# Impact of Audio Delay and Quality in Network Music Performance +
## 6 Discussion
### Audio Delay  
PoSD reflects the musicians' perception of synchronization issues when performing with variable delay. Our study shows a relatively high tolerance for delay among musicians, higher than that found in previous studies of synchronized hand-clapping with non-musicians. We can attribute this tolerance to enhanced cognitive flexibility [27] developed during their training. Because of this flexibility, musicians could effectively use their cognitive resources to deal with audio delays during the performances in this study. It seems, however, that delays above 40 ms one-way were more problematic; unfortunately, we did not test delays between 40 and 60 ms. At this point, the cognitive load to constantly adjust performance for the delay becomes too great, making it challenging to continue playing. While the enhanced cognitive flexibility plays a significant role, other factors such as the musician's adaptability, the complexity of the musical piece and the specific context of the performance in the lab also affected how musicians handled the synchronization challenges caused by audio delay in the study.  
The PoAD variable measures musicians' perception of audio delays, which impact their timing and rhythm during performances. The study found a threshold of 40 ms one-way audio delay as acceptable for music performances, higher than that considered acceptable for synchronized hand-clapping. This threshold might show the limit to which the human sensorimotor system can adapt without impacting the perception of musical rhythm [28]. Delays under this threshold could be small enough for the brain's timing mechanisms to compensate, enabling musicians to adjust during their performance. Entrainment is how the brain synchronizes with the music's rhythm. Predictive coding allows the brain to use past experiences to predict future events [29; 30]. Combining these two mechanisms facilitates the coordination of motor responses, even with slight delays. However, beyond the threshold, musicians start noticing the delays and find them disruptive, which hinders their rhythm perception and synchronization with their peers.  
Figure 18: Perception of irritation (N = 22), 95% confidence, Adj. R\({}^{2}\) = \(-\)0.01.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l} \hline \hline Dependent Variable & PoAQ & PoSat \\ \hline Independent Variable & quality & quality \\ \hline Samples & 22 & 22 \\ \hline \(p\) = 0.05 & 0.371 & 0.48 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 5: ANOVA results: quality vs. subjective results.  
TTF captures the efforts of musicians to synchronize with their peers in the face of variable delays. When the delay exceeds 40 ms one way, musicians must use more cognitive resources, like sustained attention and cognitive control, to keep up with their peers. Up to this specific threshold of 40 ms one way, musicians can handle complex synchronization tasks like TTF because of their musical training [31]. Musicians have enhanced abilities for tasks that need cognitive flexibility and control, which are crucial in complex synchronization tasks like TTF. Past the threshold, synchronization becomes more challenging, possibly because the cognitive load is too high to handle effectively while maintaining other parts of the musical performance (e.g., expression, accuracy and technical precision).