Home of the Squeezebox™ & Transporter® network music players.
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41
  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Leigh View Post
    65,000 tracks... not bytes

    I don't read Amazon reviews, the gene pool is too low.


    The number of bytes is irrelevant. The number of tracks is what counts...
    OK Phil, I've never counted my tracks. But there are lots. And lots. And if I put them all on one drive, the Touch becomes slow and unstable. And judging by many other reviews elsewhere, I am not alone in this.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    9,741
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave1972 View Post
    * I don't like to leave my PC switched on whilst using the Touch because it is in the same room, and it's noisy, hence I connect drives to the Touch's USB direct. I actually really love the ability to do this, but feel the experience could possibly be even better with my suggestions.
    If you must have the PC in the same room as listening, and prefer not to have it on due to noise, you should probably investigate a "silent" computer. Something like a sheevaplug (with squeezeplug setup) or FitPC2i running win7, winxp, or linux. You can connect USB drives to either of these, they are powerful (the fitpc2i is really powerful) and have no fans to create noise. They are also small (paperback book size) and are designed to be run headless (no keyboard or monitor needed).

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    11,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave1972 View Post
    OK Phil, I've never counted my tracks. But there are lots. And lots. And if I put them all on one drive, the Touch becomes slow and unstable. And judging by many other reviews elsewhere, I am not alone in this.
    Do you use the Touch while it's still scanning the library at startup? From other reports one key to stability is avoiding all use of the player while its still performing its startup scan.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by garym View Post
    If you must have the PC in the same room as listening, and prefer not to have it on due to noise, you should probably investigate a "silent" computer. Something like a sheevaplug (with squeezeplug setup) or FitPC2i running win7, winxp, or linux. You can connect USB drives to either of these, they are powerful (the fitpc2i is really powerful) and have no fans to create noise. They are also small (paperback book size) and are designed to be run headless (no keyboard or monitor needed).
    I don't want to have a computer running every time I use the Touch. One of the primary reasons for buying the Touch, was that it can play audio files WITHOUT having a PC switched on, which I love. I would love it even more if I could connect my sizeable library to it without it malfunctioning. As it happens, my workaround of splitting my library between separate drives into smaller collections has made the Touch much more stable, as less tracks are indexed into its memory. But it is only a workaround, not a solution.

    Please see my original suggestions, and maybe someone could advise me if this is feasible.

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by JJZolx View Post
    Do you use the Touch while it's still scanning the library at startup? From other reports one key to stability is avoiding all use of the player while its still performing its startup scan.
    You're absolutely right JJZolx. No, I don't play music whilst it is scanning as this is a recipe for a crash. But even after indexing, the larger the collection, the more unstable it seems to be (e.g. losing connection to the drive when performing certain functions like track skipping, searching, and playing a different track to the one selected, etc). Since reducing the number of files on the drive these things don't happen anymore. I concluded the symptoms were due to strain on the internal memory given that it has no option but to scan the entire drive upon connection. I guess this could be resolved with my suggestions (at least no one so far has suggested why this wouldn't work), but until then I'll use multiple drives.
    Last edited by Dave1972; 2011-02-28 at 15:49.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    11,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave1972 View Post
    Please see my original suggestions, and maybe someone could advise me if this is feasible.
    I would guess that #1 is not feasible, as Squeezebox Server has never worked like this. Some aspects of the operation of the server are so ingrained that I doubt they'll ever be changed. Pre-scanning and storing metadata and music info in a database is the only way it knows how to work.

    I'm sure #2 is possible, but unlikely. If you really want things to work better then take the initiative and dedicate a drive to audio only. Like Phil said, disk drives are cheap.

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by JJZolx View Post
    I would guess that #1 is not feasible, as Squeezebox Server has never worked like this. Some aspects of the operation of the server are so ingrained that I doubt they'll ever be changed. Pre-scanning and storing metadata and music info in a database is the only way it knows how to work.

    I'm sure #2 is possible, but unlikely. If you really want things to work better then take the initiative and dedicate a drive to audio only. Like Phil said, disk drives are cheap.
    Oh, it was never an issue of expense, I don't know why Phil even raised the issue. I have lots of disk drives. Three of them dedicated to audio now (Rock, Jazz and Classical!) instead of just one drive with three "genre" folders.

    Never mind. I guess it really is the case that the Touch must (for some design reason) scan an entire device that is connected, and is incapable of only scanning a nominated folder. It was worth asking anyway.

  8. #18
    Senior Member toby10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    USA (home of the bottomless credit card)
    Posts
    8,484
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave1972 View Post
    I don't want to have a computer running every time I use the Touch. One of the primary reasons for buying the Touch, was that it can play audio files WITHOUT having a PC switched on.....
    I think many would like that. But it's really a paradox in that you don't want a computer running yet you want the Touch to have the robustness and speed of.... a computer.
    Same with the NAS users, they want a stripped down low power device, but then complain when that NAS doesn't have the processing power of a full fledged computer.

    I'm on your side and would love to see what you desire, but realistically I just don't think you will find that in a $300 audio player, not in the near future anyway.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by toby10 View Post
    I think many would like that. But it's really a paradox in that you don't want a computer running yet you want the Touch to have the robustness and speed of.... a computer.
    Nah, I really don't. Honest I don't. I just thought it would be good to have the ability to choose which folder to scan, rather than scan the whole damn drive. Like the Boxee Box does (which is more for movies but plays music also) - you can nominate a folder (or folders) to index - or you can bypass indexing altogether if you wish and just navigate the drives instead of waiting for all the tags to be indexed. This puts less pressure on its limited resources, not to mention saves time. Especially as drives need to be disconnected periodically to put more stuff on them. I just thought the Touch would benefit equally in this respect, that's all.

    Seems that's not possible due to some deep-rooted design thing, which goes beyond simple firmware issues and means the Touch absolutely must scan the entire volume of anything that connects to it in order for its internal server to work.
    Last edited by Dave1972; 2011-02-28 at 17:25.

  10. #20
    Senior Member ModelCitizen's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Sussex UK
    Posts
    3,071
    During beta testing I requested that an option be included to enable selection of a directory. I was told that it was not going to be included but might be added as an advanced option some time in the future..... or that someone might perhaps write an 'options' plugin.

    Neither is going to happen.

    MC
    Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known
    Last.fm/user/ModelCitizen

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •