the older stuff hard copy, and made sure to get it to other places I can see it. But there aren't enough like me that want it to justify the cost.

I don't think DCI ignored the rules. There was a lot of gray area in the law (the internet, online streaming, and being able to watch archived performances online and not via physical media did not exist when the copyright rules were created.) DCI, BOA, and WGI interpreted the laws one way for a many years, and eventually a different legal opinion emerged. BOA, DCI, and WGI did not have the legal resources to take their case to court, so a settlement agreement was reached.