PDA

View Full Version : Multiple Squeezeboxes question



Mark Lanctot
2005-11-01, 07:26
I'm writing a review of the Squeezebox. I will
supply a link when it's finished, but it will be a
while - I spend a lot of time on reviews.

Anyway, my first question is regarding multiple
Squeezeboxes. The testing I'm doing is a bit hard
for me because I have only one Squeezebox. I'm
doing experiments with a Softsqueeze for my second
Squeezebox.

I notice I can play the two independently, and
that there's a new settings option to synchronize.

Synchronizing obviously reduces SlimServer
workload as only one stream needs to be sent. But
with 2 wireless Squeezeboxes I assume there are
still 2 independent wireless connections eating up
bandwidth.

So what's the limit of the amount of Squeezeboxes
supported by SlimServer? But isn't this limit
higher than the practical limit where you'd reach
your wireless bandwidth limit? Does synchronizing
players help, or do they still have their own
independent wireless connection, i.e. is
SlimServer still sending multiple streams with the
same data or is it sending one stream?

I may have other questions as I write the review.

Thanks.

--
___________________________________


Mark Lanctot
___________________________________

stinkingpig
2005-11-01, 07:35
Mark Lanctot wrote:

>I'm writing a review of the Squeezebox. I will
>supply a link when it's finished, but it will be a
>while - I spend a lot of time on reviews.
>
>Anyway, my first question is regarding multiple
>Squeezeboxes. The testing I'm doing is a bit hard
>for me because I have only one Squeezebox. I'm
>doing experiments with a Softsqueeze for my second
>Squeezebox.
>
>I notice I can play the two independently, and
>that there's a new settings option to synchronize.
>
>
>
That's been there since the get-go :)

>Synchronizing obviously reduces SlimServer
>workload as only one stream needs to be sent. But
>with 2 wireless Squeezeboxes I assume there are
>still 2 independent wireless connections eating up
>bandwidth.
>
>
>
A single stream is unicast to each Squeezebox, whether synchronized or
not, virtual or not.

>So what's the limit of the amount of Squeezeboxes
>supported by SlimServer? But isn't this limit
>higher than the practical limit where you'd reach
>your wireless bandwidth limit? Does synchronizing
>players help, or do they still have their own
>independent wireless connection, i.e. is
>SlimServer still sending multiple streams with the
>same data or is it sending one stream?
>
>

I forget the published maximum, but it's northward of 20. The more
important question is length of song -- synchronization only happens at
the beginning of each song, so you'll find they drift apart while
playing long pieces or Internet radio streams.

--
Jack At Monkeynoodle Dot Org: It's A Scientific Venture!
"I spent all me tin with the ladies drinking gin
so across the Western ocean I must wander" -- trad.

Mark Lanctot
2005-11-01, 07:39
See below.

Jack Coates wrote:
> Mark Lanctot wrote:
>
>> I'm writing a review of the Squeezebox. I will
supply a link when
>> it's finished, but it will be a while - I spend a
lot of time on reviews.
>>
>> Anyway, my first question is regarding multiple
Squeezeboxes. The
>> testing I'm doing is a bit hard for me because I
have only one
>> Squeezebox. I'm doing experiments with a
Softsqueeze for my second
>> Squeezebox.
>>
>> I notice I can play the two independently, and that
there's a new
>> settings option to synchronize.
>>
>>
>>
> That's been there since the get-go :)

err, what I mean is, that's a new option that you
don't get with a single Squeezebox, i.e. one I'm
not used to seeing with a single Squeezebox.

Thanks for the responses to my other questions.
Clears things right up!


--
___________________________________


Mark Lanctot
___________________________________

mikeb
2005-11-03, 20:12
There you guys go, Mark came up with a good idea;

Multicast audio feeds.

Screw that archaic unicast crap! ;-)


I just spent the whole day troubleshooting PIM problems in a Multicast
network, maybe I'm a bit overzealous =).

-- Mike

Mark Lanctot wrote:
> I'm writing a review of the Squeezebox. I will
> supply a link when it's finished, but it will be a
> while - I spend a lot of time on reviews.
>
> Anyway, my first question is regarding multiple
> Squeezeboxes. The testing I'm doing is a bit hard
> for me because I have only one Squeezebox. I'm
> doing experiments with a Softsqueeze for my second
> Squeezebox.
>
> I notice I can play the two independently, and
> that there's a new settings option to synchronize.
>
> Synchronizing obviously reduces SlimServer
> workload as only one stream needs to be sent. But
> with 2 wireless Squeezeboxes I assume there are
> still 2 independent wireless connections eating up
> bandwidth.
>
> So what's the limit of the amount of Squeezeboxes
> supported by SlimServer? But isn't this limit
> higher than the practical limit where you'd reach
> your wireless bandwidth limit? Does synchronizing
> players help, or do they still have their own
> independent wireless connection, i.e. is
> SlimServer still sending multiple streams with the
> same data or is it sending one stream?
>
> I may have other questions as I write the review.
>
> Thanks.
>