PDA

View Full Version : Do I need anything other than a Squeezebox receiver?



neoshmengi
2008-07-20, 09:28
I would like to stream MP3's to my stereo. I would like to get a Synology 207+ (with SSODS) and a Squeezebox receiver. Would I need any other hardware?

Thanks

jh901
2008-07-20, 11:54
You will also need a computer and wireless router, but I bet you have that covered. I use a NetGear ReadyNAS because the SqueezeCenter (SC) software is "supported" by SlimDevices. So basically I rip my CDs using dBpoweramp into flac and it saves the files to the NAS where the SC software sits. Run the SC rescan tool for any new rips and then playback is ready to go for either of my 2 listening zones. I assume you are getting either the Duet or the "classic".......best of luck!

(I'm a noob, so hopefully someone else will kick in some of the finer details.)



I would like to stream MP3's to my stereo. I would like to get a Synology 207+ (with SSODS) and a Squeezebox receiver. Would I need any other hardware?

Thanks

neoshmengi
2008-07-20, 12:48
I have a computer and the router already ;-) .

There is a product called the 'Squeezebox Receiver' that looks to me like the duet without the remote control. That's why I'm wondering if the receiver is all I will need. As cool as the remote is, I want to control everything with a laptop so I won't need the duet. I won't need the LED display so I don't want the classic.

jh901
2008-07-20, 13:15
Uh-oh. Well, I believe the controller is necessary in order to perform the set-up. And using SC to control everything is nowhere near as sweet and fast as the controller.

I'm pretty sure your only choices are Duet OR SB Classic. I have one Controller and 2 receivers and I love it.



I have a computer and the router already ;-) .

There is a product called the 'Squeezebox Receiver' that looks to me like the duet without the remote control. That's why I'm wondering if the receiver is all I will need. As cool as the remote is, I want to control everything with a laptop so I won't need the duet. I won't need the LED display so I don't want the classic.

bigfool1956
2008-07-20, 13:40
There is an alpha version of a plug in to allow a receiver to be set up without a controller, but honestly the controller is great.

toby10
2008-07-20, 14:16
I have a computer and the router already ;-) .

There is a product called the 'Squeezebox Receiver' that looks to me like the duet without the remote control. That's why I'm wondering if the receiver is all I will need. As cool as the remote is, I want to control everything with a laptop so I won't need the duet. I won't need the LED display so I don't want the classic.

As bigfool stated, there is a workaround to use the receiver by itself (no controller) but it's not an elegant solution though certainly doable. But this kinda defeats the purpose of using a SD product: freeing yourself from sitting at your computer. Using the SC software or not you could just buy an external sound-card for PC to stereo streaming which is basically what the receiver is without the controller.

The Classic SB3 has a vacuum florescent display, not LED.

Gazjam
2008-07-20, 15:49
There is an alternative to this....

I was going to buy the Duet, but then I noticed the Receiver and Controller were being sold seperately.
It seems the Display element of the Clasic has been moved out and put onto the controller hence the price difference between the SB3 and the Duet.

But it DOES equate to 200 for a remote control! (nice screen as it is)

So its all down to the better interface when accesssing your music. Still, would be good to have something better than an small black box sitting near your stereo.

How do you like the idea of a TOUCHSCREEN remote for your music collection that also lets you check email, surf the web, runs Google Maps...the list goes on.
(oh and it lets you listen to music on the move, in the car, wherever)

*AND* Have the SB3 displaying album Info, clock, or whatever you want for it.

* ALL FOR THE SAME PRICE AS THE DUET *

Apple Ipod Touch - same price as the SB Controller.
Application called IPENG controls your Squeezebox. Its in constant development and has a big following.

I imagine both remote controller options have their advantages when using the SB, but for me (for the same price) the Ipod wins it hands down.

Just an alternative, and its the route I'm going down.

If cost is a factor, id suggest buying a SB Classic which lets you enjoy your music, then getting an IPOD touch later for the fancy interface, which in my opinion is better than the Controller.

neoshmengi
2008-07-20, 15:52
The remote does look cool, but it's expensive and we have the laptops already.

Looking at the SSODS site:
http://oinkzwurgl.org/ssods_screenshots

It looks like you can control it via the web, which is still what I want to do. Is that what you mean by the 'alpha plugin?'

We have a bunch of laptops in the house which would actually be more convenient than the remote given how often we use them. I'm just trying to get an idea how the Receiver can be used without the remote.

Thanks for all the replies!

neoshmengi
2008-07-20, 15:58
Using the SC software or not you could just buy an external sound-card for PC to stereo streaming which is basically what the receiver is without the controller.


All I really needs is something that can interface with my stereo wirelessly from any computer in the house. The Squeezebox Receiver is a reasonable price and excellent quality by all reports. I carry my laptop around from room to room, and the kids have a laptop that they use, so I would prefer a web interface.


The Classic SB3 has a vacuum florescent display, not LED.

My mistake! I'm not looking for a display in any case.

neoshmengi
2008-07-20, 16:03
There is an alternative to this....
So its all down to the better interface when accesssing your music. Still, would be good to have something better than an small black box sitting near your stereo.

How do you like the idea of a TOUCHSCREEN remote for your music collection that also lets you check email, surf the web, runs Google Maps...the list goes on.
(oh and it lets you listen to music on the move, in the car, wherever)

*AND* Have the SB3 displaying album Info, clock, or whatever you want for it.

* ALL FOR THE SAME PRICE AS THE DUET *

Apple Ipod Touch - same price as the SB Controller.
Application called IPENG controls your Squeezebox. Its in constant development and has a big following.

I imagine both remote controller options have their advantages when using the SB, but for me (for the same price) the Ipod wins it hands down.

Just an alternative, and its the route I'm going down.


Interesting that you brought this up, as I own an Ipod Touch already. I was wondering how to use it as a controller too. I thought I was going try and see if I could use the web interface of SSODS, but it sounds like the plugin is the way to go. Thanks for the sweet tip!

I still want to confirm that you can control the Squeezebox Receiver from a PC.

bigfool1956
2008-07-20, 16:04
You might find some problems trying to stream from a wireless networked laptop to your router, and then on the a squeezebox. Streaming music demands a lot more bandwidth than internet usage, and it needs to be constant.

If, however, you use mp3, then that would be less of a problem.

davep
2008-07-20, 17:09
I still want to confirm that you can control the Squeezebox Receiver from a PC.

Yes, you absolutely can control the Receiver via the web interface of a pc or laptop, BUT officially you must have a Controller also in order to do the initial setup of the Receiver. The reference made in an earlier post about an Alpha Plugin relates to the work that is in progress on a method of setting up without the Contoller. Details are in this thread http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43722 which, when I last looked, ran to some 10 pages but the later posts seem to be reporting good results, so you might want to take chance on it.

davep

neoshmengi
2008-07-21, 19:42
Yes, you absolutely can control the Receiver via the web interface of a pc or laptop, BUT officially you must have a Controller also in order to do the initial setup of the Receiver. The reference made in an earlier post about an Alpha Plugin relates to the work that is in progress on a method of setting up without the Contoller. Details are in this thread http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43722 which, when I last looked, ran to some 10 pages but the later posts seem to be reporting good results, so you might want to take chance on it.

davep

Thanks Dave,

That was exactly the answer I was looking for. So other than the initial setup, is there anything else you would conceivably need the remote for? I assume the initial setup just includes the usual IP address router config stuff?

radish
2008-07-21, 19:53
Thanks Dave,

That was exactly the answer I was looking for. So other than the initial setup, is there anything else you would conceivably need the remote for?

Need, no. Want, maybe :) Seriously, the only thing I can think of is if you have to rerun setup for some reason (change of network settings, etc).



I assume the initial setup just includes the usual IP address router config stuff?
Yes, basically.

Mnyb
2008-07-22, 12:00
Thanks Dave,

That was exactly the answer I was looking for. So other than the initial setup, is there anything else you would conceivably need the remote for? I assume the initial setup just includes the usual IP address router config stuff?

If you wants to use Squeezenetwork ? you got to have the controller for now.
A classic SB can be switched to and from Squeezenetwork with the web interface.
The receiver can't do that yet.

A late development in the 7.1 makes it possible to fetch the Receiver from Squeezenetwork, but not the other way.
This makes me happy as it was explained to me that the Duet was designed that way on purpose ? but someone has changed the spec and now someone is working on it as half the function is there.