PDA

View Full Version : Softsqueeze



Bruce S.
2005-12-20, 15:07
I haven't taken receipt of my SB3 yet so I test out ripped files and other aspects of this technology by running Slimserver with Softsqueeze. If I am doing any significant processing - I am ripping and compressing with FLAC a lot - on my laptop while listening (with headphones) I will invariably, just give it a little time, get serious breakup of the playback and eventually actually stop playing altogether.

I asked a question a while back whether or not the SB3 can perform while my laptop's CPU and file system are extremely busy, since I expect to be ripping and compressing well into '06 while listening to my SB3. The answer came back that there would be no problem.

Now I am beginning to wonder. My only consolation is that softsqueeze is competing for resources on my laptop whereas the actual SB3 hardware won't be. However, Slimserver is also competing for resources and will be when I get the SB3 hardware up and running.

Which is causing me the problem? Both interfaces are sitting there acting like they are playing (running) fine even though no music is playing.

Any thoughts?

Bruce S.

mrfantasy
2005-12-20, 19:06
There seem to be some issues with Softsqueeze dropping out at times. Symptom is that it basically loses sync with Slimserver. You can look at the player status and they may not be on the same song. Sometimes skipping tracks in the Softsqueeze interface clears the problem, sometimes you just need to restart Softsqueeze.

I've noticed it's particularly troublesome with high CPU apps, or apps that seem to take over the input queue for long time in Windows. I don't even know if it's really a Softsqueeze problem per se, it could be wackiness with my Java implementation, or problems with the Internet connection at home or work.

It will probably work better with an external SB3 than with Softsqueeze. If Softsqueeze and Slimserver are on the same machine it's probably not a fair comparison.

ceejay
2005-12-21, 01:59
I asked a question a while back whether or not the SB3 can perform while my laptop's CPU and file system are extremely busy, since I expect to be ripping and compressing well into '06 while listening to my SB3. The answer came back that there would be no problem.

Now I am beginning to wonder. My only consolation is that softsqueeze is competing for resources on my laptop whereas the actual SB3 hardware won't be. However, Slimserver is also competing for resources and will be when I get the SB3 hardware up and running.

Which is causing me the problem? Both interfaces are sitting there acting like they are playing (running) fine even though no music is playing.


Using Softsqueeze to play is a LOT more demanding on your laptop than just using Slimserver to stream out FLAC files. When my server (an aging desktop) is especially busy, I do sometimes get dropouts on Softsqueeze: I'm fairly sure I've never managed to stop a FLAC stream to an SB.

But then, you'll find out for yourself soon, so why worry? :)

Ceejay

bludragon
2005-12-21, 02:35
You could always increase the priority of slimserver - find it in the task manager, right click, and set it to 'AboveNormal'.

If this works, you can also get it to startup at that priority using 'start'

kkitts
2005-12-21, 07:40
I was running SoftSqueeze and SlimServer on an old PII/266 and had dropouts all the time with SoftSqueeze. When I looked at the system using "top" to see what was taking CPU it was almost all SoftSqueeze. This is not scientific - but I'd say greater than 85% of the CPU was being taken by SoftSqueeze. The amount of CPU taken by slimserver was typically only a few percent. The only exception is if you are doing a "rescan" of your music library - in which case SlimServer takes a lot of CPU - as much as it can get - until the operation completes.

When I bought a hardware SB3 and continued to use the PII/266 computer for the SlimServer everything has worked exceptionally well. I've never had any dropout - note though - I am using the 100mbps/wired interface.

In short SoftSqueeze is a real CPU hog - and from my experience using it on even faster machines - is not really reliable in most cases that I've tried.

I think that you'll be pleasantly surprised when you get the new SB3 player at how well things work. At least that has been my experience.

Good Luck,

Kevin

Bruce S.
2005-12-21, 10:20
Thanks for all the replies on this. I had a hunch that it was softsqueeze but I needed some reassurance. Can't wait for the SB3 hardware to show up!