SB Wireless bridge and QNAP TS109 connectivity

[usr33t]

Hello,

Whilst I wait for the Squeezebox Classic to come back into stock at PcWorld I have been thinking about how I would ultimately like my setup to work.

My primary objective is for the Squeezebox to be as much a standalone "hifi seperate" as possible, only requiring me to turn the Squeezebox and storage device on in the living room and start listening. I really don't want to have to turn on the Squeezebox and then go upstairs and fire up the storage device and wireless router separately. I know I could leave these devices on continuously but I definitely won't be doing this.

As far as I understand, a way of achieving my overall setup goal is to hardwire the storage device to the Squeezebox using a crossover ethernet cable. At the moment I'm favouring the QNAP TS109 as the storage device (having previously considered a Tranquil PC). Although I can see no problem using either of these devices for playback, in terms of the QNAP I am wondering how I would subsequently be able to add new music using my proposed hardwire setup.

Proposed remedy...

I have read that the Squeezebox can be used as a wireless bridge, which, from what limited information I have gathered, I understand could be used to act as a kind of temporary wireless adapter for the QNAP. If my understanding is correct, this means that on the rare occasions that I would want to add new music to the QNAP I could rip a CD using my desktop PC and then send the files via my wireless router and Squeezebox (in wireless bridge mode) to the QNAP. Am I correct, or have I completely missed the point of the bridging feature?

I have attached a Heath-Robinson-esque jpeg to try and explain my proposed setup.

If anyone could let me know whether my planned setup will work I would be extremely grateful.

Apologies for the long thread!

Cheers
Russ
(usr33t)

[rperkin]

Yes, this will work without problem. I tested it soon after I got my QNAP TS-209 Pro. See my posts in this thread:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=42365

May I ask why you won't be leaving the router + NAS on permanently? That's what they're designed for, and having the NAS connected by Ethernet to the router is a better network topology...

Kind regards

[usr33t]

Hi there,

Thanks for your reply.

The only reason I won't be leaving the Squeezebox/router/NAS on permanently is because I live with someone who insists on everything being switched off at night or when out of the house. I can't twist their arm on this but maybe when they have a go with the Squeezebox they'll change their mind!

Thanks again for your help.

Best wishes
Russ

[rperkin]

Understood. But there are a number of practical reasons why this network topology is not ideal.

The first concerns the use of a NAS at all. The NAS provides storage available to all devices on the network, and in the case of a QNAP many other services as well [OK, you may not use many of them...]. By connecting it directly to the SqueezeBox, you are limiting the access to it by other devices. I guess it depends on what other computers and devices you have on the network.

The second is the issue of wireless bandwidth [and mentioned in one of my posts in the linked thread above]. If you are starting a digital music library from scratch or have many CDs to rip, you will soon get frustrated by the wireless data transfer speed, particularly if you are using FLAC format data files.

But it certainly provides a very neat and tidy solution, which at the end of the day may well be what is required

Kind regards

[usr33t]

Thanks again for your help and thoughts on my setup rperkin.

I would certainly only be using the QNAP as a storage device for the Squeezebox as beyond this my old (10 years) desktop PC is fine for my limited needs of accessing the internet or ripping CDs, which I then copy to my iRiver mp3 player.

The alternative is to use a Tranquil PC instead of the QNAP with a USB wireless adapter in the back for adding music from my desktop PC. From what I understand, this would probably be a much easier solution on a number of levels, however, perhaps not quite as neat and tidy in terms of physical appearance (Tranquil is a fair bit bigger than the QNAP I think). Also, I'm guessing that using a Tranquil may well mean slower boot times from a cold start, which will probably involve fiddling around with XP (or whatever OS) to get the setup up and running as quickly as possible.

Whatever route I go down I would like to thank you once again for your help in confirming the QNAP setup would work, as well as highlighting the potential shortcomings of this topology.

Best wishes
Russ

[RichardEvans]

The only problem I can see, is that when the router is switched off, you will probably also be switching off your DHCP service. There is however a simple remidy to this, simply configure your QNap and Squeezebox using static IP addresses.

Also you would obviously find transfering files wirelessly to be significantly slower than using a wired network. But if file transfers are only occasional, you might not be too worred about this. If you ever do need to transfer lots of files and speed becomes an issue you could always temporarily move your Qnap and connect it to your router, just for the transfer.

Richard.