PDA

View Full Version : Listening to music locally at PC?



2004-01-15, 21:38
PC is in one room, Slimp3 at other end of house.

Is there any way at all to listen to what's playing on Slimp3 via the local
computer speakers?

Any program at all, some third party tool, anything...??? Heeeelp!

kdf
2004-01-15, 21:42
Quoting slimp3 (AT) melbournepubs (DOT) com:

>
> PC is in one room, Slimp3 at other end of house.
>
> Is there any way at all to listen to what's playing on Slimp3 via the local
> computer speakers?
>
> Any program at all, some third party tool, anything...??? Heeeelp!
winamp...openURL... http:\\localhost:9000/stream.mp3
Then just choose the same playlist :)

If you have linux, you can use slimp3slave which will allow you to synchronize
with your slimp3.
http://www.google.com/search?q=slimp3slave&btnG=Google

-kdf

Neal Tucker
2004-01-18, 22:53
kdf says:
> Quoting slimp3 (AT) melbournepubs (DOT) com:
> >
> > PC is in one room, Slimp3 at other end of house.
> >
> > Is there any way at all to listen to what's playing on Slimp3 via the local
> > computer speakers?
> >
> > Any program at all, some third party tool, anything...??? Heeeelp!
>
> winamp...openURL... http:\\localhost:9000/stream.mp3
> Then just choose the same playlist :)

As I'm sure you know, this doesn't do what he asked. The PC comes up as
a seperate player with an independent playlist, not a "monitor" of what's
playing on the slimp3.

And as much as I like the idea of supporting Slim, "more slimp3's" is a
ridiculous solution to this problem. The best way to get an audio stream
from your PC to your ears is *not* to buy more hardware and send the
stream to it over the network. You already have the hardware necessary.

-Neal Tucker

kdf
2004-01-19, 00:11
Quoting Neal Tucker <ntucker-slimdiscuss (AT) area (DOT) com>:

> kdf says:
> > Quoting slimp3 (AT) melbournepubs (DOT) com:
> > >
> > > PC is in one room, Slimp3 at other end of house.
> > >
> > > Is there any way at all to listen to what's playing on Slimp3 via the
> local
> > > computer speakers?
> > >
> > > Any program at all, some third party tool, anything...??? Heeeelp!
> >
> > winamp...openURL... http:\\localhost:9000/stream.mp3
> > Then just choose the same playlist :)
>
> As I'm sure you know, this doesn't do what he asked. The PC comes up as
> a seperate player with an independent playlist, not a "monitor" of what's
> playing on the slimp3.
>
> And as much as I like the idea of supporting Slim, "more slimp3's" is a
> ridiculous solution to this problem. The best way to get an audio stream
> from your PC to your ears is *not* to buy more hardware and send the
> stream to it over the network. You already have the hardware necessary.
>

other than to chastise me, have you offered a solution yourself?

I know full well this didn't do what was asked. Sadly, there is no solution,
unless using Linux. Slimp3slave does not compile for any other platform.
SlimServer is not designed to output to the local soundcard, so winamp is pretty
much it. Even slimp3slave isnt a true monitor. Its a duplicate stream, just
like connecting to winamp. The only difference is a timing routine to keep them
matched at the start of each song. Even more hardware wont really tell you
exactly whats output from the other slimp3. But that is not, I'm guessing, what
is requested as a 'monitor'.

how about I change my answer....no, there is no way to do that. (yet)

-kdf

Neal Tucker
2004-01-19, 00:31
kdf says:
> Quoting Neal Tucker <ntucker-slimdiscuss (AT) area (DOT) com>:
> >
> > As I'm sure you know, this doesn't do what he asked. The PC comes up as
> > a seperate player with an independent playlist, not a "monitor" of what's
> > playing on the slimp3.
>
> other than to chastise me, have you offered a solution yourself?

Well, I didn't mean to chastise you, but your answer needed
correcting. The guy was wasting time trying your suggestion
and wondering why it didn't work.

And I wanted to throw my two cents in about the "right" solution,
which you (jokingly?) suggested was to buy another slimp3. I
disagree, and hope the slim folks do too.

-Neal Tucker

kdf
2004-01-19, 01:07
Quoting Neal Tucker <ntucker-slimdiscuss (AT) area (DOT) com>:

> kdf says:
> > Quoting Neal Tucker <ntucker-slimdiscuss (AT) area (DOT) com>:
> > >
> > > As I'm sure you know, this doesn't do what he asked. The PC comes up as
> > > a seperate player with an independent playlist, not a "monitor" of
> what's
> > > playing on the slimp3.
> >
> > other than to chastise me, have you offered a solution yourself?
>
> Well, I didn't mean to chastise you, but your answer needed
> correcting. The guy was wasting time trying your suggestion
> and wondering why it didn't work.

it does allow you to listen to the same music, in about the closest way possible.

>
> And I wanted to throw my two cents in about the "right" solution,
> which you (jokingly?) suggested was to buy another slimp3.

if you want syncronized play, that IS the solution. The only software option
works in Linux only. As for the 'right' solution, what exactly did you have in
mind? jsut becuase you have a pc and speakers doesn't make the music
automaticly get from slimserver to your speakers.

The ONLY other solution is to run a splitter off the slimp3, one set going to
the amplifier, and another set going to the line in of your soundcard. By
claiming my suggestion (while, admittedly tongue-in-cheek) are bogus, suggests
you are not aware of the capabilities (and limitations) of the SlimServer
software. To use the server to listen to the same music, requires one of the
above solutions. Of course, if anyone wants to write a cross platform client
that can deliver audio to a pc souncard, I'll be plenty willing to suggest it to
anyone who needs it.

-kdf

dean
2004-01-19, 09:49
On Jan 18, 2004, at 11:31 PM, Neal Tucker wrote:

> kdf says:
>> Quoting Neal Tucker <ntucker-slimdiscuss (AT) area (DOT) com>:
>>>
>>> As I'm sure you know, this doesn't do what he asked. The PC comes
>>> up as
>>> a seperate player with an independent playlist, not a "monitor" of
>>> what's
>>> playing on the slimp3.
>>
>> other than to chastise me, have you offered a solution yourself?
>
> Well, I didn't mean to chastise you, but your answer needed
> correcting. The guy was wasting time trying your suggestion
> and wondering why it didn't work.
>
> And I wanted to throw my two cents in about the "right" solution,
> which you (jokingly?) suggested was to buy another slimp3. I
> disagree, and hope the slim folks do too.

As an official representative from Slim Devices, I will ALWAYS suggest
that you buy more players from us.

Did you expect something different? :)

Of course, this isn't always the best solutions for everyone.
Unfortunately, there's no simple software-based solution for syncing to
hardware players yet.

-dean

Steve Baumgarten
2004-01-19, 10:11
> it does allow you to listen to the same music, in about the closest way
> possible.

Actually, don't you get an independent stream this way? That is, when I
set up Winamp as a client I can easily have the SlimServer send a
completely separate "Now Playing" list to my Winamp client than it's
sending to my Squeezebox. But I don't see a way to have it send the same
stream (even if not precisely synched to the millisecond).

This isn't a big deal for me, really, just something that it'd be cool to
be able to do. Mostly if I'm listening to the Squeezebox, that's what I'm
doing; if I'm somewhere else and I want to listen to music (say, on my
laptop in the living room) I'll just point Winamp to a shared folder of
music and listen that way.

So have I missed something obvious here? Some way to have the SlimServer
send the same stream to two different clients (one of which may be Winamp)
even if it isn't precisely synchronized?

SBB

kdf
2004-01-19, 10:42
Quoting Steve Baumgarten <sbb (AT) panix (DOT) com>:

> > it does allow you to listen to the same music, in about the closest way
> > possible.
>
> Actually, don't you get an independent stream this way? That is, when I
> set up Winamp as a client I can easily have the SlimServer send a
> completely separate "Now Playing" list to my Winamp client than it's
> sending to my Squeezebox. But I don't see a way to have it send the same
> stream (even if not precisely synched to the millisecond).

This is absolutely correct. For OSX and Windows, this is as close as it gets
currently. If you want a software solution that is synchronized, you have to
have linux. Then you can use slimp3slave which is synchronized, tho is not
capable to "to-the-millisecond" sync. It also relies on mpg123, which sometimes
refuses to play nicely with others.
>
>
> So have I missed something obvious here? Some way to have the SlimServer
> send the same stream to two different clients (one of which may be Winamp)
> even if it isn't precisely synchronized?

The server is designed to deliver in independant stream to each client
regardless. Sync is accomplished by fine tuning the timing to match. The known
buffer sizes and latency allow for precise contorl over the start time. This
way, each song transition can be set up to be matched. Winamp can be
synchronized too, but only by really good manual timing. The buffers for it are
not predictable. Thus, until someone writes a software player for windows, then
there really isnt' any "squeezebox-like" solution at the moment. However, this
is all open source, so its bound to happen eventually.

-kdf

Neal Tucker
2004-01-19, 14:30
kdf says:
> if you want syncronized play, that IS the solution. The only software option
> works in Linux only. As for the 'right' solution, what exactly did you have in
> mind? jsut becuase you have a pc and speakers doesn't make the music
> automaticly get from slimserver to your speakers.
>
> The ONLY other solution is to run a splitter off the slimp3, one set going to
> the amplifier, and another set going to the line in of your soundcard. By
> claiming my suggestion (while, admittedly tongue-in-cheek) are bogus, suggests
> you are not aware of the capabilities (and limitations) of the SlimServer
> software. To use the server to listen to the same music, requires one of the
> above solutions. Of course, if anyone wants to write a cross platform client
> that can deliver audio to a pc souncard, I'll be plenty willing to suggest it to
> anyone who needs it.

I can think of other solutions, such as having the server write a copy of
the stream to a pipe which can be read by a local client, rather than having
to implement the network protocol.

And Dean, I understand your position, but honestly, I can think of a much
better place for the next player I buy than sitting on the desk next to
the server. ;-)

Obviously, nobody owes us this feature, and it should be a low priority,
if it's implemented at all.. I'm just a little surprised by the absolute
dismissal of the idea, as if spending a few hundred dollars or running
extra speaker wires all over your house are clearly superior solutions
(they're not). It's not a terribly large stretch to wonder why, if the
bits are right there, I can't have them (as evidenced by the handful of
people expressing interest in this feature).

Sometimes the answer to "how do I do X" is not "nobody in their right
mind would want to do X, so just forget about it."

-Neal Tucker

Jack Coates
2004-01-19, 14:41
On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 13:30, Neal Tucker wrote:
....
> Sometimes the answer to "how do I do X" is not "nobody in their right
> mind would want to do X, so just forget about it."
>
> -Neal Tucker

I keep trying to explain to people that the answer to all questions is
"Jack is inherently and continuously right, I should simply agree with
him and do it the way he does." It's not my fault if no one pays
attention.

:-)
--
Jack at Monkeynoodle Dot Org: It's A Scientific Venture...
************************************************** ********************
* "Blue blue, electric blue, that's the color of my room where I *
* will live... I will sit right down waiting for the gift of sound *
* and vision." *
* -- Sound and Vision from Low by David Bowie *
************************************************** ********************

kdf
2004-01-19, 14:46
Quoting Neal Tucker <ntucker-slimdiscuss (AT) area (DOT) com>:


>
> Obviously, nobody owes us this feature, and it should be a low priority,
> if it's implemented at all.. I'm just a little surprised by the absolute
> dismissal of the idea, as if spending a few hundred dollars or running
> extra speaker wires all over your house are clearly superior solutions
> (they're not). It's not a terribly large stretch to wonder why, if the
> bits are right there, I can't have them (as evidenced by the handful of
> people expressing interest in this feature).
>
> Sometimes the answer to "how do I do X" is not "nobody in their right
> mind would want to do X, so just forget about it."
>
please point me to anyone who said that? or even dismissed it absolutely?
Just because one person doesnt have it readily available to hand over on demand,
does not a dismissal make.

it is just not readily available as requested. There are 'near' options, but
not perfect ones. Its open for anyone to take up the task as they see fit. I
for one will be perfectly willing to help with questions by any such person.

I'm offended by this accusation of dismissal.

-kdf

kdf
2004-01-19, 14:48
Quoting Jack Coates <jack (AT) monkeynoodle (DOT) org>:

> [oops...quote deleted]

sorry...can you repeat that? ;)

Neal Tucker
2004-01-19, 15:55
kdf says:
>
> I'm offended by this accusation of dismissal.

I apologize if I've offended you. I'm not trying to start a
flame war (although you seem to be), I'm just trying to voice
my disagreement with these sentiments:

"winamp...openURL... http:\\localhost:9000/stream.mp3"
"Satellite speakers and a multi-channel amp are a wonderful thing."
"ideal solution...more squeezeboxes :)"

They all give the impression that the author thinks the problem
is solved, when in fact it's not. That's what I mean by "dismissal."

-Neal Tucker

kdf
2004-01-19, 16:08
Quoting Neal Tucker <ntucker-slimdiscuss (AT) area (DOT) com>:

> kdf says:
> >
> > I'm offended by this accusation of dismissal.
>
> I apologize if I've offended you. I'm not trying to start a
> flame war (although you seem to be), I'm just trying to voice
> my disagreement with these sentiments:
>
> "winamp...openURL... http:\\localhost:9000/stream.mp3"
> "Satellite speakers and a multi-channel amp are a wonderful thing."
> "ideal solution...more squeezeboxes :)"
>
> They all give the impression that the author thinks the problem
> is solved, when in fact it's not. That's what I mean by "dismissal."

Fair enough. perhaps a better solution will come along someday.

-kdf

Richard Purdie
2004-01-19, 17:04
Neal,

> Obviously, nobody owes us this feature, and it should be a low priority,
> if it's implemented at all.. I'm just a little surprised by the absolute
> dismissal of the idea, as if spending a few hundred dollars or running
> extra speaker wires all over your house are clearly superior solutions
> (they're not). It's not a terribly large stretch to wonder why, if the
> bits are right there, I can't have them (as evidenced by the handful of
> people expressing interest in this feature).

Despite how easy it looks, the bits aren't "right there".

I think what everyone has done it tried to give a solution which you can use
to solve your problem *now*. None of the suggestions are the ideal but they
are workable with what we have. Something to do exactly what you want
doesn't exist at the moment.

I and I'm sure others have looked into what work it required to write a
client like you describe and it is technically possible. It is not an easy
task however and there are several subtle problems. The sound architecture
under windows is completely different to linux and not realistically
accessible from perl (I know about Win32::Sound and it's useless for this).
I'd say it's best done with something like C/C++ (i.e. not perl) and as the
slim products are perl based, the number of C/C++ users here is limited.

I think I could write the client you describe, I just don't have the time at
the moment to do it let alone deal with the feature requests and support it
would then generate. I'd imagine others are in a similar position.

I'm sure it will happen but not overnight.

RP

PS: There are ways to speed up the process ;-).

Jack Coates
2004-01-19, 22:38
On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 16:04, Richard Purdie wrote:
....

> PS: There are ways to speed up the process ;-).


http://www.moviewavs.com/TV_Shows/Ren_And_Stimpy/pectoral.wav

--
Jack at Monkeynoodle Dot Org: It's A Scientific Venture...
************************************************** ********************
* "We'll lead as two kings!" *
* -- City Hall by Tenacious D *
************************************************** ********************

Jack Coates
2004-01-19, 22:50
On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 13:48, kdf wrote:
> Quoting Jack Coates <jack (AT) monkeynoodle (DOT) org>:
>
> > [oops...quote deleted]
>
> sorry...can you repeat that? ;)

Sure, I said something really witty and insightful, steeped in technical
know-how. Everyone who read it just had to step away from the keyboard
and wipe their eyes, as if filthy sweat socks had been removed in the
vicinity. You know, like always :-)

I've been using the nightlies and testing transcoding and internet
radio. Both have been solid (using Mandrake Linux 9.2) since mid-last
week. Great!
--
Jack at Monkeynoodle Dot Org: It's A Scientific Venture...
************************************************** ********************
*"You choose your leaders and place your trust, and their lies won't *
*slow down and their promises rust, you'll see killing machines and *
*more rockets and guns, And the public wants what the public gets *
*but I don't get what this society wants, I'm going underground" *
*-- Going Underground from Sound Affects by The Jam! *
************************************************** ********************

Steve Baumgarten
2004-01-20, 14:50
> I and I'm sure others have looked into what work it required to write a
> client like you describe and it is technically possible. It is not an
> easy task however and there are several subtle problems. The sound
> architecture under windows is completely different to linux [...]

There's a related idea, one that would require work only on the server
side, I think. How much work I don't know. But the idea is to be able to
tell the server to send the same stream to player X as it's sending to
player Y. Don't worry about synch -- this is just a way to crudely sort
of eavesdrop on an existing playlist already in progress. (This is in
fact what I thought I was originally going to get when I first connected
Winamp to my SlimServer -- then I realized my Winamp was going to be
treated as a full-fledged client and have it's own playlist, etc.)

This would allow me to IM a friend and suggest he connect to my SlimServer
and listen to my excellent playlist along with me. Geeky stuff like that.

Again, this is hardly a dire need or something anyone should drop real
work for and think about -- there are many more pressing issues. Just
something maybe to think about, and perhaps doable because it's a
server-side thing, leaving the client side to handle things via Winamp or
whatever player would normally be used to hook up to the SlimServer.

SBB