PDA

View Full Version : Transporter



SteveK
2006-12-22, 18:44
I am thinking of setting up a fullblown music network in my home. I am considering the Transporter, but am having trouble with figuring out i am going to get it work with a wireless network. I am trying to get to the point where i can control the slim library, and access my music from different rooms. I will most likely have one receiver that will drive mutliple sets of speakers through the house. I also saw the TB server with the pair of squeeze boxes. If anyone has any suggestions on where to start with this project, i will be very appreciative. Happy Holidays!!!

SuperQ
2006-12-23, 00:10
I am thinking of setting up a fullblown music network in my home. I am considering the Transporter, but am having trouble with figuring out i am going to get it work with a wireless network. I am trying to get to the point where i can control the slim library, and access my music from different rooms. I will most likely have one receiver that will drive mutliple sets of speakers through the house. I also saw the TB server with the pair of squeeze boxes. If anyone has any suggestions on where to start with this project, i will be very appreciative. Happy Holidays!!!

I don't see a single question mark in your post. I'm not sure if this is just random thoughts, or you had a question.

I'll try and answer your statements as if they were questions.

Yes, it works with wireless just fine. Several players can be used with lossless FLAC encoding with a good 802.11g signal.

If you only have one amplifier, you will only need one device. I would suggest starting with a single squeezebox and then go from there as you add more recievers.

peter
2006-12-23, 01:03
SteveK wrote:
> I will most likely have one receiver that will
> drive mutliple sets of speakers through the house.
>
You seem to be missing the point of the slimdevices stuff.

Regards,
Peter

Skunk
2006-12-23, 10:26
There is no reason you can't have one squeeebox or transporter hooked to one receiver, driving three sets of speakers in different rooms.

I would even say it is far from 'missing the point' of Squeezebox. E.g. You can control it all from the remote if you're in the same room as the Squeezebox, or control it from a laptop/PSP/Nokia/desktop PC while in the rooms that don't have an actual squeezebox, which to me is one of the best things about the system.

The only trouble is the music will be the same in all rooms, but some people want that. A squeezebox and seperate amp in each room is a lot more money if you just want multiple zones playing the same music.

peter
2006-12-23, 12:04
Skunk wrote:
> There is no reason you can't have one squeeebox or transporter hooked to
> one receiver, driving three sets of speakers in different rooms.
>

No, there isn't, except that it's a very unelegant solution..

> I would even say it is far from 'missing the point' of Squeezebox. E.g.
> You can control it all from the remote if you're in the same room as the
> Squeezebox, or control it from a laptop/PSP/Nokia/desktop PC while in
> the rooms that don't have an actual squeezebox, which to me is one of
> the best things about the system.
>

To me it's like adding a KVM switch to a computerterminal (thin client
would be a better example these days). Perfectly possible, but slightly
weird ;)

> The only trouble is the music will be the same in all rooms, but some
> people want that. A squeezebox and seperate amp in each room is a lot
> more money if you just want multiple zones playing the same music.
>

And you can't control the volume in the different rooms seperately from
the remote or web interface. And you can't switch the 'zones' on and and
off seperately without fiddling with the amp. Steve is considering a
Transporter and wants "a full blown music network". Well, that 2000
bucks he will paying for the Transporter easily buys a bunch of
excellent Squeezeboxes with money left over for some very decent amps.
That's what I'd call a full blown music network, not a Transporter with
lots of wires. But that's me, of course ;)

Regards,
Peter

Skunk
2006-12-24, 09:41
And you can't control the volume in the different rooms seperately from the remote or web interface. And you can't switch the 'zones' on and and off seperately without fiddling with the amp. Steve is considering a Transporter and wants "a full blown music network". Well, that 2000 bucks he will paying for the Transporter easily buys a bunch of excellent Squeezeboxes with money left over for some very decent amps. That's what I'd call a full blown music network, not a Transporter with lots of wires. But that's me, of course ;)
Regards,
Peter

Steve, Peter is right. You will be much happier with a dedicated squeezebox for each room you wish to control the music in.

That being said, if the kitchen, bathroom, garage, or back patio are included in your audio system, then you could easily run just a set of speaker wires to that room, and have an l-pad (volume control) mounted on the wall. It is much easier to throw some speakers in the ceiling and run speaker wire than it is to try hiding the amp and keeping the Sb safe yet visible.

OTOH, in a place like the bedroom or den you are likely to want to have the ability to switch tracks and adjust the volume from your bed/desk. In this case, an SB3 paired with powered speakers (audioengine, Aego-M, and Swans are popular around here) will allow that in a very elegant manner, as peter pointed out.

As for the main listening room, if you're going to be using a receiver then I would suggest the transporter is overkill. If I were setting up what you want, I'd probably buy 2-3 squeezeboxes, a couple pairs of powered speakers, use your existing multi zone receiver, update my PC and storage, and get a 802.11g capable internet tablet/handheld pc to use as an album cover displaying remote.