LESSWRONG
LW

Practical

15

Mics, Bandwidth, Action: Fix Your Videoconferencing Setup

by Brendan Long
5th Sep 2025
7 min read
6

15

Practical

15

Mics, Bandwidth, Action: Fix Your Videoconferencing Setup
4Adam Zerner
4Brendan Long
4Brendan Long
2Adam Zerner
2Brendan Long
2Brendan Long
New Comment
6 comments, sorted by
top scoring
Click to highlight new comments since: Today at 4:47 AM
[-]Adam Zerner2h40

Some questions:

  1. Latency:
    1. When you mention latency, are you referring to the time from when person 1 speaks to the time that person 2 hears it?
    2. Do you have any recommendations for what latency one should target? I looked into it briefly and it looks like under 150ms is recommended, but maybe it makes sense to target an even lower number.
    3. Do you have any recommendations for how to measure what your actual latency is on video calls? Fast.com tells me I have a 4ms unloaded latency, but I think it'd probably be different for video calls.
    4. Claude is telling me that each router adds about 5-15ms in latency. Like going from 0 routers by plugging directly into the ethernet port to 1 router adds 5-15ms, and adding a second router if you live in a big house would add another 5-15ms. That doesn't seem bad to me. Do you think it's bad because you think one should target a lower latency? Because you expect a router to add more latency? Something else?
    5. As for bandwidth, I'm seeing recommendations for something like 5 Mbps for video calls. Do you have any thoughts on this?
  2. Whenever I use my headphone's microphone for audio input rather than my laptop's microphone, people always tell me it's hard to hear me. But when I use my laptop's microphone people say it sounds fine. They also say it sounds fine when I use the microphone on my webcam. Do you have any thoughts on laptop or webcam mics?
Reply
[-]Brendan Long26m40

Re: overall bandwidth

128 kbps audio sounds fine and video quality is much less important than audio. A typical video call uses 720p video at 30 fps, which Twitch says you can stream at 3 Mbps (and pro streamers probably care more about quality than most people do). I basically wouldn't worry about bandwidth unless you use a physical whiteboard or otherwise need really good video quality.

Reply1
[-]Brendan Long27m40

Re: latency and WiFi

Most sources talk about one-way latency, even though round-trip is what actually matters (how long it takes for you to react to something you heard and for the other person to hear it). I'm guessing round-trip is technically harder to measure since it includes the human-thinking delay.

Twilio says users start to notice one-way latency above 100 ms, and VOIP providers target under 150 ms. Traditional calls are below 20 ms though (similar latency to talking to someone across a large room). As a lower-bound, musicians get thrown of by ~30 ms of latency.

Note that people can adapt to latency but they do that by having less productive conversations: If you can't naturally do things like interrupt each other, you'll have a less-interactive conversation. I suspect 150 ms is too optimistic.

Bluetooth's AptX codec adds ~40 ms if you're lucky (they market this as "low latency" since the older SBC codec adds up to 200 ms of latency). If I'm understanding things right, two people on a cross-country call using bluetooth headsets are already hitting 140 ms in the best case. I don't know if there's a good way to measure this.

WiFi is harder to quantify since it can add relatively small delays, but the problem is that it's inconsistent (because of interference and being too busy). If audio packets show up inconsistently, the software needs to add buffers to keep everything showing up at the same time. I don't remember the details, but when I last worked on low-latency applications, Also if you chain WiFi routers together you get multiple channels of possible interference and a new layer where you can lose packets. I would expect coffee shop WiFi networks to be bad because they're frequently overloaded and have tons of interference (if they're in a dense area). Home WiFi might be ok in a low-density area.

Reply1
[-]Adam Zerner5m20

Gotcha, thanks for the investigation and info.

Yeah it seems plausible to me that sources recommending things like 100ms or 150ms latency are being conservative in a sense, and that there are meaningful gains to be had with lower latency.

And I definitely buy that high enough latency that leads to interruptions is annoying. As an anecdote, I've been listening to The Prancing Pony Podcast recently. The co-hosts interrupt each other unintentionally all the time, I suspect because of poor latency. It's really bad.

So with wifi, it sounds like you should be good if the routers are positioned such that there isn't much interference, and if there's plenty of capacity. Like at home my girlfriend and I don't have too many devices straining the router, but if we had a party with 15 people around then it'd be problematic?

As for coffee shops, I work from coffee shops a lot (but almost always avoid taking video calls there). A lot of them are pretty calm and don't have too many people there using the wifi. And the bigger ones with lots of people on their laptops, that's the demographic they're targeting so I suspect that they pay for good internet stuff. I've definitely been to coffee shops where the connection is bad though.

Reply
[-]Brendan Long7m20

Re: your headphones

I don't know much about non-headset mics. I don't like them because they pick up background/room noise while a mic right in front of your face can filter to just your voice better. I imagine some of them sound fine in a quiet room though.

My guess is that your headphones just don't have a good mic. I'm picky about my headset since most mics are an afterthought.

Reply1
[-]Brendan Long5h20

I didn't mean to spam the site so much today, but I accidentally published this and apparently if I move it back to draft the publish date will be stuck on today so I guess it's live now :\

Reply
Moderation Log
More from Brendan Long
View more
Curated and popular this week
6Comments

I've been working remotely since before it was cool, and one thing I wish more people paid attention to is meeting equipment. It's annoyingly common to join a remote meeting with someone on flaky WiFi, with a barely-understandable microphone, and a camera where they show up as a shadowy blob.

All of this is fixable, and if you work remotely it's worth spending a little bit of money to do it. Remote meetings where you can see and (more importantly) hear each other clearly are much nicer, and less frustrating. Some of you even get a remote work stipend from your employers, so use it!

An AI-generated watercolor image of a cat wearing a tie and a gaming head set, sitting on a WiFi router with 8 antennas. There is a key light in front of the cat illuminating its face.
Artist's impression of my setup.

Since the fundamentals of lighting and audio technology haven't changed in a long time, I'll mostly be giving ancient used suggestions to save money. There's probably nicer current-gen equipment if you go looking for it, but it's not really necessary.

Networking

Stop taking calls on crappy coffee shop WiFi networks. Just stop!

For a natural conversation, you need extremely low latency and for everything to transmit perfectly with no garbling. The best network option is to plug your laptop into ethernet wired directly to a fiber or cable modem. I do this when I'm working at my desk.

WiFi If You Must

Admittedly, this is annoying, so getting a high-quality WiFi router is also an option. There are two rules here:

  • Make sure your signal quality is good. Your connection quality symbol should be 100% maxed out. The farther you are from your router, the more easily interference can cause dropped packets and latency.
  • Do not chain WiFi routers. Every hop doubles (or more) your latency, and since WiFi is by far the worst part of the connection between two computers on the internet, increasing the amount of WiFi is very, very bad.

There are WiFi routers with range equivalent to multiple cheap routers chained together, so if you need long-range I recommend that. You can also set up multiple access points wired together if necessary.

Recommendation

I have a TP-Link AX6000 from 2020 (~$55 on ebay), although it's likely overkill for most people (it's a relatively fancy WiFi 6 router). The bare minimum is a router that supports 802.11ac ("WiFi 5") and has sufficient range. WiFi 5 came out in 2013 so there are good deals to be had here if you don't care about the latest tech.

Headphones

Headphones make way more of a difference than you'd expect, especially your microphone. This is hard to notice since you usually don't hear yourself, but consider how hard it is to understand your coworkers sometimes. Your audio also sounds that bad to them.

The two things you're looking for to improve this are a high-quality microphone and a connection that doesn't ruin it. I'm not going to talk about playback quality on your side, since every headset on the market is good enough for meetings, and you'll know if you want audiophile-quality headphones.

Microphones

Most headset reviews don't talk about microphones, but the heuristic is that gaming headsets tend to have good microphones, since gamers care about their team mates being able to hear them well.

I recommend a headset with a microphone instead of a podcasting-style microphone. Bigger/fancier headphones are good for top-quality recording, and work much better if you need to pick up multiple people, but they're harder to set up. A microphone on your desk[1] will loudly pick up typing, and they're less convenient if you want to move around.

One advantage of a separate mic is if you want to use bluetooth headphones: Bluetooth headsets are complete garbage, but in headphone-only mode they're fine.

Bluetooth Sucks

Bluetooth audio quality has improved a lot in the last decade, but unfortunately that's mostly unidirectional audio. The bidirectional codecs are a mess.

This means if you want to listen to music on bluetooth headphones, it will usually sound great, but once you also enable your mic, sound quality will drop, and the quality of your microphone will sound terrible, no matter how good it is physically.

Allegedly this has improved somewhat over the last few years, and if you're lucky you might be able to find a bluetooth headset + computer + operating system combination that uses a better bidirectional codec, but in my opinion it's still easier to use a wired headset. A wire also has no interference, so you'll get latency and quality which is impossible to achieve wirelessly.

Recommendation

The author wearing a gaming headset and posing while pointing at the headset.
You could look as cool as me.

I have the Sennheiser EPOS Game ONE Gaming Headset that a previous employer bought me and then let me keep when I left. I bought mine in 2016, but it's a wired headset so nothing important has changed in headset technology since then. You can get these for $25 on ebay now.

My advice here is out of date, so there probably is an acceptable bluetooth headset (assuming you pick based on compatibility with your OS), but I don't know what it is. Good luck if you look for that.

Lights

Finally, we get to the somewhat-less important things. Looking nice on a call is less important than being understood, but if you're going to be on calls all the time, it's worth improving your lighting. You can also trick people into liking you more if you look nice.

The two main problems with video call lighting are:

  • You don't have any lights.
  • Your lights are in the wrong place.

Turn the Lights On

This costs nothing. Just turn the lights in your room on. Cameras need light to work.

Logitech C920 capture in a dark room. Note the blur, the shadowed face, and the weird pinkish skin tone.

Your Lights Are In The Wrong Place

Unfortunately, room lights are usually in the wrong place to light your face. Ceiling lights point down (causing your face to be shadowed) and people usually don't put their desk directly against a window, so window light either causes the entire front of your body to be shadowed (if it's behind you) or to have harsh shadows from one side.

You can partially solve this with More Dakka. I have 14400 lumens of light around the edge of the ceiling in my office, so I actually look ok with just my ceiling lights.

Logitech C920 capture lit from above with the power of 1/100th of a sun. Note the shadows around the eyes.

But I look even better if I add a light in front of me.

Mostly my eyes look prettier.

And it's even more drastic if you have bad room lighting.

Logitech C920 lit with just a light attached to my monitor (turned down since this webcam gets its contrast blown out really easily).

Any light that's not behind or above you will help. Putting a lamp in either corner of your room next to your desk will help. The best option is a key light mounted on your monitor, although you may find it annoying if you don't like light in your face (I love light).

Recommendation

I have the Elgato Key Light Neo ($50 on ebay), although honestly it's overkill. Just put any light on or near your desk.

Camera

This is what prompted me to write this article. Surprisingly after decades, almost all webcams are complete trash. Even that one everyone recommends sucks. The Logitech C920 was most sites' top recommended webcam for years, and look at those pictures above. They're terrible! And that's a good webcam. Almost all webcams have tiny sensors and barely work better than the flip phone camera I had in high school.

That said, most webcams will look good enough if you have good lighting.

Logitech C920 with a well-lit room and a key light.
The author in a dimly-lit room. His face is illuminated but the color and quality of the image are much worse than the images from a higher-quality webcam.
Macbook Pro built-in webcam with a normally-lit room and a key light.

Recommendation

I swear Insta360 didn't pay me to write this, but their Insta360 Link webcam is so good that I really love it. Just compare the "good shot" from the C920 with the shot by an Insta360 Link in the dark.

Insta360 Link capture taken in the dark, lit only by a window with the blinds down.

Sure, my skin is still a weird pink tone, but that image is still much nicer.

Meme from Iron Man: Insta360 could take a better video in a cave with no lighting!
I overuse this meme but it's always relevant.

If I actually give it some light to work with..

Look at the pretty colors! And how I don't look dead!

This thing does cost $120 on ebay, and it's not really that important, so if you're going to skip anything, skip this.

Some other options are:

  1. Whatever webcam you already have, if you have decent lighting.
  2. An old phone if you don't mind it being kind of annoying. Camera phones have much better sensors than the average webcam.
  3. Technically you can use a spare DSLR as a webcam (and it looks really good), but if you're rich enough to have a DSLR just sitting around, you can probably just buy the Insta360 and save yourself a lot of effort.

Conclusion

Fix your WiFi, get a decent mic, and turn some lights on, and your coworkers will love you. Maybe get a fancy camera if you're vain like I am.

Then get back to work.

  1. ^

    You can use a boom arm to fix this, but they're huge and get in the way.