PDA

View Full Version : Squeezebox and internet radio?



Darren Marshall
2004-01-09, 20:15
I'm listening to the vocal trance station at www.digitallyimported.com right
now. 45 min in no hiccups. using a d-link dwl-900ap+ as a client wired to an
8 port switch that the squeeze is plugged into, also a Compaq 733 running
windows 2000 pro on same switch as server. I have a dwl-900ap as an access
point of my router.

-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com
[mailto:discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com]On Behalf Of John Shriver
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 8:01 PM
To: discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com
Subject: [slim] Squeezebox and internet radio?


I posted something on this topic last weekend and get few responses, so I
thought I would try again. Hopefully I can get some ideas to work on this
weekend.

I have a new Squeezebox connected to a PC (XP on a 900 MHz Pentium III
with 256 MB RAM, ethernet connection to the box, running 5.0.3 Jan 5 build
with firmware 6, and with the internet connection through a cable modem). I
have no problem connecting and playing MP3's. However, all internet
stations become intermittent after a few minutes. I have no problem playing
the same stations through Winamp or iTunes on my computer speakers. The
guys at slimdevices say that they are aware of the problem and it is
software, not hardware related, but they have not been able to track down
the problem yet.

I wonder how prevalent this problem is. Have people given up for now
trying to listen to internet radio using the Squeezebox, or is there some
way around the problem?

Michael Bowyer
2004-01-10, 01:19
Internet Radio IS flawed (ok, maybe only 128k streams and above), and
always has been in version 5. Version 4.2.6 works fine, but its not for
Squeezbox's, plus other goodies are missing in 4.2.6 (xPL support)
which stops me going back. I wish someone smart would actually look
into fixing streaming radio in 5.

>I wonder how prevalent this problem is. Have people given up for now
trying to listen to internet radio using the Squeezebox, or is there
some way >around the problem?

Yes, I have unfortunately had to give up listening to radio, and
probably a lot of other people too (unless they're happy with a 32K
stream). The subject keeps cropping up but, after a few "works for
me..." replies, the thread just fizzles out.

Please SlimDevices, fix it!!!


On 10 Jan 2004, at 4:15, Darren Marshall wrote:

> I'm listening to the vocal trance station
> atwww.digitallyimported.comright now. 45 min in no hiccups. using a
> d-link dwl-900ap+ as a client wired to an 8 port switch that the
> squeeze is plugged into, also a Compaq 733 running windows 2000 pro on
> same switch as server. I have a dwl-900ap as an access point of my
> router.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com
> [mailto:discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com]On Behalf OfJohn Shriver
> Sent:Friday, January 09, 2004 8:01 PM
> To:discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com
> Subject:[slim] Squeezebox and internet radio?
>
> I posted something on this topic last weekend and get few responses,
> so I thought I would try again. Hopefully I can get some ideas to
> work on this weekend.
>
> I have a new Squeezebox connected to a PC (XP on a 900 MHz Pentium
> III with 256 MB RAM, ethernet connection to the box, running 5.0.3 Jan
> 5 build with firmware 6, and with the internet connection through a
> cable modem). I have no problem connecting and playing MP3's.
> However, all internet stations become intermittent after a few
> minutes. I have no problem playing the same stations through Winamp or
> iTunes on my computer speakers. The guys at slimdevices say that they
> are aware of the problem and it is software, not hardware related, but
> they have not been able to track down the problem yet.
>
>

kdf
2004-01-10, 01:27
Quoting Michael Bowyer <mbowyer (AT) mac (DOT) com>:

> I wish someone smart would actually look
> into fixing streaming radio in 5.

I'd like to know how you think that statement wont be insulting to just about
everyone who has actually been working to try to fix it for all the users out
there, without having access to the same hardware configurations, while also
trying to satisfy every other user who is wanting their issue solved immediately.

There have been times when it worked. Sadly, when it worked best for linux/osx
it was totally useless in Windows. Cross-platform is the biggest gain for
SlimServer, but also the biggest loss.

I've tried to do what I can, but I already know I'm not one of the smart ones.
However, if I can find anything at all that would help, I'll be sure to pass it
on. Rest assured, this issue IS being worked on, and it is recieving ever
priority that it can have.

cheers,
kdf

Michael Bowyer
2004-01-10, 01:32
On 10 Jan 2004, at 9:27, kdf wrote:

>> I wish someone smart would actually look
>> into fixing streaming radio in 5.
>
> I'd like to know how you think that statement wont be insulting to
> just about
> everyone who has actually been working to try to fix it

You're right, and I apologise! I thought it was on the edge when I
wrote it. But, please understand I am upset about the radio
situation....

Michael Bowyer
2004-01-10, 01:37
On 10 Jan 2004, at 9:32, Michael Bowyer wrote:

>
> On 10 Jan 2004, at 9:27, kdf wrote:
>
>>> I wish someone smart would actually look
>>> into fixing streaming radio in 5.
>>
>> I'd like to know how you think that statement wont be insulting to
>> just about
>> everyone who has actually been working to try to fix it
>
> You're right, and I apologise! I thought it was on the edge when I
> wrote it. But, please understand I am upset about the radio
> situation....
>

Also, by "someone smart", I meant NOT ME, because I'm not smart enough!!

kdf
2004-01-10, 01:51
Quoting Michael Bowyer <mbowyer (AT) mac (DOT) com>:

>
> On 10 Jan 2004, at 9:27, kdf wrote:
>
> >> I wish someone smart would actually look
> >> into fixing streaming radio in 5.
> >
> > I'd like to know how you think that statement wont be insulting to
> > just about
> > everyone who has actually been working to try to fix it
>
> You're right, and I apologise! I thought it was on the edge when I
> wrote it. But, please understand I am upset about the radio
> situation....
>
Trust me, so am I. I've seen it some and go. But if it wont work for all
users, it will be an ongoing issue. Its definately been improving, just be
patient.

Slimserver 5 was a big change, and there are a lot of issues to work out with
such diverse setups. It will be worth it in the long run.

-kdf

Simon
2004-01-10, 03:09
On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 09:19:06AM +0100, Michael Bowyer wrote:
> Internet Radio IS flawed (ok, maybe only 128k streams and above), and
> always has been in version 5. Version 4.2.6 works fine, but its not for
> Squeezbox's, plus other goodies are missing in 4.2.6 (xPL support)
> which stops me going back. I wish someone smart would actually look
> into fixing streaming radio in 5.

Running Linux (Debian unstable, 2.4.x kernel) with Slimserver 5.0.1 i have
no problems listening to digitallyimported.com's 160k streams for hours
pretty much daily. Slimserver running on an overloaded P2-233mhz machine
with 96Mb ram.

--
Simon

Ben Sandee
2004-01-10, 09:11
Simon wrote:

>On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 09:19:06AM +0100, Michael Bowyer wrote:
>
>
>>Internet Radio IS flawed (ok, maybe only 128k streams and above), and
>>always has been in version 5. Version 4.2.6 works fine, but its not for
>>Squeezbox's, plus other goodies are missing in 4.2.6 (xPL support)
>>which stops me going back. I wish someone smart would actually look
>>into fixing streaming radio in 5.
>>
>>
>
>Running Linux (Debian unstable, 2.4.x kernel) with Slimserver 5.0.1 i have
>no problems listening to digitallyimported.com's 160k streams for hours
>pretty much daily. Slimserver running on an overloaded P2-233mhz machine
>with 96Mb ram.
>
>
>
Running Linux (Debian testing, 2.4.20 kernel) with SlimServer nightlies,
I can listen to RadioParadise (www.radioparadise.com) 64k streams
forever but if I try 128k mp3 my SliMP3 falters almost immediately.
Everything works fine using Winamp or even streaming using mpg321 on the
Linux box (1ghz athlon, 512mn ram, lightly loaded). This has happened
since the move to 5.0 -- but 5.0 is still better the 4.2.6 which
periodically would leave my Slimp3 non-responsive forcing a hard reboot
by removing the power cord. If the streaming radio problems are fixed I
will be buying two additional squeezeboxen if that's any incentive. :-)

Ben

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Peter_=27epostlistor=27_N=F5u?=
2004-01-10, 12:07
Ben Sandee wrote:
>>
> Running Linux (Debian testing, 2.4.20 kernel) with SlimServer nightlies,
> I can listen to RadioParadise (www.radioparadise.com) 64k streams
> forever but if I try 128k mp3 my SliMP3 falters almost immediately.
> Everything works fine using Winamp or even streaming using mpg321 on the
> Linux box (1ghz athlon, 512mn ram, lightly loaded). This has happened
> since the move to 5.0 -- but 5.0 is still better the 4.2.6 which
> periodically would leave my Slimp3 non-responsive forcing a hard reboot
> by removing the power cord. If the streaming radio problems are fixed I
> will be buying two additional squeezeboxen if that's any incentive. :-)
>

I recently bought my first slim-device (SqueezeBox), and it turns out I
love the streaming radio and use this more than I thought. However, my
expericene on w2k server is very much like the above description. All
channels (at 128 kbit) are stuttering within a few seconds of starting.
I am on the latest nightly build, and 6.0 firmware

/peter

John Shriver
2004-01-10, 16:56
Just wondering: how system dependent is the internet radio problem? Does
the Squeezebox work any better on a Mac with OSX?




----- Original Message -----
From: "kdf" <slim-mail (AT) deane-freeman (DOT) com>
To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 2:27 AM
Subject: [slim] Squeezebox and internet radio?


> Quoting Michael Bowyer <mbowyer (AT) mac (DOT) com>:
>
> > I wish someone smart would actually look
> > into fixing streaming radio in 5.
>
> I'd like to know how you think that statement wont be insulting to just
about
> everyone who has actually been working to try to fix it for all the users
out
> there, without having access to the same hardware configurations, while
also
> trying to satisfy every other user who is wanting their issue solved
immediately.
>
> There have been times when it worked. Sadly, when it worked best for
linux/osx
> it was totally useless in Windows. Cross-platform is the biggest gain for
> SlimServer, but also the biggest loss.
>
> I've tried to do what I can, but I already know I'm not one of the smart
ones.
> However, if I can find anything at all that would help, I'll be sure to
pass it
> on. Rest assured, this issue IS being worked on, and it is recieving ever
> priority that it can have.
>
> cheers,
> kdf
>
>
>
>

Dave Scott
2004-01-10, 19:18
While I have little or no issues with Internet Radio ( all stations i
listen to are 128K streams ) I have noticed something in the last 24
hours ...

Some streams can never fill the buffer ... one in particular,
GroveSalad (from www.somafm.com ) will only fill the buffer 75% ..
doesn't matter which stream feed I use. I find after approx 20 minutes
or so the stream will start stuttering .. the buffer having fallen to 1
or 2 bars .... the stream continues to break up even though the buffer
appears to be trying to "re-fill". So, maybe in this case maybe the
originating station is maxing out ?

With other feeds from the same site ( which are not as popular ) I can
listen all day ie 15 to 20 hours without an issue.

Set up:

Tibook 1 Ghz, 768 meg Ram, OSX 10.3.2, SlimP3 Player, Slimserver 5.0.3
- 9 Jan 2004 build, iTunes - Lame Package, 9 Jan 2004 build

Buffer display is certainly handy :-)

cheers

Dave Scott

dean
2004-01-11, 10:56
I have fewer problems with radio on my OSX machine, but I think it has
more to do with internet connectivity and specific stations.

I'll be attacking the radio problem first thing monday morning, now
that MacWorld is over...

-dean

On Jan 10, 2004, at 3:56 PM, John Shriver wrote:

> Just wondering: how system dependent is the internet radio problem?
> Does
> the Squeezebox work any better on a Mac with OSX?
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "kdf" <slim-mail (AT) deane-freeman (DOT) com>
> To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
> Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 2:27 AM
> Subject: [slim] Squeezebox and internet radio?
>
>
>> Quoting Michael Bowyer <mbowyer (AT) mac (DOT) com>:
>>
>>> I wish someone smart would actually look
>>> into fixing streaming radio in 5.
>>
>> I'd like to know how you think that statement wont be insulting to
>> just
> about
>> everyone who has actually been working to try to fix it for all the
>> users
> out
>> there, without having access to the same hardware configurations,
>> while
> also
>> trying to satisfy every other user who is wanting their issue solved
> immediately.
>>
>> There have been times when it worked. Sadly, when it worked best for
> linux/osx
>> it was totally useless in Windows. Cross-platform is the biggest
>> gain for
>> SlimServer, but also the biggest loss.
>>
>> I've tried to do what I can, but I already know I'm not one of the
>> smart
> ones.
>> However, if I can find anything at all that would help, I'll be sure
>> to
> pass it
>> on. Rest assured, this issue IS being worked on, and it is recieving
>> ever
>> priority that it can have.
>>
>> cheers,
>> kdf
>>
>>
>>
>>

Ben Sandee
2004-01-11, 11:11
dean blackketter wrote:

> I have fewer problems with radio on my OSX machine, but I think it has
> more to do with internet connectivity and specific stations.
>
> I'll be attacking the radio problem first thing monday morning, now
> that MacWorld is over...
>
> -dean

Dean,

Just some more information to go on -- on a whim I applied the -preempt
low latency patch to my Linux 2.4.20 kernel (Debian testing) and have
been able to play my radioparadise 128k streams without any problems for
25 minutes. I had not really been interested in the low latency patches
before because it's not particularly important for servers, but I'm sold
on it now. Before this patch it would fail within 20-30 seconds pretty
consistently. I've been watching the buffers on the on-screen display
and it pretty much stays at 100% now.

I would hypothesize that the current software has trouble recovering
from an extended "sleep" period that causes a playback device buffer
underrun. I may revert back to the non-preempt kernel to analyze this
further. If you'd like ssh access to my box I'd be happy to arrange it.

Thanks,
Ben

dean
2004-01-11, 11:15
Hi Ben,

That information is REALLY helpful. I should be able to reproduce it
easily tomorrow.

Thanks!

-dean

On Jan 11, 2004, at 10:11 AM, Ben Sandee wrote:

> dean blackketter wrote:
>
>> I have fewer problems with radio on my OSX machine, but I think it
>> has more to do with internet connectivity and specific stations.
>>
>> I'll be attacking the radio problem first thing monday morning, now
>> that MacWorld is over...
>>
>> -dean
>
> Dean,
>
> Just some more information to go on -- on a whim I applied the
> -preempt low latency patch to my Linux 2.4.20 kernel (Debian testing)
> and have been able to play my radioparadise 128k streams without any
> problems for 25 minutes. I had not really been interested in the low
> latency patches before because it's not particularly important for
> servers, but I'm sold on it now. Before this patch it would fail
> within 20-30 seconds pretty consistently. I've been watching the
> buffers on the on-screen display and it pretty much stays at 100% now.
>
> I would hypothesize that the current software has trouble recovering
> from an extended "sleep" period that causes a playback device buffer
> underrun. I may revert back to the non-preempt kernel to analyze this
> further. If you'd like ssh access to my box I'd be happy to arrange
> it.
>
> Thanks,
> Ben
>

John Shriver
2004-01-11, 14:19
Dean wrote:


> I have fewer problems with radio on my OSX machine, but I think it has
> more to do with internet connectivity and specific stations.
>
> I'll be attacking the radio problem first thing monday morning, now
> that MacWorld is over...
>
> -dean
>

Thanks Dean for all the hard work Congratulations on the Best of Show award!

As indicated by others, I have found that I have no problem playing
groovesalad at 128 kbps (all three feeds) over the Squeezebox (on a PC
running XP and an ethernet connection to the squeezebox, Jan 11 build).
Others, for example Highlander Radio and CelticGrove do not work, even at
24, 56, or 64 kbps. But all work fine when played through iTunes or Winamp
using a SoundBlaster Live soundcard and digital speakers.

The playlists follow:

[playlist]
numberofentries=3
File1=http://64.236.34.97:80/stream/1018
Title1=SomaFM Presents: Groove Salad 128k (Feed #1)
Length1=-1
File2=http://205.188.245.133:8076
Title2=SomaFM Presents: Groove Salad 128k (Feed #2)
Length2=-1
File3=http://server2.somafm.com:8032
Title3=SomaFM Presents: Groove Salad 128k (Feed #3)
Length3=-1
Version=2

[playlist]
NumberOfEntries=2
Version=2
File1=http://rs4.radiostreamer.de:8200/
Title1=Highlander Radio #1 (MP3 @ 56 kbps)
Length1=-1
File2=http://live.str3am.com:2780/
Title2=Highlander Radio #2 (MP3 @ 24 kbps)
Length2=-11

[playlist]

NumberOfEntries=1

File1=http://205.188.234.38:8040/