PDA

View Full Version : Announcing the Squeezebox Duet



Pages : [1] 2 3

mvalera
2008-01-05, 17:11
I'm happy to announce that we have launched the all new Squeezebox™ Duet!

Squeezebox™ Duet lets you listen to the music you love in any room in your home. Access millions of songs — even when your computer is off. The multi-room controller with 2.4-inch color display makes it easy to browse, select, and play songs from your personal collection, Internet radio — even online music services.

A convenient scroll wheel, simple menus and intuitive buttons make navigation a breeze. Advanced 802.11g technology eliminates the need to string wires. Enjoy crystal clear, CD-quality audio on your home theater system, your bedroom stereo, your kitchen mini-system — anywhere you have audio gear.

Check out the details:
http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_duet.html

Press Release (once they get it up):
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/172/4180

Some really really big pics for those who want them (The LCD is simulated):
http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_beauty_large.jpg
http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_top_large.jpg
http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_ray_large.jpg
http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_ray_shuck_large.jpg


Mike

upstatemike
2008-01-05, 18:11
This looks great but I am not clear about the controller... do you need a wireless network to use it? I have 14 Squeezebox players but they are all wired. Would I have to put up a wireless network to use this remote?

mrfantasy
2008-01-05, 18:27
This looks great but I am not clear about the controller... do you need a wireless network to use it? I have 14 Squeezebox players but they are all wired. Would I have to put up a wireless network to use this remote?


You'd need wireless to run the remote. Your Squeezeboxes can stay wired though.

14? Is that some sort of record?

pichonCalavera
2008-01-05, 18:56
Wow!, congratulations on another product release!

I bought a Squeezebox 3 like 2 months ago (The one with the VFD display :) ), so here are my first main observations:

Differences of Squeezebox 3 (SB3) vs. Squeezebox Receiver (SBR)

The SBR doesn't have a headphone jack.
The DAC from SB3 is a Burr-Brown™ 24-bit DAC, and the one on the SBR is a Wolfson® 24-bit DAC.
The Total harmonic distortion on the SB3 is less than -93.5dB (0.002%) and on the SBR is less than -88dB (0.002%) (no idea what this means :P ).
The SBR doesn't have a VFD.
The SB3 costs $299 and the SBR costs $149.

So I see that both are not very diferent in terms of arquitecture / functions, so I guess a SBR can be synchronized with a SB3 or maybe even a SB2 for music playback from Squeezecenter?

As for the Squeezebox Controller (SBC), it seems there is a headphone jack on the SBC pics, what purpose does it have?

Also I'm not very clear with this: Bridging capability allows Ethernet devices to connect to the network through Squeezebox Receiver's wireless connection. Does it mean the SBC can connect to the network through the SBR instead of connecting directly to the wireless router for example?

I wish you great success with your new products!

mvalera
2008-01-05, 19:04
All Squeezboxes can be synchronized by the Controller, or SlimServer /SqueezeCenter for that matter, to play the same song. Or they can all play different songs at the same time.

Bridging works the same as on the SqueezeBox. You connect your SqueezeBox wirelessly to your network, and then you can connect wired devices, like a PS2 to your network through your SqueezeBox's Ethernet port. Or you can connect a switch to it, and hve a whole load of devices connected.

It works great if you don't have a wired connection for your home theater setup. Everything AV related seems to come with a Ethernet port these days.


Mike

EnochLight
2008-01-05, 19:35
I'm happy to announce that we have launched the all new Squeezebox™ Duet!
Mike

Congrats on the formal announcement! Hopefully beta testing for the remote/Jive will end soon.

That said, although the new Squeezebox Receiver is a good price point at $149, I can't say I'm impressed with the price being asked for the new remote. $299??? Are you serious?

I would say $199 at most would be a fair price but... *sigh*

pichonCalavera
2008-01-05, 20:03
That said, although the new Squeezebox Receiver is a good price point at $149, I can't say I'm impressed with the price being asked for the new remote. $299???


Exactly my toughts, since I already own a Squeezebox, $299 is very expensive for me right now for the Controller, altough on the flip side, is $100 cheaper than the Sonos Controller, so while I think the Sonos controller is "very-expensive", I think the Squeezebox Controller is just "expensive" :P

But I think the main purpose of this is the Duet and first timers to the Squeezebox, since you'll get the Duet for $400, that in comparision with the Sonos for example, I think you'll need at least $750 for a similar setup (Sonos Controller + Sonos® ZonePlayer 80). Also I don't think a Squeezebox Receiver is very helpful without a Squeezebox Controller as mvalera says on this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41805&page=3



One note about the SB Receiver, is that it requires the Controller for network setup. You can't just buy one on it's own. It's for adding extra rooms.

The Receiver and Controller will be available as an accessory from us online, and a few select online partners. They will not be a retail boxed product.

Bradley
2008-01-05, 21:28
Bridging works the same as on the SqueezeBox. You connect your SqueezeBox wirelessly to your network, and then you can connect wired devices, like a PS2 to your network through your SqueezeBox's Ethernet port. Or you can connect a switch to it, and hve a whole load of devices connected.
Mike

What if everything you have is hardwired Ethernet (including 6 SB3's), not wireless. Can the Controller then be the sole wireless device that talks to the Squeezebox or Squeezebox Receiver, and onto the hardwired network through this bridging capability?

Hint: I live in a city and don't use wireless because of security concerns.

Not clear whether this would work.

*Bradley

andyg
2008-01-05, 21:42
Yes, if you have a wired Duet receiver and no other wireless network, you can bridge the controller through the receiver's wireless connection.

Bradley
2008-01-05, 21:57
Yes, if you have a wired Duet receiver and no other wireless network, you can bridge the controller through the receiver's wireless connection.

What about if you just bought the controller and not the receiver? Would the SB3's provide the same functionality?

mvalera
2008-01-05, 21:57
Yes, if you have a wired Duet receiver and no other wireless network, you can bridge the controller through the receiver's wireless connection.

That's actually an ad-hoc wireless connection, not bridging. But yes, it will work that way with a Squeezebox Receiver.

Mike

mvalera
2008-01-05, 21:58
What about if you just bought the controller and not the receiver? Would the SB3's provide the same functionality?

The controller controls all our hw products.

Mike

andyg
2008-01-05, 22:01
I think he meant would an SB3 provide the ad-hoc connection. Currently the answer is no but it would technically be possible in future firmware.

Bradley
2008-01-05, 22:13
I think he meant would an SB3 provide the ad-hoc connection. Currently the answer is no but it would technically be possible in future firmware.

Exactly. I'm looking for an ad-hoc connection (or as I understand, a "private wireless network for only the Controller" and no Other wireless computing device.

Is this doable with 1) the Receiver and/or 2) the SB3?

Thanks in advance.

*Bradley

mvalera
2008-01-05, 22:19
What about if you just bought the controller and not the receiver? Would the SB3's provide the same functionality?

As we said receiver, yes. SB3 I will have to get back to you on.

Mike

twylie
2008-01-05, 23:08
Will I be able to pick one up at your booth next week? :-)

SuperQ
2008-01-05, 23:12
Congrats! How about some nice hot internal photos of the SBR?

I've always thought it would be really cool if the SqueezeBox could act as an AP.

SuperQ
2008-01-05, 23:23
Oh, poo, I just noticed that it's missing the headphone port.. of course the headphone port was never useful for headphones, but was great for IR Blaster.

mvalera
2008-01-06, 00:03
Will I be able to pick one up at your booth next week? :-)

You can play with one, but we won't have any for sale.

Mike

dean
2008-01-06, 00:38
On Jan 5, 2008, at 5:11 PM, upstatemike wrote:
> This looks great but I am not clear about the controller... do you
> need
> a wireless network to use it? I have 14 Squeezebox players but they
> are
> all wired. Would I have to put up a wireless network to use this
> remote?

If you buy the Duet bundle, you can connect the Receiver to your
ethernet network and bridge to the Controller without any other
wireless networking equipment.

dean
2008-01-06, 00:41
On Jan 5, 2008, at 5:56 PM, pichonCalavera wrote:
> Wow!, congratulations on another product release!
Thanks!

> So I see that both are not very diferent in terms of arquitecture /
> functions, so I guess a SBR can be synchronized with a SB3 or maybe
> even a SB2 for music playback from Squeezecenter?
That's right.

> Also I'm not very clear with this: -Bridging capability allows
> Ethernet
> devices to connect to the network through Squeezebox Receiver's
> wireless
> connection-. Does it mean the SBC can connect to the network
> through the
> SBR instead of connecting directly to the wireless router for example?
That's right too!

-dean

peter
2008-01-06, 00:53
dean blackketter wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2008, at 5:11 PM, upstatemike wrote:
>
>> This looks great but I am not clear about the controller... do you
>> need
>> a wireless network to use it? I have 14 Squeezebox players but they
>> are
>> all wired. Would I have to put up a wireless network to use this
>> remote?
>>
>
> If you buy the Duet bundle, you can connect the Receiver to your
> ethernet network and bridge to the Controller without any other
> wireless networking equipment.
>

I can imagine that's a nice feature. Although most people (unlike
upstatemike) who run wired ethernet these days are probably also running
wireless. In my experience the less technically inclined people just use
wireless for everything.

Regards,
Peter

GCFL
2008-01-06, 01:06
Please forgive me if this is posted in the incorrect location. I am currently running four zones via a Zon audio system in my home. I am seriously considering purchasing the Duet and plugging it in as one of the music sources so I can access streaming Internet radio, networked music files etc. The new controller that comes in the duet package looks to be ideal for remote access for at least the SB when it is the music source being played. Has anyone here used the SB, SB2, etc with a Zon system and can anyone tell me if the controller will be able to be used (or possibly modified) as a universal remote (to access the CD player, etc.)?

Thanks for any info.

macintoys.nl
2008-01-06, 01:49
Great, now I can sell my Sonos system! (I use both Squeezebox and Sonos; the Sonos is nice because I have the Remote always with me...)
My problem with the Sonos is that I cannot see more than 50,000 songs and I do have more!
So the question is: has the Duet enough memory to access my whole collection?

Thanks, Wim

bits
2008-01-06, 02:43
Make the controller 100% compatible with SB3's and I'll buy the controller.
I want to remain with my SB3's as the display on it can be read by all when they walk past which is handy, the remote that is less likely as I'll have it hidden somewhere so it doesn't get stolen by friend, foe or family. Also I use a SB3 as an alarm clock, the remote screen just cant double as a room clock. Plus the SB3 has a better spec'ed dac(disappointing to see Logitech cut that huge selling point).

Logitech should consider bundling the new remote with SB3's. The SB3's screen, DAC, IR blaster and headphone jack are key selling points the SBR lacks. Some will appreciate the cost saving of a SBR + SBC, some will appreciate the benefits of a SB3 + SBC. Give users the choice :)

Seineseeker
2008-01-06, 02:55
It's a shame there is no display on the receiver, everyone who passes this house is impressed with seeing what is being played scrolling by.

Philip Meyer
2008-01-06, 03:36
What's the main benefits of the SqueezeBox Controller over a PDA?

The Controller looks like any other handheld PC, similar to a PDA, but only has one specific function? If the Controller is easier to use than eg the Handheld skin on a PDA, then the price is justified, and I may consider buying one.

However, my PDA has a larger screen and already multi-functional.

How long will the Controller's full battery charge last? I assume the thing it's sitting in is a charging cradle, which means it needs to be plugged in, so it would not sit well on a coffee table in the center of a room.

Does the device remain on all the time; if not, how long would it take to be functional from power-off?

Phil

mherger
2008-01-06, 03:53
> So the question is: has the Duet enough memory to access my whole
> collection?

Duet is the bundled Receiver and Controller. I assume you're interested in the Controller? It doesn't manage the collection locally, but communicates with SqueezeCenter. It will only keep those items in memory which are to be displayed. Thus there shouldn't be a memory limitation for larg collections.

Michael

mherger
2008-01-06, 03:53
> It's a shame there is no display on the receiver, everyone who passes
> this house is impressed with seeing what is being played scrolling by.

Then buy a SB3 instead. It's not discontinued.

Michael

ModelCitizen
2008-01-06, 03:53
What's the main benefits of the SqueezeBox Controller over a PDA?The interface is much slicker and much, much more responsive than the web gui. The web gui is very clunky and slow in comparison (or it is on whatever device/platform I've tried it on). The difference is chalk and cheese.

MC

mherger
2008-01-06, 03:54
> Make the controller 100% compatible with SB3's and I'll buy the
> controller.

It is. Get one ;-).

Michael

bits
2008-01-06, 04:25
I thought they said it doesnt support ad-hoc yet. I would need to be running my own AP currently.

macintoys.nl
2008-01-06, 04:29
> So the question is: has the Duet enough memory to access my whole collection?[/color]

Duet is the bundled Receiver and Controller. I assume you're interested in the Controller? It doesn't manage the collection locally, but communicates with SqueezeCenter. It will only keep those items in memory which are to be displayed. Thus there shouldn't be a memory limitation for larg collections.

Michael

Are you sure? I hope so! But the controller and the receiver both have 64MB Ram. Isn't that used for indexing or so?

peter
2008-01-06, 04:34
ModelCitizen wrote:
> Phil Meyer;254852 Wrote:
>
>> What's the main benefits of the SqueezeBox Controller over a PDA?The interface is much slicker and much, much more responsive than the
>>
> web gui. The web gui is very clunky and slow in comparison (or it is on
> whatever device/platform I've tried it on).
>

The controller does not have/use a web GUI. It's a newly developed
client/server menu system. The menus are downloaded from Squeezecenter
and run locally. At least that's how I understand it. I have one of the
beta units and it works a lot better than a PDA with a web browser.

Regards,
Peter

peter
2008-01-06, 04:35
macintoys.nl wrote:
> Michael Herger;254857 Wrote:
>
>>> So the question is: has the Duet enough memory to access my whole
>>>
>> collection?
>>
>> Duet is the bundled Receiver and Controller. I assume you're interested
>> in the Controller? It doesn't manage the collection locally, but
>> communicates with SqueezeCenter. It will only keep those items in
>> memory which are to be displayed. Thus there shouldn't be a memory
>> limitation for larg collections.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>
> Are you sure? I hope so! But the controller and the receiver both have
> 64MB Ram. Isn't that used for indexing or so?
> [/color]

Perhaps it's meant as a buffer for when the headphone option is added.

Regards,
Peter

Mnyb
2008-01-06, 04:35
There are stupendeus price hikes if one sees the European prices :-(
at http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/speakers_audio/wireless_music_systems/

Qucik calc for the swedish prices including 25% VAT:

399$*6.2031*1.25=3094 SEK
The suggested logitech price 3999 SEK (I hope this includes VAT)

I'm stunned, wtf correct it now

mherger
2008-01-06, 04:43
> Are you sure? I hope so! But the controller and the receiver both have
> 64MB Ram. Isn't that used for indexing or so?

Receiver has 64M_b_ (8MB) which is used to buffer data and run decoders.

Controller has 64M_B_ of RAM. Indexing is done on SqueezeCenter. Thus library size isn't limited by Controller's memory. AFAIK it has been tesed with libraries of more than 100'000 songs.

Michael

funkstar
2008-01-06, 04:43
Are you sure? I hope so! But the controller and the receiver both have 64MB Ram. Isn't that used for indexing or so?
The RAM is for adio buffers and in the case of the remote, a cache for graphics sent from SqueezeCenter.

The Duet, SqueezeBox and Taransporter all rely on SqueezeCenter or SqueezeNetowk to deliver information to them. The Duet has a bit more autonomy than the other two (the others don't render the screen displays, they are sent bitmats from the server to display, the Duet renders the interface from information provided by the server) but none of them deal with your music library directly.

mherger
2008-01-06, 04:44
> The controller does not have/use a web GUI.

That said we would be very happy if somebody was able to implement a web browser for it :-).

Michael

signor_rossi
2008-01-06, 04:49
The interface is much slicker and much, much more responsive than the web gui. The web gui is very clunky and slow in comparison (or it is on whatever device/platform I've tried it on). The difference is chalk and cheese.

MC

Can second that. When I looked at the SB3 I thought: my, it has a nice big screen but only such a small remote, but hey, I can control it via my Nokia770 with its 800x480 screen and bought it. Soon did I realize that the web interface wasn't really to my taste because of its' clunkyness and slowness (on the N770, on the PC it is o.k.), but fortunately the small remote proved to be usable very well. So what is my point? The new remote in combination with the SBR is really an interesting kit, where the SBR is responsible for the increased user experience and the SBR takes care of keeping the price relatively low. EDIT: 399€ for the duet in Europe is disappointing. :((
I only hope that Logitech makes it possible to set up the SBR in the network without a SBR.


Bye, signor_rossi.

Tele
2008-01-06, 04:50
There are stupendeus price hikes if one sees the European prices :-(
at http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/speakers_audio/wireless_music_systems/

Qucik calc for the swedish prices including 25% VAT:

399$*6.2031*1.25=3094 SEK
The suggested logitech price 3999 SEK (I hope this includes VAT)

I'm stunned, wtf correct it now

Well, 399 euros is about 590 dollars, quite a price difference indeed. :( The dollar=euro time is way behind us Logitech :P Even with taxes, shipping, etc. added to 399 dollars it comes nowhere near $590,-

Mnyb
2008-01-06, 04:58
The swedish price is actually 3999 SEK which is 644$
but never theless bs

Paul Webster
2008-01-06, 04:58
No infrared receiver listed for the new Receiver?

I suppose it does make sense since you would not be able to see the menus - but it would have worked with Favourites on presets, volume, mute, power.

ModelCitizen
2008-01-06, 05:20
In the US the Duo costs 399.99 US Dollars (equiv. to 172.103 UK Pounds) but in the UK it costs 551.17 US Dollars (279 UK Pounds)

What possible justification can there be for this almost 40% price hike for UK buyers?

MC

Mnyb
2008-01-06, 05:41
In the US the Duo costs 399.99 US Dollars (equiv. to 172.103 UK Pounds) but in the UK it costs 551.17 US Dollars (279 UK Pounds)

What possible justification can there be for this almost 40% price hike for UK buyers?

MC

None IMHO, but does the US price include sales tax, it's common EU practice to anounce comsumer prices inluding taxes. US have diffent
sales tax in different states.
So it's maybe not 40% but anyway i think like you and I don't like it.

It's not the money i can afford one now no problemo. It's the principle why ****** european buyers.

Robin Bowes
2008-01-06, 05:45
ModelCitizen wrote:
> In the US the Duo costs 399.99 US Dollars (equiv. to 172.103 UK Pounds)
> but in the UK it costs 551.17 US Dollars (279 UK Pounds)
>
> What possible justification can there be for this almost 40% price hike
> for UK buyers?

Er, I think your sums may have gone a little awry.

$399.99 converted directly to UKP is £202.63

There will also be import duty - not sure exactly how much, but let's
say 10%. That brings us to £222.89.

Add VAT @ 17.5% onto that and you get £261.90

That's not all that much different to £279.99 is it.

R.

Mnyb
2008-01-06, 05:55
I don't think the import part count's, sure it will if you import one yourself.
But what duties are logitech paying ? and where are the product manufactured, and what does it cost before markup when logitech imports them into EU ? There migth be import cost's in the US price to.

Parrellell importing one unit as always expensive, the european price migth be (cynically)calculated with that in mind.
I'm convinced that logitech makes more $ per unit in UK or Sweden.

This is somekind off "strategy" or missfireid neorons if you ask me.

Why does logitech think that they must make mor $ per sale here ?

Fifer
2008-01-06, 06:36
Am I alone in being slightly more excited about the SBR than the Controller (which is lovely and I'm not putting it down). If the US price of $149 converts (with VAT and duty) to around (preferably under) £100, it starts to look like a reasonably affordable module with which to build a rather nice multi-room system (along with one controller). Any word of UK pricing for the SBR?

marlowe
2008-01-06, 06:52
ModelCitizen wrote:
> In the US the Duo costs 399.99 US Dollars (equiv. to 172.103 UK Pounds)
> but in the UK it costs 551.17 US Dollars (279 UK Pounds)
>
> What possible justification can there be for this almost 40% price hike
> for UK buyers?

Er, I think your sums may have gone a little awry.

$399.99 converted directly to UKP is £202.63

There will also be import duty - not sure exactly how much, but let's
say 10%. That brings us to £222.89.

Add VAT @ 17.5% onto that and you get £261.90

That's not all that much different to £279.99 is it.

R.

The import duty applies to the price, that the company importing the SB to the EU pays. That, I am sure, is not the US retail price. Probably not even half that price. I think the duty is 3,5%, though not sure. So duty isn't going to amount to much.

Mnyb
2008-01-06, 07:04
I'm most interested in the controller, but the combo deal makes an aditional reciver a consideration.
Id like to se the covers for my CD's and as it is backlit i can se it in the dark.
If someone makes the headphone soccet in the controller work i'm happy then I have a kitchen radio.I will hook it upp to my PAL.

Now i have to justify "multi room " functions in my 69square meter flat :-) he he

toby10
2008-01-06, 07:48
None IMHO, but does the US price include sales tax, it's common EU practice to anounce comsumer prices inluding taxes. US have diffent
sales tax in different states.
So it's maybe not 40% but anyway i think like you and I don't like it.

It's not the money i can afford one now no problemo. It's the principle why ****** european buyers.

The price is higher in Great Britain cuz us Colonists are still pissed at the Brits for the Stamp Act. (just kidding) *wink*

Just to clarify, prices in the US almost never include Sales Tax as each State, County and (sometimes) Cities impose different rates of Point of Purchase Sales Tax rates. It usually is around 5% to 8% total Sales Tax.

The one advantage to our overly bloated and outrageously disorganized form of government here in the good old USA is that we consumers can quite often get around these sales taxes. If I order a SB sold from California and mailed to me in Ohio there is no sales tax charged by the seller. There are rules that sometimes force the seller to charge this sales tax, mail order or not, but I won't go into that here.

Sadly, our over spending and wasteful State governments are catching on to this 50 year old "loop hole" and are closing in on such tax avoidance schemes. :(

ModelCitizen
2008-01-06, 07:53
The one advantage to our overly bloated and outrageously disorganized form of government here
You've obviously no experience of uk government bureaucracy then..... :-)

MC

toby10
2008-01-06, 07:54
Mike

I WANT ONE! Just bill it to Sean Adams account. :)

The posted screen shots are nice. Are there plans to eventually post some screen shots of what the screen will *actually* be displaying in regards to Internet Radio feeds?

Thanks. :)

ModelCitizen
2008-01-06, 07:55
Er, I think your sums may have gone a little awry.
$399.99 converted directly to UKP is £202.63
You must get a better rate than me then.....

:-)

Yup, looks like I screwed the conversion up.

MC

ezkcdude
2008-01-06, 08:24
Am I alone in being slightly more excited about the SBR than the Controller (which is lovely and I'm not putting it down). If the US price of $149 converts (with VAT and duty) to around (preferably under) £100, it starts to look like a reasonably affordable module with which to build a rather nice multi-room system (along with one controller). Any word of UK pricing for the SBR?

No, I want the headless receiver. I already have a beta version of the jive remote. I've been wanting to stick another SB3 in my home theater system, but the receiver will look much more low profile.

mortslim
2008-01-06, 08:31
"the Controller? It doesn't manage the collection locally, but communicates with SqueezeCenter. It will only keep those items in memory which are to be displayed."

Thus from what the above quote implies and what can be gleaned from other posts, it seems that the controller communicates either with the squeezenetwork or with slimserver (which will become squeezecenter soon as I understand it is the new name for the merger of the squeezenetwork and the slimserver into one common interface, to be run either by your own computer or by the servers at logitech's slim devices division).

mortslim
2008-01-06, 08:33
I also assume that your own computer can control the new receiver so you really don't need any remote (neither the new one nor the old one).

bigfool1956
2008-01-06, 08:34
Well, Logitech.com is only showing the duet on the UK site. One of the Slim guys (forgot which one) has already said the items will not be generally available separately, but will be direct from them and certain internet partners....

BUT, Slim Devices only ship to the Americas - which means the rest of us in Europe might be out in the cold!

mortslim
2008-01-06, 08:39
I also want to follow up on the comments that the new controller is better than a pda (e.g. the nokia web tablets - 770, 800, 810)

If the idea is to have something handheld rather than a desktop or laptop computer to control the receiver, then looking at form factor, the nokia line seem to beat the new logitech controller because the nokia has a bigger screen and is multifunctional - it can do more than just control the receiver.

However a comment was made above that the new controller is better than a pda because the interface is what? something about chalk and cheese. Can those comments please be amplified or elaborated upon. It seems to be that, as a non-programmer myself, that a plug in for the nokia can be upgraded to make it more like cheese than chalk, right? By the way, what is better, chalk or cheese? I have never heard of that metaphor before.

mkozlows
2008-01-06, 08:40
I also assume that your own computer can control the new receiver so you really don't need any remote (neither the new one nor the old one).

Logitech people have said that you need the Controller for setup, and a Receiver by itself is not a functioning configuration. (I think; correct me if I'm wrong.)

Mnyb
2008-01-06, 08:41
"the Controller? It doesn't manage the collection locally, but communicates with SqueezeCenter. It will only keep those items in memory which are to be displayed."

Anyone knows if it remember this when you powered off the server ? or does it have to cache these thing's every time the server starts ? and does only remember the current item ? some kind off cache seems a resonable idea ? the ideal would if it could cache a large part of the library and the cover art.

Mortslim wrote.
"I also assume that your own computer can control the new receiver so you really don't need any remote (neither the new one nor the old one)."

You need one to do the initail setup ip config etc.

mecouc
2008-01-06, 08:43
The new controller doesn't seem to have enough buttons.

How would I use it to type a search when there are no alphanumeric buttons? It doesn't have a touch screen for that does it? No.. can't do... else there'd be no buttons at all.

mrfantasy
2008-01-06, 08:47
Logitech people have said that you need the Controller for setup, and a Receiver by itself is not a functioning configuration. (I think; correct me if I'm wrong.)

They have said that, and I can see why it has to be true for a wireless connection (you need to identify a network) but if you connect it to your wired network, there'd be no technical reason why it couldn't DHCP an address and then identify a SqueezeCenter, and let you run it from a web interface.

Was there a conscious decision to not allow that configuration?

mortslim
2008-01-06, 08:57
They have said that, and I can see why it has to be true for a wireless connection (you need to identify a network) but if you connect it to your wired network, there'd be no technical reason why it couldn't DHCP an address and then identify a SqueezeCenter, and let you run it from a web interface.

Was there a conscious decision to not allow that configuration?

I agree with the above quote. It is hard to believe that logitech forces you to buy the controller.

mortslim
2008-01-06, 09:00
It seems that logitech passed out some of these new units to some existing customers as beta testers who apparently kept the secret till the official announcement.

I would like to be on the beta tester list when the next iteration appears three years hence :)

aubuti
2008-01-06, 09:29
It seems that logitech passed out some of these new units to some existing customers as beta testers who apparently kept the secret till the official announcement.

I would like to be on the beta tester list when the next iteration appears three years hence :)
Fyi, the "secret" has had an active and public forum on these pages for several months: http://forums.slimdevices.com/forumdisplay.php?f=19 . But don't tell anyone about it, okay? ;o)

bretonfou
2008-01-06, 09:43
I loved the initial product since it was focussed on high sound quality with interesting features like an open source client/server.

The new commander look to me as a mere wifi micro PDA, ideally
one could control any streaming media server with
any form of computing device with communication facility
(it could be my macbook, a bluetooth phone, a wifi phone, a pda or what people calle a smart phone).

Well is that really usefull ?

I have an Ati HF (15 euros) remote command and a high quality
DAC (second hand for 500 euros) it's much better.


Before i had a squeezebox, i enjoyed it but i broke down after 18 monthes and there is no way to fix it and the warranty is over.


The advantage of using something else than what logitec sell is that it can be repaired.

I will never pay 500 $ for a portable micro PC
with wifi that would probable break down after 13 monthes just when the legal warrant is over. A standard PDA, and wireless remote command (bluetooth, infrared or HF) are a much safer solution.


I had a squeezebox, i liked it but paying 299 euros each 13 monthes is quite a lot.

I will miss the clear display of the squeezebox, there is still nothing has good but i m sure that soon add ons for amarok
xmms or any other player will offer a very clear display on any PC screen.


Soon too clients runnning on any PDA or smartphone will be available.


The slimbox was there 2-3 years ago at that time it was unexpensive and new. Today the product are overpriced
and not even at the edge of the possibilities.

dean
2008-01-06, 10:05
On Jan 6, 2008, at 2:36 AM, Phil Meyer wrote:
> How long will the Controller's full battery charge last?
That depends on the usage. Constant usage is around 3 hours now, but
that's without any power management at all. When the screen dims
and the wireless goes in to power-saving mode, the life goes way up.

> I assume the thing it's sitting in is a charging cradle, which
> means it needs to be plugged in, so it would not sit well on a
> coffee table in the center of a room.
Probably not. Better a side table where you can have a wire to keep
it charged. When it's in the charging stand it acts as a Now Playing
screensaver while playing, or defaults to a clock screensaver when not.

> Does the device remain on all the time;
Yes.

> if not, how long would it take to be functional from power-off?
From inserting the battery, through cold-boot, wireless association
and connection to the server is about 40 seconds at this point, or
half what my cell phone takes. :)

radish
2008-01-06, 10:18
The new controller doesn't seem to have enough buttons.

How would I use it to type a search when there are no alphanumeric buttons? It doesn't have a touch screen for that does it? No.. can't do... else there'd be no buttons at all.

Text entry is via the scroll wheel. It actually works quite well assuming you're not trying to type essays :)

radish
2008-01-06, 10:20
I also assume that your own computer can control the new receiver so you really don't need any remote (neither the new one nor the old one).

Once it's setup on the network, yes. It will basically look like any other player to either the new controller or the SqueezeCenter web interface.

danco
2008-01-06, 11:10
Before i had a squeezebox, i enjoyed it but i broke down after 18 monthes and there is no way to fix it and the warranty is over.


The advantage of using something else than what logitec sell is that it can be repaired.



How long ago did it break down?

the warranty has been *two* years, not one, for some time, I think.

And, of course, there is great variability as to what devices can be repaired at a reasonable price.

Mnyb
2008-01-06, 11:13
A possibillity, would be if logitech could offer some kind off "preconfig" service untill SC gets the abillity to set IP in SBR

danco
2008-01-06, 11:13
I also assume that your own computer can control the new receiver so you really don't need any remote (neither the new one nor the old one).

Updating firmware currently requires "Press and hold brightness". I don't think it can be done from the computer.

A similar comment applies to factory reset and resetting the chip.

So keep the remote where you can find it, even if it is not used every day.

IRJ
2008-01-06, 11:14
I need some clarification.

If I have say an existing SB1 or 2 or 3, can I add a new SBR and control both from my existing WiFi PDA?

seanadams
2008-01-06, 11:21
Are you sure? I hope so! But the controller and the receiver both have 64MB Ram. Isn't that used for indexing or so?

That is inadvertently very misleading and will be rephrased. The controller has 64 mega_bytes_, but the Receiver, Squeezebox and Transporter are all in mega_bits_. Yes that makes it seem like more but really it is a reasonable metric being as it refers to the streaming audio buffer, and one almost always talks about streaming and/or compression in terms of mega/kilo-bits per second. Mixing units is obviously bad form though...

Mnyb
2008-01-06, 11:27
How much bandwitdh will the controller use over the wifi ?
Is there any risc off audiable droopouts when scrolling with the controller ? just a thougth

seanadams
2008-01-06, 11:31
How much bandwitdh will the controller use over the wifi ?

Not much. It is only downloading lists in text form, plus small graphics for the covert art. It would be roughly equivalent to browsing simple web pages from a wireless laptop.


Is there any risc off audiable droopouts when scrolling with the controller ? just a thougth

No. Scrolling and screen-drawing are done in the Controller's software so this does not load the network. Anyway, it is a negligible amount of data compared to streaming audio.

scrosland
2008-01-06, 11:35
I also want to follow up on the comments that the new controller is better than a pda (e.g. the nokia web tablets - 770, 800, 810)

If the idea is to have something handheld rather than a desktop or laptop computer to control the receiver, then looking at form factor, the nokia line seem to beat the new logitech controller because the nokia has a bigger screen and is multifunctional - it can do more than just control the receiver.
Surely the new Jive software stack could be made to run on the Nokia tablets? Then we'd have the benefit of a decent tablet with browser and so on, and a decent Squeezebox controller all in one.

Simon

Mnyb
2008-01-06, 11:36
When will the controller be aviable as a separate item then ? is there a release date decided

dean
2008-01-06, 12:07
On Jan 6, 2008, at 10:14 AM, IRJ wrote:
> I need some clarification.
>
> If I have say an existing SB1 or 2 or 3, can I add a new SBR and
> control both from my existing WiFi PDA?
At this time you need a Squeezebox Controller to set up a Squeezebox
Receiver.

Fifer
2008-01-06, 12:15
But not one per SBR? (Can you have a setup with one controller and multiple receivers?)

IRJ
2008-01-06, 12:42
On Jan 6, 2008, at 10:14 AM, IRJ wrote:
> I need some clarification.
>
> If I have say an existing SB1 or 2 or 3, can I add a new SBR and
> control both from my existing WiFi PDA?
At this time you need a Squeezebox Controller to set up a Squeezebox
Receiver.

Err.
Begs the question... Why?

Philip Meyer
2008-01-06, 12:53
>That depends on the usage. Constant usage is around 3 hours now, but
>that's without any power management at all. When the screen dims
>and the wireless goes in to power-saving mode, the life goes way up.
>
About the same as a PDA then, but I understand that the UI feels more responsive than using the WebUI through a PDA.

Phil

dean
2008-01-06, 13:05
On Jan 6, 2008, at 11:15 AM, Fifer wrote:
> But not one -per- SBR? (Can you have a setup with one controller and
> multiple receivers?)
Right. One Controller can set up and control any number of Receivers.

-dena

Greg Friedman
2008-01-06, 13:28
Surely the new Jive software stack could be made to run on the Nokia tablets? Then we'd have the benefit of a decent tablet with browser and so on, and a decent Squeezebox controller all in one.

Simon

This is exactly what I wish they'd done.

Had the controller debuted with a $150 price tag, I would have easily justified the purchase. At $299 it doesn't make sense to me. It's currently a single-purpose remote whose value is being justified based on its potential for third parties to exploit its DAC, expansion slot, headphone jack, and platform potential. Personally, I'm only marginally interested in seeing what the community does with the controller's platform potential because I think the form factor is too limiting for it to ever become a compelling multi-purpose device in my home.

On the other hand, the Nokia N800 has all of these capabilities of the controller and much more (touch screen, built-in camera for video conferencing, FM radio, Opera, multiple expansion slots, ...). The N800 currently retails for as low as $239. With its touch screen and on-screen keyboard, it has the potential to smoke the competitive offerings (namely Sonos), but it isn't achieving this with the SlimServer web-browser based experience. I would love to see a native $29.99 app from Slim which brings the features and performance of the new controller to the N800/N810. Sling Media (SlingBox) has gone this direction with custom apps for a variety of platforms, and I think it's a great model.

On an different note: I miss the era of the $200 wired SqueezeBox. We're a multiple SqueezeBox household. My six-year-old daughter has her own SqueezeBox in her room. My three-year-old son is about due for his own. Today's SqueezeBox costs 33% more than the last one I bought in Summer 2004.

Overall, I feel a bit left at the side of the road by the current product line and prices. I suppose the new line works great for new adopters who are willing to buy receivers and controllers such that the receivers outnumber the controllers. Deployed like this, Slim is definitely less pricey than Sonos. With my existing setup, though, I'm suffering from sticker shock and can't figure out how to evolve it short of the used market on eBay.

I do hope you guys have great success with the new products, and I hope you'll consider pursuing native apps on the N800/N810 platform.

Paul Webster
2008-01-06, 13:33
Video from CES by Engadget
http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/06/video-logitech-squeezebox-duet/
However, it doesn't really do it justice.

)p(
2008-01-06, 15:06
On the other hand, the Nokia N800 has all of these capabilities of the controller and much more (touch screen, built-in camera for video conferencing, FM radio, Opera, multiple expansion slots, ...). The N800 currently retails for as low as $239. With its touch screen and on-screen keyboard, it has the potential to smoke the competitive offerings (namely Sonos), but it isn't achieving this with the SlimServer web-browser based experience. I would love to see a native $29.99 app from Slim which brings the features and performance of the new controller to the N800/N810.

If you use a windows pc as your server you can achieve this with remote desktop and Moose. I have my Nokia n800 connected 24h and it's always ready to use which is needed for it to work as a remote. The library navigation is as fast as on the pc. And as an added bonus I can browse the internet with firefox much faster then with the Nokia's own browser.

peter

lreinstein
2008-01-06, 15:24
[QUOTE=mvalera;254681]I'm happy to announce that we have launched the all new Squeezebox™ Duet!

Squeezebox™ Duet lets you listen to the music you love in any room in your home. Access millions of songs — even when your computer is off. The multi-room controller with 2.4-inch color display makes it easy to browse, select, and play songs from your personal collection, Internet radio — even online music services.
Congrats...this looks amazing!
My problem--
I just bought the SB3 (arrived only last week!) but LOVE the design of your new controller and interface. Will I be able to return and upgrade?

Larry

Mitch Harding
2008-01-06, 15:27
They've stated elsewhere that this restriction may not always exist,
but it does right now. Probably it simplifies things for them, which
is important at the initial product launch.

Also, pet peeve of mine, "to beg the question" does not mean "to raise
the question"... Although I guess it will come to mean that, since
it's frequently used that way:
http://begthequestion.info/

On Jan 6, 2008 1:42 PM, IRJ
<IRJ.32s58z1199648701 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> > At this time you need a Squeezebox Controller to set up a Squeezebox
> > Receiver.
>
> Err.
> Begs the question... Why?
>
>
> --
> IRJ
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> IRJ's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7031
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41813
>
>

Mitch Harding
2008-01-06, 15:28
They have a 30 day no questions asked return policy, unless things
have changed, so I don't see why you couldn't.

On Jan 6, 2008 4:24 PM, lreinstein
<lreinstein.32scnn1199658302 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
> > Congrats...this looks amazing!
> > My problem--
> > I just bought the SB3 (arrived only last week!) but LOVE the design of
> > your new controller and interface. Will I be able to return and
> > upgrade?
> >
> > Larry
>
>
> --
> lreinstein
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> lreinstein's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14644
>
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41813
>
>
>

lreinstein
2008-01-06, 15:35
On Jan 6, 2008, at 2:36 AM, Phil Meyer wrote:
> How long will the Controller's full battery charge last?
That depends on the usage. Constant usage is around 3 hours now, but
that's without any power management at all. When the screen dims
and the wireless goes in to power-saving mode, the life goes way up.

> I assume the thing it's sitting in is a charging cradle, which
> means it needs to be plugged in, so it would not sit well on a
> coffee table in the center of a room.
Probably not. Better a side table where you can have a wire to keep
it charged. When it's in the charging stand it acts as a Now Playing
screensaver while playing, or defaults to a clock screensaver when not.

> Does the device remain on all the time;
Yes.

> if not, how long would it take to be functional from power-off?
From inserting the battery, through cold-boot, wireless association
and connection to the server is about 40 seconds at this point, or
half what my cell phone takes. :)

I think this has been asked, but dont quite understand the answers... do you think that the new controller will be sold as a stand alone to work with my existing SB3? For me, that would be the best combination since I like the SB3 display but think the graphic controller would be a great addition. But I would rather not pay for the receiver since in effect I already own one (and just bought it last week!)
larry

Mitch Harding
2008-01-06, 15:47
Yes, the controller and receiver will be available separately, as well
as together. The web site has prices for them individually as well as
combined. $150 SBR, $300 SBC, $400 both.

On Jan 6, 2008 4:35 PM, lreinstein
<lreinstein.32sdcn1199659201 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> dean blackketter;255088 Wrote:
> > On Jan 6, 2008, at 2:36 AM, Phil Meyer wrote:
> > > How long will the Controller's full battery charge last?
> > That depends on the usage. Constant usage is around 3 hours now, but
> >
> > that's without any power management at all. When the screen dims
> > and the wireless goes in to power-saving mode, the life goes way up.
> >
> > > I assume the thing it's sitting in is a charging cradle, which
> > > means it needs to be plugged in, so it would not sit well on a
> > > coffee table in the center of a room.
> > Probably not. Better a side table where you can have a wire to keep
> > it charged. When it's in the charging stand it acts as a Now Playing
> >
> > screensaver while playing, or defaults to a clock screensaver when
> > not.
> >
> > > Does the device remain on all the time;
> > Yes.
> >
> > > if not, how long would it take to be functional from power-off?
> > From inserting the battery, through cold-boot, wireless association
> > and connection to the server is about 40 seconds at this point, or
> > half what my cell phone takes. :)
>
> I think this has been asked, but dont quite understand the answers...
> do you think that the new controller will be sold as a stand alone to
> work with my existing SB3? For me, that would be the best combination
> since I like the SB3 display but think the graphic controller would be
> a great addition. But I would rather not pay for the receiver since in
> effect I already own one (and just bought it last week!)
> larry
>
>
> --
>
> lreinstein
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> lreinstein's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14644
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41813
>
>

IRJ
2008-01-06, 15:56
Sadly these this restriction will mean I will refrain from buying more slimdevices until it is lifted (or hacked). I need more machines. In the meantime I AM at risk of looking towards other products. Don't mean to be unpleasant, but that's my perspective.

bhaagensen
2008-01-06, 16:36
On the other hand, the Nokia N800 has all of these capabilities of the controller and much more (touch screen, built-in camera for video conferencing, FM radio, Opera, multiple expansion slots, ...). The N800 currently retails for as low as $239. With its touch screen and on-screen keyboard, it has the potential to smoke the competitive offerings (namely Sonos), but it isn't achieving this with the SlimServer web-browser based experience. I would love to see a native $29.99 app from Slim which brings the features and performance of the new controller to the N800/N810. Sling Media (SlingBox) has gone this direction with custom apps for a variety of platforms, and I think it's a great model.


Well, the way I see it is that this is an all new platform for slim, and they have to start somewhere. They could have offered a client for e.g. the iphone, n800 and symbian, but multiplatform developement takes more time, and anyway those devices are currently mostly used by the gadget nerds. Instead they chose to start by creating a stand-alone fully integrated system which anyone can buy immediately have a fully working, more or less, plug and play system. The price is set lower than comparable products. Moreover the entire platform is open, so anyone is free to create a better and cheaper solution, or extend the current one. What more can we ask for? The only answer I have to this question is a gift in terms of a miraculously low priced device. That didn't happen, but I think slimdevices are being very fair anyway.

Enough sucking up. Can I get a discount now :)

Bjørn

Ian_F
2008-01-06, 16:40
First of all, congratulations on the announcement of the new product(s). I've no doubt there are some very worried people over at Sonos HQ!

Looking through the specs (under the System requirements on this page (http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_duet.html)) I see you're quoting 256MB of RAM as a requirement. Is that number correct? If it is, I guess I need to factor in the cost of a new host if I'm going to get the Duet since my trusty QNAP is not gonna make the grade :-(

Timothy Stockman
2008-01-06, 16:55
Some really really big pics for those who want them (The LCD is simulated):
http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_beauty_large.jpg
Good choice of music!

dean
2008-01-06, 17:05
On Jan 6, 2008, at 3:40 PM, Ian_F wrote:
> First of all, congratulations on the announcement of the new product
> (s).
> I've no doubt there are some very worried people over at Sonos HQ!
>
> Looking through the specs (under the System requirements
> '_on_this_page_' (http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_duet.html)) I see
> you're quoting 256MB of RAM as a requirement. Is that number correct?
> If it is, I guess I need to factor in the cost of a new host if I'm
> going to get the Duet since my trusty QNAP is not gonna make the grade
> :-(
The new hardware doesn't add any new requirements to your host setup,
but running SqueezeCenter 7.0 might. I don't know the status of
running SC7 on QNAP, but if it runs well there, then the new hardware
should work fine.

Ian_F
2008-01-06, 17:24
On Jan 6, 2008, at 3:40 PM, Ian_F wrote:
> First of all, congratulations on the announcement of the new product
> (s).
> I've no doubt there are some very worried people over at Sonos HQ!
>
> Looking through the specs (under the System requirements
> '_on_this_page_' (http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_duet.html)) I see
> you're quoting 256MB of RAM as a requirement. Is that number correct?
> If it is, I guess I need to factor in the cost of a new host if I'm
> going to get the Duet since my trusty QNAP is not gonna make the grade
> :-(
The new hardware doesn't add any new requirements to your host setup,
but running SqueezeCenter 7.0 might. I don't know the status of
running SC7 on QNAP, but if it runs well there, then the new hardware
should work fine.

Thanks for the prompt reply Dean. I'll just sit tight for now then. I don't believe anyone has SC7 up and running on the QNAP yet but I've been away from the scene for a few weeks so I may be mistaken. It won't be a show stopper if I do have to upgrade it. Boys and their toys and all that ;-)

SteveC
2008-01-06, 18:03
There are stupendeus price hikes if one sees the European prices :-(
at http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/speakers_audio/wireless_music_systems/

Qucik calc for the swedish prices including 25% VAT:

399$*6.2031*1.25=3094 SEK
The suggested logitech price 3999 SEK (I hope this includes VAT)

I'm stunned, wtf correct it now It's listed as 3299 NOK in Norway, which would be USD 490 even taking the sales tax off. I agree it's a rip off but it's not uncommon for us, is it. I think I might order one, but it would have been three if I didn't resent being ripped off so much.

brant
2008-01-06, 20:53
Hello. Congrats on your launch! Was considering Sonos recently, but was delighted to discover what Slim Devices has been up to. Then I refresh the site and find the Duet announcement -- sweet! Having the controller will significantly boost the WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor) for Slim Devices! Glad I held off -- now I can't wait for this stuff to be available...

A few questions though, as I try to sort out all the offerings:

1. Does the Controller also work with Transporter?

2. If so, does that mean the "party mode" thing would also work with a Transporter and a Receiver?

3. Is there any limitation on the size of a music library that the controller can deal with?

4. Am I right in thinking that I could take the digital out of the Receiver (or an SB3) and run that through my Yamaha RXV-1500 letting it do the D/A conversion? Will that likely be better than the analog out of the SB3 or Receiver? Will I still pine for the Transporter?

5. I am considering loading my library (and a bunch of other stuff I'd like to see stored safely in a RAID array) onto a Buffalo TeraServer (or similar) NAS. Any special trick to get the Duet to work with that? Is the Buffalo a good choice or does someone have positive experience with an alternative?

Sorry if some of this is borderline OT -- just trying to figure out what I want to build toward (and what I can live with while waiting for the Audiophile Fairy to bring me a Transporter...). Thanks in advance for any help!

-Brant

seanadams
2008-01-06, 21:23
//1. Does the Controller also work with Transporter?

Yes

//2. If so, does that mean the "party mode" thing would also work with a Transporter and a Receiver?

Yes

//3. Is there any limitation on the size of a music library that the controller can deal with?

No

// 4. Am I right in thinking that I could take the digital out of the Receiver (or an SB3) and run that through my Yamaha RXV-1500 letting it do the D/A conversion?

Yes

// Will that likely be better than the analog out of the SB3 or Receiver?

Maybe

// Will I still pine for the Transporter?

Yes

// 5. I am considering loading my library (and a bunch of other stuff I'd like to see stored safely in a RAID array) onto a Buffalo TeraServer (or similar) NAS. Any special trick to get the Duet to work with that? Is the Buffalo a good choice or does someone have positive experience with an alternative?

Others with more experience running on NAS can comment....

Matt Wise
2008-01-06, 21:31
//
// 5. I am considering loading my library (and a bunch of other stuff I'd like to see stored safely in a RAID array) onto a Buffalo TeraServer (or similar) NAS. Any special trick to get the Duet to work with that? Is the Buffalo a good choice or does someone have positive experience with an alternative?

Others with more experience running on NAS can comment....

I must mention that I'm running a Fit PC (http://www.fit-pc.com/new/) that mounts my 20GB music collection off of my Drobo (shared over smbclient, from an airport extreme) with no problems. It seems a bit complicated, but the 500MHz FitPC is pleeeenty fast to run the SC 7.0 client.

aubuti
2008-01-06, 22:00
Thanks for the prompt reply Dean. I'll just sit tight for now then. I don't believe anyone has SC7 up and running on the QNAP yet but I've been away from the scene for a few weeks so I may be mistaken. It won't be a show stopper if I do have to upgrade it. Boys and their toys and all that ;-)
The 256MB RAM requirement is the same as that listed for the SB3 and slimserver 6.5.x. I've never used a QNAP, but I've been running SC7 and the beta Jive hardware (now the Controller) for a few months now on a LinkStation with only 128MB. Performance is about the same as it was with 6.5.x: streams music fine, good response with the remote, and slow-but-usable with the web ui. The Controller is faster than the web ui, but can be a bit slow to load the album art.

mherger
2008-01-06, 23:22
> The new hardware doesn't add any new requirements to your host setup,
> but running SqueezeCenter 7.0 might. I don't know the status of
> running SC7 on QNAP, but if it runs well there, then the new hardware
> should work fine.

flipflip has SC7 running on the Diskstations, which are similar devices, equipped with 128MB RAM. It does run on these, as did SS6, quite well, but I'd guess it's swapping memory already.

Michael

smg
2008-01-07, 03:38
I’ve read somewhere, that like the SB3, the Controller is always on. With my SB3, however, I can at least switch it off at the mains at the end of day or when it isn’t being used for an extended period.

Does this mean that the controller can’t be switched off at all?

peter
2008-01-07, 03:42
smg wrote:
> I’ve read somewhere, that like the SB3, the Controller is always on.
> With my SB3, however, I can at least switch it off at the mains at the
> end of day or when it isn’t being used for an extended period.
>
> Does this mean that the controller can’t be switched off at all?
>

Yes it can, unlike the SB it even has an off switch. (press home for a
few seconds)

Regards,
Peter

funkstar
2008-01-07, 03:43
The reciever is "always on"... appart from when you pull the plug :)

The remote us usually on, and goes into power save when not in use (the accelerometer wakes it up when you pick it up, very cool). You can switch it off though. The home button acts as a power button as well. Holding it down will completely shut the remote down.

smg
2008-01-07, 04:02
smg wrote:
> I’ve read somewhere, that like the SB3, the Controller is always on.
> With my SB3, however, I can at least switch it off at the mains at the
> end of day or when it isn’t being used for an extended period.
>
> Does this mean that the controller can’t be switched off at all?
>

Yes it can, unlike the SB it even has an off switch. (press home for a
few seconds)

Regards,
Peter

Thanks Peter (and Funkstar) - This is just what I needed to know.

I was worried for a minute that the controller would have to be left on all the time - something which I'm not keen on.

doundounba
2008-01-07, 06:35
[...] they have to start somewhere. They could have offered a client for e.g. the iphone, n800 and symbian, but multiplatform developement takes more time, [...]. Moreover the entire platform is open, so anyone is free to create a better and cheaper solution, or extend the current one.

They do have to start somewhere, but AFAICT, it's not true that anyone is free to extend the current solution. There's a thread on licensing on the Jive Dev forum discussing the licensing on the Jive SDK - basically the license prevents people from redistributing any code changes. This means you're unlikely to see the same kind of community-based development on the Jive stuff as you saw on the slimserver code. In particular, you're very unlikely to see community ports to the N800 or iPhone. Possibly some commercial dev might enter into an agreement with Logitech to do a port and sell us client software...

Rick B.
2008-01-07, 06:56
Had the controller debuted with a $150 price tag, I would have easily justified the purchase. At $299 it doesn't make sense to me.


Me, too. I'm really disappointed. I already have an SB3 and the new remote is just what I'm looking for - but not at this price.

Chewie
2008-01-07, 07:07
Me, too. I'm really disappointed. I already have an SB3 and the new remote is just what I'm looking for - but not at this price.

I must confess I’m a little disappointed in the Duet as an existing user. If starting from scratch I can see it’s a great piece of kit but as an existing user of a Transporter and SB3 I was looking forward to a remote control with display and a few toys for maybe £100 or so but at £250-300 it’s very expensive for that purpose.

elziko
2008-01-07, 07:15
I also already have a SB3 and would like to have a remote like in the Duet - but it does seem very expensive for what it will add to my setup. Shame.

earthbased
2008-01-07, 07:24
ModelCitizen wrote:
> Phil Meyer;254852 Wrote:
>
>> What's the main benefits of the SqueezeBox Controller over a PDA?The interface is much slicker and much, much more responsive than the
>>
> web gui. The web gui is very clunky and slow in comparison (or it is on
> whatever device/platform I've tried it on).
>

The controller does not have/use a web GUI. It's a newly developed
client/server menu system. The menus are downloaded from Squeezecenter
and run locally. At least that's how I understand it. I have one of the
beta units and it works a lot better than a PDA with a web browser.

Regards,
Peter

Harmony integration?

kunze
2008-01-07, 07:57
Hi,

I think its a shame that the IR Blaster port has been removed.
That would be very useful to switch power on an amp (and control the volume). So the whole thing could be hidden in a cabinet. Only the controller would be visible.

Regards,
Michael

stevek1006
2008-01-07, 08:26
Please forgive me if this is posted in the incorrect location. I am currently running four zones via a Zon audio system in my home. I am seriously considering purchasing the Duet and plugging it in as one of the music sources so I can access streaming Internet radio, networked music files etc. The new controller that comes in the duet package looks to be ideal for remote access for at least the SB when it is the music source being played. Has anyone here used the SB, SB2, etc with a Zon system and can anyone tell me if the controller will be able to be used (or possibly modified) as a universal remote (to access the CD player, etc.)?

I have used and SB1 and SB2 with the original Zon system for a number of years. It works fine. Looking at the specs on the controller, there does not seem to be any IR, so I suspect it cannot be used as a universal controller. It is unfortunate, because I would like to have a single remote that could control the Zon and the devices attached to it including the Squeezebox. I have tried using a Pocket PC as a IR remote plus the handheld skin, a Pepper and a number of other devices. Nothing that I have tried to date can control the Squeezebox and also serve as a universal remote. It would have been nice if they had added ir and learning remote to the controller. Oh well, maybe some day.

andyg
2008-01-07, 08:31
The controller does have an IR emitter.

thomsens
2008-01-07, 08:50
I'm in the it's too expensive camp as well. I think what's happened to many of us is that we feel we've been offered a $300 remote control for our SB3s and Transporters and clearly that's a lot of money for a dedicated remote control (i.e., not a universal). No offense to SD, but the initial explanation of "it cost us a lot to build, so it has to cost that much for you. Plus, we'll do the basic stuff to make the remote control work, but enabling the extra hw will be your responsibility to take care of" comes off as a little arrogant. I understand and honestly believe that's not what the SD folks feel, but it can appear that way if you read through the early part of the thread - at least it did to me. If it appeared that SD had a roadmap for more functionality, I might have felt differently.

The fact is that there are folks paying more for the SONOS remote, so the market supports the pricing. In the end, that's all that really matters. I'd personally rather hear that answer because it makes sense to me and isn't offensive in any way - it's just business. If you don't like it, buy a Harmony, buy nothing, or buy the more expensive SONOS option (ignoring the SC host hw requirements that is).

In the end, I'll probably also buy the duet combo because I want to hide my transporter from view and for $100 another SB is hard to pass up.

stevek1006
2008-01-07, 09:06
The controller does have an IR emitter.

That's interesting -- I did not see that anywhere in the specs. Still, the emitter does little good if we cannot program the remote for our equipment. Will that be possible?

funkstar
2008-01-07, 09:10
That's interesting -- I did not see that anywhere in the specs. Still, the emitter does little good if we cannot program the remote for our equipment. Will that be possible?
If someone writes an extension to the software to let you do it. This someone may be Logitec, it may be someone in the comunity.

sbjaerum
2008-01-07, 09:12
That's interesting -- I did not see that anywhere in the specs. Still, the emitter does little good if we cannot program the remote for our equipment. Will that be possible?

There is currently a test applet that makes it possible to control SB/Transporter using the IR emitter on the Controller.
I am sure it is possible to extend on that so that the Controller will act as a universal IR remote.

Mongo
2008-01-07, 09:15
I think the sticker shock is less pronounced if you think of it starting from scratch with a multi room setup in mind. All of you with 3 or 4 SB3's have equal capability at almost the same cost.

In thinking through the target audience for the duet, I am not sure that SD has yet hit the nail on the head. I would target families with two kids, with three different simultaneous but different listening needs. The kids make playlists on the fly, rarely listen to albums and would want to be able to control the music and play list creation from their room. If they have a computer with speakers then they can do it already. The adults listen to albums, not as much playlists, and probably like to see the music selection displayed in the living room. Three SB3's would solve this problem better than the duet, unless you buy three controllers, but you still need a computer for the kids to do their playlists. Squeeze center is not playlist friendly. There is a divide in the move from somewhat geeky audiophile to mass market but audiophile quality, and the key is understanding the target user. I think that target user should be a family, not the audiophile.

toby10
2008-01-07, 09:20
There is currently a test applet that makes it possible to control SB/Transporter using the IR emitter on the Controller.
I am sure it is possible to extend on that so that the Controller will act as a universal IR remote.

Adding just some simple IR learning would be sufficient for my purposes. I would only ask that it could learn some basic AVR commands (on, off, input select, volume, mute).

Mnyb
2008-01-07, 09:31
How will a transporter owner shift between a digital input or SC without being conected to SC or SN. Or Controll volume etc.
With the digital ins it's possible to use transporter as a dac/preamp without being connected to anything ?
An ir applet is much needed for that otherwise you need two remotes ;-)

jdc0730
2008-01-07, 09:33
Harmony integration?

Now that I would buy!

Mnyb
2008-01-07, 09:42
If my SB3 fails to conect to SN for some reason, isnt that a catch22 how do i piont it back SC (my computer) with the Controller ? do I have to bring forth the old remote or can future versions of SC7 take over from the serverside (i'm at 6.5.4 myself)

erland
2008-01-07, 10:11
No offense to SD, but the initial explanation of "it cost us a lot to build, so it has to cost that much for you. Plus, we'll do the basic stuff to make the remote control work, but enabling the extra hw will be your responsibility to take care of" comes off as a little arrogant. I understand and honestly believe that's not what the SD folks feel, but it can appear that way if you read through the early part of the thread - at least it did to me. If it appeared that SD had a roadmap for more functionality, I might have felt differently.

I'm sure they have a roadmap, it's just not public.
I'm sure they are going to continue developing the Controller software themselves, I suppose they just felt that the Controller offered enough functionality for an initial release.

bigfool1956
2008-01-07, 10:20
CES starts today (I believe) and that is a very important platform for launching new product, hence the timing.

I'm sure SD and Logitech decided to launch with the functionality that is currently reliable.

Bear in mind that launch and shop availability can be some months apart, and that in the intervening time more functionality may become available for the controller.

jgs
2008-01-07, 10:25
The specs list Apple Lossless as a supported format, and don't mention transcoding. Does this mean that ALAC is now supported natively? I'd love to have FFWD/REW support for Apple Lossless (drat iTunes for not supporting FLAC).

aubuti
2008-01-07, 12:12
If my SB3 fails to conect to SN for some reason, isnt that a catch22 how do i piont it back SC (my computer) with the Controller ? do I have to bring forth the old remote or can future versions of SC7 take over from the serverside (i'm at 6.5.4 myself)
The Controller is a separate device on your LAN, so as long as your SB3 is still available on the LAN, you can tell it which music source (SC, SN, other server) to go to via the Controller. At least that's how it's supposed to work -- at present I can't get the beta controller to switch music sources.

IRJ
2008-01-07, 12:32
I still do not understand the SD pathway.

For quite some time I have held off buying more SB(3)s as while I considered them excellent technically, I felt they had become rather over priced. I was hoping the morphing with Logitech's people would reduce the hardware cost of these machines.

Now they issue a new SB, the SBR, for an excellent $150.00. I became excited that I could pair with my original SBs and continue to control them all with my WiFi. Although some seem to think this is clunky, I find it highly satisfactory. But Nope! To conrol an SBR one needs the new $250.00 controller so going the new route would cost me $400.00 for one extra SB(R). Of course I could go and buy the SB3 for $300.00, but I already rejected this as not good pricing.

I feel somewhat cast aside, as an early customer of SB and being forced into new proprietary hardware to grow my system. I do not understand why the new SBR hasn't been enabled to be controlled by WiFi, to give users and especially long standing costomers a choice. It seems that SD want to force the new proprietary controller on all of us. Is the move away from opensource starting? Granted a new wholehouse system from SD now beats out Sonos nicely (in pricing and likely functionality), but it does seem that SD is becoming less friendly to its long time customers.

stoobie-doo
2008-01-07, 12:52
Any reason why the new devices aren't 802.11n draft 2.0 compliant. With most n routers, mixing g and n clients slows the whole network down. I bet there are lots of people like me who would be relying on wifi for the multi-room setups. It would be nice to have the higher speed and lower risk of dropouts.

Cry Havok
2008-01-07, 13:01
I still do not understand the SD pathway.

For quite some time I have held off buying more SB(3)s as while I considered them excellent technically, I felt they had become rather over priced. I was hoping the morphing with Logitech's people would reduce the hardware cost of these machines.

Now they issue a new SB, the SBR, for an excellent $150.00. I became excited that I could pair with my original SBs and continue to control them all with my WiFi. Although some seem to think this is clunky, I find it highly satisfactory. But Nope! To conrol an SBR one needs the new $250.00 controller so going the new route would cost me $400.00 for one extra SB(R). Of course I could go and buy the SB3 for $300.00, but I already rejected this as not good pricing.

I feel somewhat cast aside, as an early customer of SB and being forced into new proprietary hardware to grow my system. I do not understand why the new SBR hasn't been enabled to be controlled by WiFi, to give users and especially long standing costomers a choice. It seems that SD want to force the new proprietary controller on all of us. Is the move away from opensource starting? Granted a new wholehouse system from SD now beats out Sonos nicely (in pricing and likely functionality), but it does seem that SD is becoming less friendly to its long time customers.

You've obviously skipped through the thread. There's nothing stopping you buying more SB3 units. Everything seems to be remaining as open as before.

To put it bluntly, suck it up. This is a company that's about making a profit at the end of the day. If you don't like it, buy other products, but you'll be hard pushed to find other manufacturers that put half as much effort into working with their customers and provide such an open platform.

Me, I'm waiting for the UK release so I can buy one to go with my existing SB3. It isn't cheap, but it's cheaper and better than the alternatives IMO and will integrate better with my stereo system than another SB3.

shvejk
2008-01-07, 13:09
>To control an SBR one needs the new $250.00 controller so going the new route would cost me $400.00 for one extra SB(R).

Hopefully, this will quickly be addressed by Logitech or by the community. I cannot imagine a reason the controller could not be setup by plugging a PC to the Ethernet port.

Otherwise, your option is to buy the controller and the SBR separately, configure your SBR and return the controller. It is kind of silly.....

Robin Bowes
2008-01-07, 13:09
IRJ wrote:
>
> Now they issue a new SB, the SBR, for an excellent $150.00. I became
> excited that I could pair with my original SBs and continue to control
> them all with my WiFi. Although some seem to think this is clunky, I
> find it highly satisfactory. But Nope! To conrol an SBR one needs the
> new $250.00 controller so going the new route would cost me $400.00 for
> one extra SB(R). Of course I could go and buy the SB3 for $300.00, but I
> already rejected this as not good pricing.

Actually, there's every possibility that it will be possible to set up
the Duet Receiver from some other software application, possibly even a
SqueezeCenter plugin.

There's no reason this can not be done - it's just that the code isn't
written yet!

R.

aubuti
2008-01-07, 13:22
I do not understand why the new SBR hasn't been enabled to be controlled by WiFi, to give users and especially long standing costomers a choice.
That's because it is enabled to be controlled by wifi. At the present time you need the Controller for initial configuration of the SBR, but after that it's all controlled by standard wifi or ethernet, nothing proprietary about it. I'd be very surprised if this hurdle isn't overcome early in the product life (remember, it's not shipping yet), for much the same reasons that you have given.

nicky6
2008-01-07, 13:31
Hi!

it seems everyone is really interested in the controller. Me however, is more interested in the sound quality. How does this new little black box called the Receiver fare against the ol' SB3 in terms of sound quality using the built-in DAC's (Wolfson vs BB)? And why did you go with Wolfson rather than BB?

Also, since I haven't been reading the forum for quite a while, how much of this project is the "Logitech Monster"'s ;) baby and what is "The Good Guys from SD"'s ;) part? The black box is a tuned down(?) SB3 delivered by the original good guys and the controller is derived from the Useless DJ BadSound system ;) and also formerly known as Jive?! Please fill me in ("The names have been changed to protect the innocent" or whtever they say in some documentaries ;) )

Me too have been waiting for the prices of SB3's to get in a market based price range (i.e. ~149-199USD) to build my multi room sound system. Now I'm thrilled to read about the Receiver, but only if I don't have to buy a Controller with it (as implied regarding setup). I already have a remote to my SB3 (yes, I know I can't use it with the new receiver...) and have a Sony PSP and laptop etc to control the system.

If SD/Logitech don't solve the remote-issue regarding setup, then I think it would be a really nice gesture of SD/Logitech to make these avail to previous customers for a lot less, say 149USD (which still is an awful lot of money for what is still a "simple" remote control with a color screen, albeit with lots of RAM and 802.11g built-in).

I'm stil an avid admirer of the SB-conecpt and have friends who are. And as seen on this forum, LOTS of people are. So please SD/Logitech, listen closely to the songs of this bunch - please make the remote cheaper and also, make the receiver possible to setup without the remote.

and, Sean or whoever can tell - please answer my question regarding the difference of the DAC's earlier in this post :) Very much appreciated, thanks and keep up the otherwise good work!

bklaas
2008-01-07, 13:49
the controller is derived from the Useless DJ BadSound system ;)

I've seen this come up before. Let me answer: no, no, NO.

There is not a single line of code in the Squeezebox controller shared with the Logitech Wireless DJ. The Squeezebox controller is engineered entirely by Logitech SMS (formerly SlimDevices). The Wireless DJ was not a product developed by Logitech SMS.

There is *zero* cross-pollination between these products.

cheers,
#!/ben

JimC
2008-01-07, 13:50
Hi!

it seems everyone is really interested in the controller. Me however, is more interested in the sound quality. How does this new little black box called the Receiver fare against the ol' SB3 in terms of sound quality using the built-in DAC's (Wolfson vs BB)? And why did you go with Wolfson rather than BB?

Also, since I haven't been reading the forum for quite a while, how much of this project is the "Logitech Monster"'s ;) baby and what is "The Good Guys from SD"'s ;) part? The black box is a tuned down(?) SB3 delivered by the original good guys and the controller is derived from the Useless DJ BadSound system ;) and also formerly known as Jive?! Please fill me in ("The names have been changed to protect the innocent" or whtever they say in some documentaries ;) )

Me too have been waiting for the prices of SB3's to get in a market based price range (i.e. ~149-199USD) to build my multi room sound system. Now I'm thrilled to read about the Receiver, but only if I don't have to buy a Controller with it (as implied regarding setup). I already have a remote to my SB3 (yes, I know I can't use it with the new receiver...) and have a Sony PSP and laptop etc to control the system.

If SD/Logitech don't solve the remote-issue regarding setup, then I think it would be a really nice gesture of SD/Logitech to make these avail to previous customers for a lot less, say 149USD (which still is an awful lot of money for what is still a "simple" remote control with a color screen, albeit with lots of RAM and 802.11g built-in).

I'm stil an avid admirer of the SB-conecpt and have friends who are. And as seen on this forum, LOTS of people are. So please SD/Logitech, listen closely to the songs of this bunch - please make the remote cheaper and also, make the receiver possible to setup without the remote.

and, Sean or whoever can tell - please answer my question regarding the difference of the DAC's earlier in this post :) Very much appreciated, thanks and keep up the otherwise good work!

The entire Jive platform was designed and built by the original Slim Devices team (with newly minted Logitech employees who were previously long-standing community members), along with input from my product marketing team (which are a mix of SD and Logi people). There's not a single bit of the Wireless DJ product in the Squeezebox Duet.

As I've said before, companies in the "mass" high-tech market generally price up from production costs (which factor in a LOT of things beyond material costs -- labor, yield, shipping, amortizations of costs of design / tooling / etc.). There's no reason to assume Logitech would behave any differently.


-=> Jim

smcint
2008-01-07, 13:59
Hi!

it seems everyone is really interested in the controller. Me however, is more interested in the sound quality. How does this new little black box called the Receiver fare against the ol' SB3 in terms of sound quality using the built-in DAC's (Wolfson vs BB)? And why did you go with Wolfson rather than BB?

Also, since I haven't been reading the forum for quite a while, how much of this project is the "Logitech Monster"'s ;) baby and what is "The Good Guys from SD"'s ;) part? The black box is a tuned down(?) SB3 delivered by the original good guys and the controller is derived from the Useless DJ BadSound system ;) and also formerly known as Jive?! Please fill me in ("The names have been changed to protect the innocent" or whtever they say in some documentaries ;) )

Me too have been waiting for the prices of SB3's to get in a market based price range (i.e. ~149-199USD) to build my multi room sound system. Now I'm thrilled to read about the Receiver, but only if I don't have to buy a Controller with it (as implied regarding setup). I already have a remote to my SB3 (yes, I know I can't use it with the new receiver...) and have a Sony PSP and laptop etc to control the system.

If SD/Logitech don't solve the remote-issue regarding setup, then I think it would be a really nice gesture of SD/Logitech to make these avail to previous customers for a lot less, say 149USD (which still is an awful lot of money for what is still a "simple" remote control with a color screen, albeit with lots of RAM and 802.11g built-in).

I'm stil an avid admirer of the SB-conecpt and have friends who are. And as seen on this forum, LOTS of people are. So please SD/Logitech, listen closely to the songs of this bunch - please make the remote cheaper and also, make the receiver possible to setup without the remote.

and, Sean or whoever can tell - please answer my question regarding the difference of the DAC's earlier in this post :) Very much appreciated, thanks and keep up the otherwise good work!

Sean has mentioned the sound quality being 'good' in the Audiophile forum thread titled'We're going to need a bigger...external PSU?'. I'm intrigued as well but perhaps we have to wait for reviews from users. Considering the care and consideration for audio quality that has gone into previous products from Sean et al, I doubt they would throw away their reputation by selling a shoddy sounding box now.

As for the price, I was about to buy another SB3 anyway. $100 more for the new remote to finally control the music from my dining table and a completely hidden system is worth it to me. Sign me up!

clarkgable
2008-01-07, 15:35
I have two setups:
In my apartment I have a Transporter connected via ethernet wire to a mac with an external drive; the mac can also access my wireless network.
In my country house I have an SB3 accessing music stored on a mac wirelessly.
Question:
Will the new remote by itself (without the receiver) replace my Nokia 800 web interface control?

aubuti
2008-01-07, 15:58
Question:
Will the new remote by itself (without the receiver) replace my Nokia 800 web interface control?
Answer: Yes, but only for controlling your SBs, not general web browsing like you can do with the Nokia 800.

DaveBrennan
2008-01-07, 16:38
It looks good but like the SB I think I will wait for Version 3

gorman
2008-01-07, 16:50
Is a setup like this reasonable/doable?

1 Car PC in the trunk running SqueezeCenter
1 Receiver in the trunk connected to the car's audio system
1 Controller in the car to control your music

meep
2008-01-07, 16:53
Is a setup like this reasonable/doable?

1 Car PC in the trunk running SqueezeCenter
1 Receiver in the trunk connected to the car's audio system
1 Controller in the car to control your music

If the controller can control softsqueeze (?) save on the receiver and just plug your pc audio out into the car system? Or use a Nokia 770/800 and get GPS as well?

Peter

gorman
2008-01-07, 16:56
If the controller can control softsqueeze (?) save on the receiver and just plug your pc audio out into the car system? Or use a Nokia 770/800 and get GPS as well?

PeterI already have a GPS receiver, plus for car use I think the more streamlined the user interface is the better.
Regarding Softsqueeze... anyone knows if the Controller is capable of interfacing with it?

Bizarroterl
2008-01-07, 19:50
I could complain how the duet controller doesn't have built in GPS, cell phone, too big, too small, too expensive, wrong color, doesn't have a built in browser, blah, blah, blah.

but I like the design, it's quite a bit less expensive than the alternatives, and it's just what I was looking for. I'll be ordering one as soon as they're available.

BTW, Will a future upgrade include an email server and unlimited range? ;)

pfarrell
2008-01-07, 20:05
Bizarroterl wrote:
> I could complain how the duet controller doesn't have built in GPS, cell
> phone, too big, too small, too expensive, wrong color, doesn't have a
> built in browser, blah, blah, blah.

At the risk of going way OT here.
What he said.

Why can't I buy a cell phone that is good at being a cell phone?
Why do *all* of the cell phones tout their ability to play MP3 files,
display photos, and all sorts of stuff I don't want, and yet they have
at best mediocre functionality as a phone?

What ever happened to "do one thing, and do it well?"

The Controller seems to be aiming to be a well designed wireless
controller for SqueezeBoxen and Transporters. Cool with me.

pichonCalavera
2008-01-07, 21:42
Why can't I buy a cell phone that is good at being a cell phone?
Why do *all* of the cell phones tout their ability to play MP3 files,
display photos, and all sorts of stuff I don't want, and yet they have
at best mediocre functionality as a phone?

What ever happened to "do one thing, and do it well?"

The Controller seems to be aiming to be a well designed wireless
controller for SqueezeBoxen and Transporters. Cool with me.


Yeah, everyone has their needs, and we all want the perfect product just for us :P . But let's face it, the Squeezebox Controller has the main purpose of controlling our music coming from Squeezebox / Squeezecenter / Squeezenetwork from the comfort of our home, I mean, every application and every problem has different solutions, for this case, the SBC has been built from the experience learned by their past products (Squeezebox), from the competition (Sonos Controller, IPod GUI, etc.), and the feedback from their customers, so I think it has a very good chance of being a great product of it's kind, since it was built by people that know how to do a digital music player right. If they wanted to construct a Universal Remote for example, we won't be reading this at the moment, since it would be a sure thing that it would not be ready by now, more features... more time.

I myself won't be buying a SBC right now, since I already own a Squeezebox 3, don't have the multi-room requirement to buy a Duet, and like many people here, the $300 price is too much for me right now, altough I'm very interested in how the software in the SBC evolves, becuase in the end, im really interested in new ways of accesing my music and internet music services/radio.

bordo
2008-01-07, 22:35
New product looks great, but I'm disappointed that it does not have a keyboard (numeric like the SB remotes). I have played a lot with the SONOS controller. Both the original SONOS interface (scrolling through songs) and their new search interface (scrolling through the alphabet) really stink. I think anyone who does any texting at all will find the original SB remote better than the SONOS interface. Hopefully the scrolling on the new Duet controller is better than SONOS...or maybe the keyboard will find its way on to the next version of the controller

kdf
2008-01-07, 23:12
On 7-Jan-08, at 11:52 AM, stoobie-doo wrote:

>
> Any reason why the new devices aren't 802.11n draft 2.0 compliant.
> With
> most n routers, mixing g and n clients slows the whole network down.

I don't think this is true. At least, my early pre-n Belkin router
doesn't suffer, so I'd be surprised if more recent ones do.
802.11G routers suffered when 802.11B devices were on the network, but
part of 11N is the support for G and B without suffering from
performance loss.

As for not supporting it in a Squeezebox...it's a draft and also well
beyond what the device needs for plenty of playback bandwidth.

-kdf

peter
2008-01-07, 23:26
Pat Farrell wrote:
> Bizarroterl wrote:
>
>> I could complain how the duet controller doesn't have built in GPS, cell
>> phone, too big, too small, too expensive, wrong color, doesn't have a
>> built in browser, blah, blah, blah.
>>
>
> At the risk of going way OT here.
> What he said.
>
> Why can't I buy a cell phone that is good at being a cell phone?
> Why do *all* of the cell phones tout their ability to play MP3 files,
> display photos, and all sorts of stuff I don't want, and yet they have
> at best mediocre functionality as a phone?
>

Because *I* and many people don't want to walk around with 4 devices in
their pockets. I really hate this worn out argument. I know someone IRL
who says the same thing, but then he goes out and buys another gadget
phone...

> What ever happened to "do one thing, and do it well?"
>

It's alive and kicking on Unix. Of course, that's also a collection of
very many tools built into one system.

> The Controller seems to be aiming to be a well designed wireless
> controller for SqueezeBoxen and Transporters. Cool with me.

I agree there. But part of me is sorry that I now have 2 RC devices on
my table instead of one Harmony to control all my stuff.

Regards,
Peter

Mitch Harding
2008-01-07, 23:39
For me, the main reason I'd like to see 802.11n support is for use
with the wireless bridging capability. I use that option on my SB3,
and plan to use it on the next SB3/SBR/whatever that I buy. Having
the additional bandwidth would be nice if I add a lot of stuff behind
the bridge, but for what I need now 802.11g is fine.

I'm crossing my fingers that SB4/SBR2 has n support, though. :)

On Jan 8, 2008 12:12 AM, kdf <slim-mail (AT) deane-freeman (DOT) com> wrote:
> I don't think this is true. At least, my early pre-n Belkin router
> doesn't suffer, so I'd be surprised if more recent ones do.
> 802.11G routers suffered when 802.11B devices were on the network, but
> part of 11N is the support for G and B without suffering from
> performance loss.
>
> As for not supporting it in a Squeezebox...it's a draft and also well
> beyond what the device needs for plenty of playback bandwidth.

Tradewind25
2008-01-08, 03:04
I have a Squeezebox 3. I wish to add one of the new Receivers in another room, and ideally synchronize the two.
Can I achieve this with my current SB3 remote, or would I also need to purchase one of the new Controllers?
(I think I read that the Receiver requires the Controller to configure network security?)

James_B
2008-01-08, 05:53
http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/06/video-logitech-squeezebox-duet/

Reporting is a bit slack on the details..

Fifer
2008-01-08, 06:02
I really hate this worn out argument.,
Peter

Sorry Peter, but for those of us who agree with it (and there are many) it's far from worn out. For us, it's the truth.

NickP
2008-01-08, 06:27
Can the text on the controller be made bigger?

Some of us here have less than stellar eyesight and variable font size is a blessing.

Tradewind25
2008-01-08, 07:00
[QUOTE=James_B;255899]http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/06/video-logitech-squeezebox-duet/

QUOTE]

Thanks for the link, but nor sure this does anything to answer my question.

cparker
2008-01-08, 07:14
Well maybe I missed something amazing about this, but it just seems to be a big clunky remote, based on a early ipod design but just large enough to ensure they can emboss a logo on it. What happened to elegance in design?? :s

Buying a Nokia 770 would do the same but with more features right?

Now if it were a full bodied slimplayer with a colour screen then I might be interested. :)

Skunk
2008-01-08, 07:17
I have a Squeezebox 3. I wish to add one of the new Receivers in another room, and ideally synchronize the two.
Can I achieve this with my current SB3 remote, or would I also need to purchase one of the new Controllers?
(I think I read that the Receiver requires the Controller to configure network security?)

The Receiver does require the Controller for setup: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=255195&postcount=80

While this keeps you from using a $150 Receiver on its own, the glass-half-full way of looking at that is you can get both for only $100 more than the price of an Sb3. Then of course you can add as many $150 Receivers as you'd like without 'having' to buy the Controller.

tamanaco
2008-01-08, 07:22
Sorry Peter, but for those of us who agree with it (and there are many) it's far from worn out. For us, it's the truth.

I'm somewhere in between in this argument. I expected the controller also be good AV System remote given that SD is now part of Logitech. I'd still have to use 2 remotes to listen to my music. The convenience factor of having just one remote is lost with this remote. So, if I want to turn off my SB3 and Receiver I have to put my beer down and reach for my universal remote. As I mentioned in another thread, we need at minimum a remote that can turn the receiver on/off, select the input source and adjust the receiver volume. Why wasn't there any engineering cross pollination between SD and Logitech/Harmony? This would have been the perfect opportunity to show that both companies had integrated well and that SD was taking full advantage of the big pockets and resources of Logitech. (I guess there wasn't enough time)

Btw, I'd only go as far as making the Controller a better "REMOTE" for any SB and audio receiver combo. Optimize the navigation of the SC music library. A full keypad or other spare keys below the wheel would have been nice. Heck... there is plenty of real estate there. All that spare space gives it a Senior Citizen friendly look. Btw, I'm over 50 so I appreciate it. I don't need a browser, touch screen or PDA like functions in my remote. Some of those functions are mutually exclusive. The remote should be "family-friendly" I would not want to hand over the remote to someone else while I'm browsing the web. I wanna hold my beer in one hand and the remote in the other. I want to be able to throw it to my wife with one hand without spilling any of my beer, so the remote has to be sturdy. Any configuration function of the SC, SB or SB receiver you be done from a computer with a browser. If configuration options need to be accessed from the remote, then these options should be password protected. I don't want my wife or my friends changing the configuration of my SC/SB3 or starting a full clear and scan of my music library.

I don't want to forget... congratulations to the SD folks... this is a big step in the right direction.

Mark Lanctot
2008-01-08, 07:27
can anyone tell me if the controller will be able to be used (or possibly modified) as a universal remote (to access the CD player, etc.)?

Apologies if this has been answered already but I'm just going through this thread - there are no official plans to include universal remote functionality in the SBC. It could be possible for someone in the open-source community to make one but its usefulness would be hampered by the lack of hard buttons on the SBC, most of it would have to be done by scrolling through options on the screen.

Square peg, round hole. On the bright side, Logitech Harmony was looking at the server software formerly known as Jive so there might be a Harmony universal remote in the future that works like an SBC but could also be used as a universal remote.

Mark Lanctot
2008-01-08, 07:41
The new commander look to me as a mere wifi micro PDA, ideally
one could control any streaming media server with
any form of computing device with communication facility
(it could be my macbook, a bluetooth phone, a wifi phone, a pda or what people calle a smart phone).

Well is that really usefull ?

The SBC is dedicated and loads pages much faster than the SC web interface running over a PDA.


The advantage of using something else than what logitec sell is that it can be repaired.

Where did you hear the SB isn't repairable? Outside of warranty, it isn't free to repair of course ($90 US) but it is repairable.

Rick B.
2008-01-08, 07:46
On the bright side, Logitech Harmony was looking at the server software formerly known as Jive so there might be a Harmony universal remote in the future that works like an SBC but could also be used as a universal remote.

Hope springs eternal! This is what I have really been waiting for ever since Logitech entered the picture.

Skunk
2008-01-08, 07:59
I wanna hold my beer in one hand and the remote in the other. I want to be able to throw it to my wife with one hand without spilling any of my beer, so the remote has to be sturdy.

While throwing probably isn't a good idea -unless she's a better than average catcher- it is actually pretty sturdy. My beta unit passed the drop test a couple times when I woke up after having fallen asleep with it on my chest. The noise it made hitting and sliding across the hardwood floor scared me, but everything was fine.

peter
2008-01-08, 08:02
cparker wrote:
> Well maybe I missed something amazing about this, but it just seems to
> be a big clunky remote, based on a early ipod design but just large
> enough to ensure they can emboss a logo on it. What happened to
> elegance in design?? :s
>
> Buying a Nokia 770 would do the same but with more features right?
>

No, it wouldn't.
You are indeed missing the point.

Regards,
Peter

Mark Lanctot
2008-01-08, 08:13
Regarding Softsqueeze... anyone knows if the Controller is capable of interfacing with it?

Well, SoftSqueeze behaves like a hardware player, and the controller can access all hardware players, so it should be possible.

I haven't tried it with the beta version of the controller though.

Mark Lanctot
2008-01-08, 08:16
Adding just some simple IR learning would be sufficient for my purposes.

Unfortunately the IR hardware in the controller is an emitter only, no receiver so no learning function.

However the SB (not the new receiver) has a learning function through the IRBlaster plugin so there is a convoluted pathway involving an SB, IRBlaster and an as-yet undeveloped universal remote plugin. ;-)

Mark Lanctot
2008-01-08, 09:30
Oh I should say - congratulations to the Logitech SMS people!

This does seem to answer several user requests - a "headless" SB, a lower-priced SB (but without cutting corners) and a graphical wifi remote, with a colour screen that displays album art.

rblnr
2008-01-08, 09:41
How's the jitter performance of the SBR vs. the SB3/2?

Mitch Harding
2008-01-08, 09:41
Not currently. From all reports the SBC interface is far more
responsive than the web interface (via Nokia 770 or otherwise). Many
people have reported that the N770 works, but is a little
unresponsive.

On Jan 8, 2008 8:14 AM, cparker
<cparker.32vfaz1199801701 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> Buying a Nokia 770 would do the same but with more features right?
>

Mitch Harding
2008-01-08, 09:47
I believe Sean has said that the digital path is basically identical,
although there are differences in PSUs.

FWIW, the spec page lists less than 50 ps (standard deviation) for
both SB3 and SBR.

On Jan 8, 2008 10:41 AM, rblnr
<rblnr.32vm901199810703 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> How's the jitter performance of the SBR vs. the SB3/2?
>
>
> --
> rblnr
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> rblnr's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4504
>
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41813
>
>

tamanaco
2008-01-08, 10:12
Unfortunately the IR hardware in the controller is an emitter only, no receiver so no learning function.

However the SB (not the new receiver) has a learning function through the IRBlaster plugin so there is a convoluted pathway involving an SB, IRBlaster and an as-yet undeveloped universal remote plugin. ;-)

Hmmmm, I get it... "Universal Remote Plugin" This could be the ticket I'm looking for. SD via Logitech should have access to Harmony's IR codes from the vendor's that their remotes already support. (I'm assuming that the IR emitter in the Controller supports such Harmony codes and that these codes are not propretary stuff) SD gets access to the IR codes for receivers and provides them to the Remote plugin developers to incorporte them in their plugins.

Just to clarify, a plugin can be implemented so that it can control my receiver via the SB Controller IR using menus accessible thru the thumbwheel. Eg. scroll to Receiver, Select, On/Off, click Ok... Select, Volume, turn the wheel slowly to the righ to raise the volume.. etc, etc. If this is possible, I won't have to wait until Logitech/Harmony incorporates Jive in their remotes... Heck, we don't even know for sure if they "plan" to incorporate it.

Mark Lanctot
2008-01-08, 10:17
Heck, we don't even know for sure if they "plan" to incorporate it.

They've said pretty clearly that they do not plan to incorporate it. The SBC is not a universal remote. It lacks the hard buttons and doesn't have a touchscreen.

This doesn't mean that the community can't develop a "universal remote plugin" for it, but access to Harmony's IR code database would be iffy.

Robin Bowes
2008-01-08, 10:50
Skunk wrote:
> Tradewind25;255864 Wrote:
>> I have a Squeezebox 3. I wish to add one of the new Receivers in
>> another room, and ideally synchronize the two.
>> Can I achieve this with my current SB3 remote, or would I also need to
>> purchase one of the new Controllers?
>> (I think I read that the Receiver requires the Controller to configure
>> network security?)
>
> The Receiver does require the Controller for setup:
> http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=255195&postcount=80

At the moment, it does....

R.

radish
2008-01-08, 11:07
They've said pretty clearly that they do not plan to incorporate it. The SBC is not a universal remote. It lacks the hard buttons and doesn't have a touchscreen.



Sure, they're unlikely to incorporate Harmony functionality in the SBC, but I don't see why they couldn't build a new Harmony with Jive built in. That could be rather sweet.

tforce
2008-01-08, 11:16
Will the Duet be available in stores or only on the internet?

mrfantasy
2008-01-08, 11:22
Well, SoftSqueeze behaves like a hardware player, and the controller can access all hardware players, so it should be possible.

I haven't tried it with the beta version of the controller though.

It works fine at least in the Windows SDK version of the Controller interface.

dean
2008-01-08, 11:22
On Jan 8, 2008, at 10:16 AM, tforce wrote:
> Will the Duet be available in stores or only on the internet?
Duet will be available in both retail and online stores around the
world, though the specific retailers haven't been announced yet.

The individual Receiver and Controller units will also be available
worldwide, but in fewer stores.

-dean

snarlydwarf
2008-01-08, 11:28
Sure, they're unlikely to incorporate Harmony functionality in the SBC, but I don't see why they couldn't build a new Harmony with Jive built in. That could be rather sweet.

I know a couple Harmony devs are at least looking at Jive since they posted here. No idea whether they will use it or it is just playing, er, um, "research".

Mark Lanctot
2008-01-08, 13:47
I took the opportunity to add the Squeezebox Receiver here:

http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?HardwareComparison

Correct away if you see any inaccuracies. Some of it was guesswork since the SBR isn't officially released.

wdrazek
2008-01-08, 14:12
For those who claim Duet is out of touch with real world pricing in the US, consider:

The Duet provides what the SB3 does, but has a vastly improved color screen handheld remote control for $100 more at $399. Sonos charges $900 for its base system, but does include a low power built in digital amp.

When it's time to expand to other rooms, here is the breakdown:

Sonos controller: $399 Sonos Z-80: $349 Total: $749
Duet Controller: $299 Duet Receiver: $150 Pkg price: $399

So, Sonos is $750 per additional room whereas Duet is $399.

The pricing here is VERY real world and I say kudos to SB.

ds2021
2008-01-08, 14:15
So, Sonos is $750 per additional room whereas Duet is $399.

As it does not appear that you must have a separate controller for each receiver, the cost per additional room is actually $150 (149).

Mike Siegel
2008-01-08, 14:36
I saw it asked elsewhere, but didn't see a response: Is that a headphone jack on the Controller?




I'm happy to announce that we have launched the all new Squeezebox™ Duet!

Squeezebox™ Duet lets you listen to the music you love in any room in your home. Access millions of songs — even when your computer is off. The multi-room controller with 2.4-inch color display makes it easy to browse, select, and play songs from your personal collection, Internet radio — even online music services.

A convenient scroll wheel, simple menus and intuitive buttons make navigation a breeze. Advanced 802.11g technology eliminates the need to string wires. Enjoy crystal clear, CD-quality audio on your home theater system, your bedroom stereo, your kitchen mini-system — anywhere you have audio gear.

Check out the details:
http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_duet.html

Press Release (once they get it up):
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/172/4180

Some really really big pics for those who want them (The LCD is simulated):
http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_beauty_large.jpg
http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_top_large.jpg
http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_ray_large.jpg
http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_ray_shuck_large.jpg


Mike

Mitch Harding
2008-01-08, 14:41
There is a headphone jack on the controller.

On Jan 8, 2008 3:36 PM, Mike Siegel
<Mike.Siegel.32vzwo1199828403 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
> jack on the Controller?
>
>
>
> mvalera;254681 Wrote:
> > I'm happy to announce that we have launched the all new Squeezebox™
> > Duet!
> >
> > Squeezebox™ Duet lets you listen to the music you love in any room in
> > your home. Access millions of songs — even when your computer is off.
> > The multi-room controller with 2.4-inch color display makes it easy to
> > browse, select, and play songs from your personal collection, Internet
> > radio — even online music services.
> >
> > A convenient scroll wheel, simple menus and intuitive buttons make
> > navigation a breeze. Advanced 802.11g technology eliminates the need to
> > string wires. Enjoy crystal clear, CD-quality audio on your home theater
> > system, your bedroom stereo, your kitchen mini-system — anywhere you
> > have audio gear.
> >
> > Check out the details:
> > http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_duet.html
> >
> > Press Release (once they get it up):
> > http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/172/4180
> >
> > Some really really big pics for those who want them (The LCD is
> > simulated):
> > http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_beauty_large.jpg
> > http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_top_large.jpg
> > http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_ray_large.jpg
> > http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_ray_shuck_large.jpg
> >
> >
> > Mike
>
>
> --
> Mike Siegel
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mike Siegel's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=466
>
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41813
>
>
>

erland
2008-01-08, 14:42
To those that likes the SqueezeBox Controller to be a universal remove I can honestly say that I had the exact same idea until I felt the Jive prototype.

After having the chance to use the Jive prototype I've changed my feelings a bit. A Harmony remote based on Jive software would be really great, but my feeling is that it will never be as great as SqueezeBox Controller to control the SqueezeBox players. The reason is that the SqueezeBox Controller is optimized to control a SqueezeBox player and Harmony universal remote won't be. The Harmony remote on the other hand will be optimized for controlling several types of equipement which the SqueezeBox Controlder won't be.

My feeling is that the optimal solution will be:
1. A Harmony remote which is used for power on your system and doing simple things like launching a random playlist.
2. A dedicated SqueezeBox Controller for browsing your library when you look for something to listen to.

If you like one device to solve both these problems it will be a compromise that isn't really good at anything. Using two devices like this will not be a major problem for me, the reason is that in most cases would be able to do what I want from the Harmony remote. In some cases when I get inspired and like to find something different to listen to, I'll pickup the SqueezeBox Controller and browse my library. The SqueezeBox Controller would be a replacement for the laptop which I today use when I like to browse and search my library when I don't now exactly what I'm looking for.

nicky6
2008-01-08, 15:12
Jim, thanks for the answer! I didn't want to try locate the info myself in the JHive-threads and besides, I think it's good for others to read in this duet-thread instead of trying to search for the info and perhaps not finding it. So thanks to you and bklaas for clearing this out. And good to see that it was a quick response from you Jim. Not often that the marketing dept answers that quick in companies. I myself have been working at TelCo and TelCoOps as a manager at both marketing, tech and customer care and unfortunatly it's seldom that e.g. product managers participate in direct contact with their audience/customers. Kudos! :)

Regarding the remote, I just love the toggle wheel or whatever it's called. I've been using B&O DECT-phones for quite a while and it's sooo convenient and quick to use. So people who are implying that a Harmony and the controller wouldn't be possible to merge, think again. Add a scroll/toggle-wheel to the Harmony and you're there. Use that wheel to scroll through menus at any type of device, instead of clicking like mad on the up/down buttons.

Regarding the controller, I understand it had the forward-button to the top right, but the back-button to the low-left of the scrollwheel, correct? For me, that's a weird setup. My 0.02$-suggestion is to move the back-button to the direct opposite of the forward-button. That's more logical. And the name being Logitech... well, go ahead ;)


Regarding the sound quality, yes, I agree that the history of SD has shown it has delivered. But the reason I asked was two-fold. First, there's a change from BB to that Wolxxxx (sorry, can't see my previous post and am too lazy to open a new browser window) DAC and I have NO idea what that means in real life, second comparing the price of the SB3 and the receiver, I notice a 50% price decrease. Could really the VDC(?) screen, headphone jack and change of DAC really make it possible to decrease the price that much if either 1) the SB3 was overpriced 2) the new DAC is much cheaper because it's of less good sound/build/whatever quality or 3) since Logitech has become quite a big company since I sold computer equipment back in 1991, they also have really good batch prices cmopared to what SD had.

Also, I want to say that comparing the Duet with the Sonos is not really fair. The Sonos does after all come with an included/integrated amplifier. Something I'd really want to see packaged with the Duet as well, either integrated or in a bundle. After all, buying a multi-room solution for people, or for first-time buyers for just one odd room, maybe the bedroom, it would be nice to have it all at the fingertips on the websites and not having to run around on all sites trying to find a matchinf amp. Quicker call-to-action if there was an amp-package as well, I think. Still, just my 0.02$ ;) The Sonos is much easier to setup for the iliterated(?) since it's packaged nicely. Too bad for them it's pricetag is huge for the average-Joe, who would be better off with the Duet if it was a more plug-and-play solution

That all being said, I'm really happy to see this kind of product finally appear. Sure in my mind it still lacks some small details like the possibility to wake up an amp (if I've understood it correctly), the need of the controller to be able to setup the receiver and it should be available at least in one package as a turn-key-solution.

May I make a wish: the next version is possible to use with the old remote (i.e. IR-receiver on the Receiver. Receiver could then be hidden away but have an IR-eye somewhere with an IR-blaster that controls the Receiver) or downloaded IR-codes to any other decent remote. The 2nd thing: To be able to set this thing up without the controller.

If the last part would be possible (set it up without the controller) and someone pursuades me the sound quality is as good as the SB3, I'd buy one for each room in my house immediatly! 149 USD is just too good...

Keep up the inventions guys!

Mike Siegel
2008-01-08, 15:38
Is the Controller basically a handheld receiver that doubles as a controller for different SB devices?



There is a headphone jack on the controller.

On Jan 8, 2008 3:36 PM, Mike Siegel
<Mike.Siegel.32vzwo1199828403 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
> jack on the Controller?
>
>
>
> mvalera;254681 Wrote:
> > I'm happy to announce that we have launched the all new Squeezebox™
> > Duet!
> >
> > Squeezebox™ Duet lets you listen to the music you love in any room in
> > your home. Access millions of songs — even when your computer is off.
> > The multi-room controller with 2.4-inch color display makes it easy to
> > browse, select, and play songs from your personal collection, Internet
> > radio — even online music services.
> >
> > A convenient scroll wheel, simple menus and intuitive buttons make
> > navigation a breeze. Advanced 802.11g technology eliminates the need to
> > string wires. Enjoy crystal clear, CD-quality audio on your home theater
> > system, your bedroom stereo, your kitchen mini-system — anywhere you
> > have audio gear.
> >
> > Check out the details:
> > http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_duet.html
> >
> > Press Release (once they get it up):
> > http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/172/4180
> >
> > Some really really big pics for those who want them (The LCD is
> > simulated):
> > http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_beauty_large.jpg
> > http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_top_large.jpg
> > http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_ray_large.jpg
> > http://www.slimdevices.com/images/jive/jive_ray_shuck_large.jpg
> >
> >
> > Mike
>
>
> --
> Mike Siegel
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mike Siegel's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=466
>
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=41813
>
>
>

Mitch G
2008-01-08, 15:48
To those that likes the SqueezeBox Controller to be a universal remove I can honestly say that I had the exact same idea until I felt the Jive prototype.

After having the chance to use the Jive prototype I've changed my feelings a bit. A Harmony remote based on Jive software would be really great, but my feeling is that it will never be as great as SqueezeBox Controller to control the SqueezeBox players. The reason is that the SqueezeBox Controller is optimized to control a SqueezeBox player and Harmony universal remote won't be. The Harmony remote on the other hand will be optimized for controlling several types of equipement which the SqueezeBox Controlder won't be.

My feeling is that the optimal solution will be:
1. A Harmony remote which is used for power on your system and doing simple things like launching a random playlist.
2. A dedicated SqueezeBox Controller for browsing your library when you look for something to listen to.


I'm not really disagreeing with you, but it sure seems to me like the 3-axis accelerometer could make up for missing buttons in a given context. Maybe it wouldn't make a perfect universal controller, but it seems like it could work well for daily-use.
But, I guess we won't know until some folks start hacking out code for the thing. Who knows? We might all be surprised by how useful the SBC ends up being.



Mitch

Mitch Harding
2008-01-08, 16:04
My understanding is that the headphone jack currently cannot be used
to play streaming music, but it sounds like that will be enabled
eventually.

On Jan 8, 2008 4:38 PM, Mike Siegel
<Mike.Siegel.32w2oq1199832004 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
> Is the Controller basically a handheld receiver that doubles as a
> controller for different SB devices?

oyvine
2008-01-09, 02:38
Hi,
this new controller seems nice. I currently have a SB2 setup at home, but find the display hard to read from some distance. I also like the album art display. I have a few questions:

- Is it possible to control SoftSqueeze from the squeezebox controller?
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?SoftSqueeze

- Why dont you make a kitchen radio/music player for me? :) (Henry kloss style, only buttons and display, no remote, good mono speaker (Fostex FE107E or similiar) I want to listen to internet radio and my music collection in my kitchen as well. I would pay about $400 for such a device I think.

If it is possible to control Softsqueeze from the controller, I might be able to take the SB2 out of my main system and hack together my own kitchen player from its parts.

best regards,
Øyvin Eikeland

mherger
2008-01-09, 02:53
> - Is it possible to control SoftSqueeze from the squeezebox
> controller?

Sure.

> - Why dont you make a kitchen radio/music player for me?

Why questions are hard to answer...

Michael

Siduhe
2008-01-09, 03:03
Not sure if this is the right place to post, but will the final version of the controller support MusicIP mixes? It's the one thing missing from my current Jive install which keeps me using the supplied remote.

ezkcdude
2008-01-09, 05:37
Will the controller be able to turn the receiver on/off? I have a jive remote now, and one of the things that bothers me is that it can't turn the SB3 on (or off). I have to use the IR remote or SlimServer.

autopilot
2008-01-09, 05:44
Will the controller be able to turn the receiver on/off? I have a jive remote now, and one of the things that bothers me is that it can't turn the SB3 on (or off). I have to use the IR remote or SlimServer.

Really? I can with my beta Jive remote, i have been able to from day zero - its right there on the main home menu - or do you mean something else?

kdf
2008-01-09, 08:33
On 9-Jan-08, at 4:37 AM, ezkcdude wrote:

>
> Will the controller be able to turn the receiver on/off? I have a jive
> remote now, and one of the things that bothers me is that it can't
> turn
> the SB3 on (or off). I have to use the IR remote or SlimServer.

You should have an option to turn the player off in the main menu of
the Controller once you choose a player.
-kdf

JulianL
2008-01-09, 10:19
I'm currently using a Dell Axim as a dedicated controller for my SB3 and it really is a dedicated device, I have no extra software installed and just have the IE home page set to <SlimServerIP>/Handheld. It looks to me as if, after reading all 20 pages of this thread, the new Duet controller (DC) might work better for me.

I really only have one serious issue with my PDA solution. OK, the interface is a bit slow, but the real issue is that when I pick up the Axim and turn it on to change the music then there is a 5-10 second delay before the Axim re-registers onto my wireless network. If I've understood various posts here correctly then this shouldn't be an issue with the DC as it never disconnects itself, it just goes into a power saving mode but keeps the WiFi connected. Is this correct? Does this mean that as soon as I pick up the DC I will have instance access, much like browsing with the IR remote on my SB3 right now?

Dean said that under constant use the battery life is about 3 hours. What is the life on power-save mode? What I'm really looking for is the equivalent of the cellphone talk-time and standby-time figures. Dean's 3 hour figure is essentially a talk-time figure. What is the standby-time figure? I'm trying to work out whether the DC would survive (battery-life wise!) an 8 hour party without being put back in the charger. Parties are when the connect delay on every switchon of my Axim becomes most annoying because non-technical guests aren't expecting it.

My other question is when will we get more details of the browsing experience? The screenshots on the web site only show a now-playing screen and the Engadget video isn't zoomed in on the screen when the reporter is browsing so it is hard to know what the interface will be like. For what it's worth, here is what I'm hoping for (my dream interface)

I mostly browse by artist and then album and, with 6.5.4, have started browsing albums by artwork. Ideally I would like to be able to configure the options on the home page (top level menu) much like an iPod so that one of my top-level items is Artists (i.e. Browse by Artists). Selecting that menu option then takes me to the alphabetical list of artists (maybe with some A-Z tabs to move quickly through a big list). When I select an artist I then have the option (depending on how I have it configured) to either show a list of that Artist's album titles or to show the albums via artwork, probably a scrollable list of one on screen at a time with the title below it. An option of 4 thumbnails per screen with title beneath would also be good. In all cases I would want the option to sort an artist's albums in date order (like the current SlimServer can do). I would then want the ability to either play an entire album or drill down to the track list to play or enqueue on a track-by-track basis.

Is the browse-by-artist functionality able to offer an experience anything like the above? If not then when will there be screenshots and/or video/flash demos on the site?

- Julian

Tradewind25
2008-01-09, 11:20
...the glass-half-full way of looking at that is you can get both for only $100 more than the price of an Sb3...

There again, the glass half empty arguement is that I already have a type of receiver and a type of controller - they are just called an SB3 and its remote control. All want to do is to add another, low-cost, receiver. Who's to say that, were I to purchase the new receiver and controller and then later wanted a third device, that the Duet would not then itself be obsolete and I would some sort of "third generation" device?

I just think it a shame that Logitech appear to have effectively made the SB3 obsolete. What is the point of having an SB3 if it lacks the expandibility of the Duet??

peter
2008-01-09, 11:29
Tradewind25 wrote:
> Skunk;255938 Wrote:
>
>> ...the glass-half-full way of looking at that is you can get both for
>> only $100 more than the price of an Sb3...
>>
>
> There again, the glass half empty arguement is that I already have a
> type of receiver and a type of controller - they are just called an SB3
> and its remote control. All want to do is to add another, low-cost,
> receiver. Who's to say that, were I to purchase the new receiver and
> controller and then later wanted a third device, that the Duet would
> not then itself be obsolete and I would some sort of "third generation"
> device?
>
> I just think it a shame that Logitech appear to have effectively made
> the SB3 obsolete. What is the point of having an SB3 if it lacks the
> expandibility of the Duet??
>

The SB3 and the Duet have exactly the same expandability. I own a first
generation device (the SliMP3) and it's just as expandable as the SBR.
It also works just as well with the new controller. Nothing SD has ever
made is obsolete yet AFAIK. Well, perhaps slimserver 1.0 ;)

Regards,
Peter

aubuti
2008-01-09, 11:38
What is the point of having an SB3 if it lacks the expandibility of the Duet??
As Peter has pointed out, the expandability of the SB3 and the SBR (Squeezebox receiver) are identical. Why else have an SB3? Some people don't want to spend the money on the SBC (the new SB Controller). Some people want to see what's playing on the SB screen, whether they buy an SBC or not.

If you only want to add an inexpensive receiver, then sit tight until the SBR can be configured without an SBC. SD/Logi hasn't promised this, but the hints are strong and the system is sufficiently open that I expect someone will implement it.

kdf
2008-01-09, 12:10
Quoting Tradewind25
<Tradewind25.32xljn1199903101 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:


> I just think it a shame that Logitech appear to have effectively made
> the SB3 obsolete. What is the point of having an SB3 if it lacks the
> expandibility of the Duet??

There is no obsolescence, and the SB3 is as expandable as it's always been.
I personally have 2SB2s, 1SB3, a Slimp3, an SBG, 2 Transporters, and a
Duet (contributing code does have its perks). They all play well
together and if I had any more rooms in the house (or wall sockets for
that matter) I'm sure I could easily expand by adding more. But now,
there is option of adding units at $150each if the option fits. It's
about choice. Fair enough not to like Duet, but that doesn't take
away from the choices you already had.

The argument that the Receiver is not an option because it requires at
least one Controller is only valid from an 'official release'
perspective. A community effort (perhaps already underway as we
speak? ;) is all that's required to get around that requirement.

-kdf

kdf
2008-01-09, 12:13
Quoting Peter <landen-slimp (AT) frg (DOT) eur.nl>:

> Well, perhaps slimserver 1.0 ;)
>
I'll do you one better and suggest that on most days, SlimServer or
SqueezeCenter is obsolete by the time the next nightly build comes out
:)

My slimp3 still works as it did on day one. In fact, thanks to the
software growth, it does a lot more than it used to.

-kdf

Mitch Harding
2008-01-09, 12:14
The point is that the SB3 has a display on every unit. I don't see
how it has been made obsolete...

On Jan 9, 2008 12:20 PM, Tradewind25
<Tradewind25.32xljn1199903101 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
> I just think it a shame that Logitech appear to have effectively made
> the SB3 obsolete. What is the point of having an SB3 if it lacks the
> expandibility of the Duet??

Phil Leigh
2008-01-09, 12:37
There again, the glass half empty arguement is that I already have a type of receiver and a type of controller - they are just called an SB3 and its remote control. All want to do is to add another, low-cost, receiver. Who's to say that, were I to purchase the new receiver and controller and then later wanted a third device, that the Duet would not then itself be obsolete and I would some sort of "third generation" device?

I just think it a shame that Logitech appear to have effectively made the SB3 obsolete. What is the point of having an SB3 if it lacks the expandibility of the Duet??

I'm sorry but that's twaddle. The Receiver is basically an SB3 without a display. The Controller (at the moment) is a fancy remote. You can control an SB with a Controller (which is the expandable bit). So there is NO difference in exopndability and nothing... NOTHING... has been made obsolete!

autopilot
2008-01-09, 12:45
I'm currently using a Dell Axim as a dedicated controller for my SB3 and it really is a dedicated device, I have no extra software installed and just have the IE home page set to <SlimServerIP>/Handheld. It looks to me as if, after reading all 20 pages of this thread, the new Duet controller (DC) might work better for me.

I really only have one serious issue with my PDA solution. OK, the interface is a bit slow, but the real issue is that when I pick up the Axim and turn it on to change the music then there is a 5-10 second delay before the Axim re-registers onto my wireless network. If I've understood various posts here correctly then this shouldn't be an issue with the DC as it never disconnects itself, it just goes into a power saving mode but keeps the WiFi connected. Is this correct? Does this mean that as soon as I pick up the DC I will have instance access, much like browsing with the IR remote on my SB3 right now?

Dean said that under constant use the battery life is about 3 hours. What is the life on power-save mode? What I'm really looking for is the equivalent of the cellphone talk-time and standby-time figures. Dean's 3 hour figure is essentially a talk-time figure. What is the standby-time figure? I'm trying to work out whether the DC would survive (battery-life wise!) an 8 hour party without being put back in the charger. Parties are when the connect delay on every switchon of my Axim becomes most annoying because non-technical guests aren't expecting it.

My other question is when will we get more details of the browsing experience? The screenshots on the web site only show a now-playing screen and the Engadget video isn't zoomed in on the screen when the reporter is browsing so it is hard to know what the interface will be like. For what it's worth, here is what I'm hoping for (my dream interface)

I mostly browse by artist and then album and, with 6.5.4, have started browsing albums by artwork. Ideally I would like to be able to configure the options on the home page (top level menu) much like an iPod so that one of my top-level items is Artists (i.e. Browse by Artists). Selecting that menu option then takes me to the alphabetical list of artists (maybe with some A-Z tabs to move quickly through a big list). When I select an artist I then have the option (depending on how I have it configured) to either show a list of that Artist's album titles or to show the albums via artwork, probably a scrollable list of one on screen at a time with the title below it. An option of 4 thumbnails per screen with title beneath would also be good. In all cases I would want the option to sort an artist's albums in date order (like the current SlimServer can do). I would then want the ability to either play an entire album or drill down to the track list to play or enqueue on a track-by-track basis.

Is the browse-by-artist functionality able to offer an experience anything like the above? If not then when will there be screenshots and/or video/flash demos on the site?

- Julian

So far I have used a PDA, Nokia Smart Phone, Play Station Portable, N800 (briefly) and laptop - all with various web browsers, web skins and stand alone apps. I now have been using an SBC for 4 months or so as part of the beta test and i say that as a Squeezebox remote the SB Controler wins hands down. And i honestly dont say that with any Bias or fanboyism at all.

The reasons it beats all the other devices for me are;

1) Always on wifi - because it mostly in the dock wifi is always on - other devices like the PSP, PDA etc constantly lose the connection when idle - it takes a few seconds to log on and drives me mad when i just want to flick tracks but have wait.

2) Ergonomics - the SBC can be used one handed, in fact it works best this way. Most other devices need two hands. I prefer to have a beer hand free at all times. I also just feels right using a remote in one hand.

3) Start up time - with say my PSP, i not only had to switch it on, log on to the network, but i also had to load the web browser. With the SBC it's just there - i grab it and its ready to use before my eyes even get chance to focus on it.

4) Knowing where it is - I know where it is - next to my sofa in the dock, not in the car or next to the bed, or being used by someone else for something else.

5) The dock - is a good wieght and lose so i can grab the SBC and drop it back with speed and ease with one drunken hand. The other docks i had for my PDA, PDA etc had to be clicked in with two hands and to much concentration to make me instinctively want to dock it after use.

6) Fool proof, easy to use and WAF - I can let my mates have free reign without worrying about them exiting the browser or something.

7) Speed of UI - very sluggish on most devices, often worse when using a NAS. Once the album art is cached it's lightening fast. Thats no to say it's perfect in the beta firmware, it's one of my main complaints, but we are told its being fix right now.

Of course whether or not you think its justifies the extra cost is up to you, i'm not 100% sure it does, but just looking at it from the view of it being used as a remote, the SBC is the nuts. But if i had to chose the N810 would probably get my money first - but i would want a SBC too.

wtfaidh
2008-01-09, 13:13
So much talk about the interface/controller. My primary concern is audio quality (I own 2 SB3's but ditched the transporter).

Is the Wolfson DAC (does anybody know the exact type ?) an improvement or quite the contrary... ?

Is there more to say about audio quality on this product ? Because if it's on the same level as an SB3 or worse I do not welcome this particular kind of innovation...

Regards, Eric.

peter
2008-01-09, 13:20
wtfaidh wrote:
> So much talk about the interface/controller. My primary concern is audio
> quality (I own 2 SB3's but ditched the transporter).
>
> Is the Wolfson DAC (does anybody know the exact type ?) an improvement
> or quite the contrary... ?
>
> Is there more to say about audio quality on this product ? Because if
> it's on the same level as an SB3 or worse I do not welcome this
> particular kind of innovation...
>

Audio quality is hardly a subjective matter. Whole flamewars can be
fought over this. SD claims it's the same quality. Please buy one and
let us know what you think so the flamewars may start ;)

Regards,
Peter

Ben Sandee
2008-01-09, 13:22
On Jan 9, 2008 2:13 PM, wtfaidh <
wtfaidh.32xqmz1199909701 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:

>
> So much talk about the interface/controller. My primary concern is audio
> quality (I own 2 SB3's but ditched the transporter).
>
> Is the Wolfson DAC (does anybody know the exact type ?) an improvement
> or quite the contrary... ?
>
> Is there more to say about audio quality on this product ? Because if
> it's on the same level as an SB3 or worse I do not welcome this
> particular kind of innovation...
>

I'm confused, you own the SB3's but you think their audio quality is
sub-par. You elected not to go with the Transporter. Do you feel it is
worse?

Keep in mind the SBR is a $150 component so it is definitely not priced for
audiophiles. Transporter will work just fine with the SBC and that's the
best audio quality these guys have to offer.

Ben

wtfaidh
2008-01-09, 13:36
The transporter is, IMHO, to expensive compared to a same priced CD player. The SB3 is superb in everyday-easy-to-use.

For me improving SBx audio quality would make the difference, not the interface...

Phil Leigh
2008-01-09, 13:36
From what has been stated so far it would appear that the sound quality of the Receiver and the SB3 are pretty much identical.
So this is not about sound quality, it is about "user experience" and operational functionality. Nothing wrong with that.

The Transporter is about sound quality. Alternatively, use a receiver or SB3 with a DAC.

It is theoretically possible (but so far unknown) that the removal of the VFD and the change in power supply arrangements MIGHT make an improvement in sound quality for the Receiver over an SB3...either as a digital transport or as an analogue playback device or both.

Until they are in the wild and have been DBT'd we won't really know.

Mitch Harding
2008-01-09, 13:51
The DAC measures slightly worse, from what has been written, but most
people have said it sounds quite good.

The digital path is identical, so if you're using your own DAC, it
should be equivalent.

But if audio quality in the analog domain is your primary concern, I
would suggest a Transporter anyway.

On Jan 9, 2008 2:13 PM, wtfaidh
<wtfaidh.32xqmz1199909701 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
> Is there more to say about audio quality on this product ? Because if
> it's on the same level as an SB3 or worse I do not welcome this
> particular kind of innovation...

wtfaidh
2008-01-09, 13:57
wtfaidh wrote:[color=blue]

Audio quality is hardly a subjective matter. Whole flamewars can be
fought over this. SD claims it's the same quality. Please buy one and
let us know what you think so the flamewars may start ;)

Regards,
Peter

True, and I will buy one btw (when available) just out of curiosity, but I will't not share to prevent any discussion/flamewar on this forum ;-)

thing-fish
2008-01-09, 13:58
The reasons it beats all the other devices for me are;

1) Always on wifi - because it mostly in the dock wifi is always on - other devices like the PSP, PDA etc constantly lose the connection when idle - it takes a few seconds to log on and drives me mad when i just want to flick tracks but have wait.

3) Start up time - with say my PSP, i not only had to switch it on, log on to the network, but i also had to load the web browser. With the SBC it's just there - i grab it and its ready to use before my eyes even get chance to focus on it.

100% with you on that. I have used my Nintendo DS Browser to control the Squeezebox a few times, and it was painful for both of the reasons you specify there. You run into #3 when you start, but even after everything is loaded, you run into #1; after it times out you have to not only get back on the network but then refresh the page!

Note that even though those were dealbreakers for the most part, it WAS fun to use the DS to control the music. It actually looked good and was quite operational, but only while it was a live connection.

Fifer
2008-01-09, 14:23
The transporter is, IMHO, to expensive compared to a same priced CD player. The SB3 is superb in everyday-easy-to-use.

I'm not sure I understand this comment. You are saying that the £1300 TP is too expensive to compare with a £1300 CD player? Why?

CardinalFang
2008-01-09, 14:23
Note that even though those were dealbreakers for the most part, it WAS fun to use the DS to control the music. It actually looked good and was quite operational, but only while it was a live connection.

I've tried the PSP and smartphones and also suffered the same way. There's abit of a geeky wow factor at first and the graphics look good, but then the clunkiness started to really annoy me.

The controller is by far the best way to date to control squeezeboxes to date, it's still frustrating at times and I think overengineered, but from spending some time discussing it, that seems to be the intent; to provide a platform for developers as much as a consumer product. Not the way I would have done it, I would have put a lot more focus on core features like library search, playlist composition and ultra-slick navigation and completely left out screensavers, clocks, accelerometers, DACs and other novelties, but hey, it's not my company :-)

After spending some time considering it and a lot of the comments, I'm starting to realise that it's version 2.0 of the controller that is going to be the killer. This one is a learning curve and it'll only be after the software settles down, the longer term usability and hardware niggles emerge and get fixed, that that it'll really be the mutts nuts.

BetterDAC
2008-01-09, 14:35
I really like this new product announcement, but there are some things I wish they would improve on.

The good:
They have had an obvious needed for a hand-held controller with a visual screen for quite a while. They have delivered on that nicely with the new SB Controller.

The Duet is perfectly priced for those of us that want to add more devices to other rooms. It’s much better priced than the Sonos in that regard, and is catching up on ease of use.

The Duet compliments rather than replaces the SB3. I can’t understand those who think the SB3 has been made obsolete. The SB3 is still the right choice when you want a VDU, but if not then go Duet.

Needs improvement
I think they should have enabled the embedded DAC within the controller so that we could use it for a headphone, or similar. To leave it to the “community of developers” is more reflective of the start-up roots of SD than of the professional capabilities of Logitech and their very well engineered Harmony line of universal remotes. The price of the SB Controller is a little steep because of all the hidden hardware inside, so it does bite to have to pay for something that doesn’t yet work, made worse by the fact that Slim isn’t responsible for making it work…the “community” is. I’d rather buy the DAC from the community then, rather than pay for it now.

Let’s hope the Harmony guys pitch in to help out. At this early stage of the acquisition, I wasn’t expecting a Harmony remote controller to work for these devices, because product plans have long lead times, but I do hope that the guys at Logitech are working on Harmony to support Slim Devices in the future. They will need to provide support both to keep up with the competition and to get the full benefits of the merger synergies.

The Wolfson DAC is a disappointment for those of us that like audiophile sound but prefer the convenience of digital streaming. I use an external DAC in my studio, but also wanted to extend my Squeeze devices to other rooms, so I was hoping for an upgrade in the DAC for standalone use. I think most of us were hoping for an upgrade in the DAC that at least included support for 24x96kHz. There are only about 5 major DAC manufacturers, and if you look at the prices for their circuits they are not expensive. So for the high price of the controller, Slim could have easily upgraded the quality of the DAC. Unlike their other devices, SD didn’t even bother to name what Wolfson DAC they are using, perhaps because they know it’s nothing to brag about?

Here’s a list of Wolfson DACs, followed by a price list from Analog Devices so you can see how little DAC circuits really cost:
http://www.wolfsonmicro.com/productListings/dacs/
http://www.analog.com/en/subCat/0,2879,765%255F796%255F0%255F%255F0%255F,00.html

Slim Devices has an open source business model that appeals to people that want to extend their system and get the most out of it. I would guess that a lot of their customers have ripped their CD’s using lossless FLAC, which isn’t an effortless exercise. Thus we’d like to get the most out of our digital recordings and the DAC is the weak link right now. So for me that’s the biggest disappointment since it seems they may be targeting a different customer than us streaming audiophiles.

rtitmuss
2008-01-09, 15:13
I think they should have enabled the embedded DAC within the controller so that we could use it for a headphone, or similar. To leave it to the “community of developers” is more reflective of the start-up roots of SD than of the professional capabilities of Logitech ...

I have been meaning to comment on this for the last couple of days, this statement is actually not correct. When we started this project the objective was to first release the controller without support for the embedded DAC, and then enable playback support in a subsequent firmware. We will be working on adding the audio playback to the controller soon. This is not one of the tasks being left to the developer community, although of course we will welcome their assistance.

Richard

bigfool1956
2008-01-09, 15:15
Most of the views on the new Duet are based on us being current users. Here's a different viewpoint....

I had persuaded a colleague of mine that an SB3 would be a good purchase for him, and he was going to get one over Xmas. As it happens he didn't get round to it, so after the break I immediately showed him the new Duet on the site.

His reaction was that he was glad he hadn't bought the SB3, and that paying an extra 100 Euro was a worthwhile investment. So from this (admittedly small) sample it would appear that SD are on a winner here - and let's face it, we all want them and their products to suceed.

Mark Lanctot
2008-01-09, 15:20
The Wolfson DAC is a disappointment for those of us that like audiophile sound but prefer the convenience of digital streaming.

Why not go with the Transporter then?


Unlike their other devices, SD didn’t even bother to name what Wolfson DAC they are using, perhaps because they know it’s nothing to brag about?

From http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?HardwareComparison

SBR DAC: WM8501

SBC DAC: WM8750

It's still early days yet, it's not fair to conclude there was a concerted effort to hide it.

Skunk
2008-01-09, 15:43
Thus we’d like to get the most out of our digital recordings and the DAC is the weak link right now. So for me that’s the biggest disappointment since it seems they may be targeting a different customer than us streaming audiophiles.

I don't see it that way because most audiophiles had the SB3 connected to an external DAC anyway. Even a lot of non-audiophiles just connect it to a HT receiver, negating the quality of the built in converter.

Comparing the SB3 to Squeezebox Receiver you get the same level of jitter on the SPDIF output, the same well implemented digital volume control, and the same bit perfect digital passthrough allowing external DTS and HDCD decoding, for $150 less. All that and the gold plated connectors should make it even more appealing to audiophiles on a budget IMO. Real audiophiles should just get a Transporter anyway.

ezkcdude
2008-01-09, 16:41
On 9-Jan-08, at 4:37 AM, ezkcdude wrote:

>
> Will the controller be able to turn the receiver on/off? I have a jive
> remote now, and one of the things that bothers me is that it can't
> turn
> the SB3 on (or off). I have to use the IR remote or SlimServer.

You should have an option to turn the player off in the main menu of
the Controller once you choose a player.
-kdf

I don't. Does that mean I have an old version of the controller? I've upgraded the software several times. ???

kdf
2008-01-09, 17:08
Quoting ezkcdude <ezkcdude.32y0cz1199922301 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:

> I don't. Does that mean I have an old version of the controller? I've
> upgraded the software several times. ???

ok, so here we go...
What is the SC build number (check server settings for the version string)
What is the jive build number? See Settings->advanced->about jive

SC should, as always, be the latest nightly (16000+ now)
Jive should be 1279 (more recent builds are disabled for the duration of CES)

-kdf

bpa
2008-01-09, 17:09
Something is not right.

"Turn on/off XXX" is usually below "Choose Player" or "Extras" if you only have one player.

ezkcdude
2008-01-09, 17:24
Quoting ezkcdude <ezkcdude.32y0cz1199922301 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:

> I don't. Does that mean I have an old version of the controller? I've
> upgraded the software several times. ???

ok, so here we go...
What is the SC build number (check server settings for the version string)
What is the jive build number? See Settings->advanced->about jive

SC should, as always, be the latest nightly (16000+ now)
Jive should be 1279 (more recent builds are disabled for the duration of CES)

-kdf

SC build number? I don't see that anywhere. Under About Jive, it says the following:



Version:
1 r477
sdi@padbuild #35 Mon Sep
17 01:26:57 PDT 2007

MAC Adress:
(bunch of numbers here)

Credits:
Dean Blackletter
.
.
.


That's all it says.

mikerob
2008-01-09, 17:30
A couple of questions....

- will it be possible to generate MusicIP playlists using the Squeezebox Controller? (you can do this by holding down the play button on the current IR remote)

- planned date for UK availability of Squeezebox Controller?

Skunk
2008-01-09, 17:39
SC build number? I don't see that anywhere. Under About Jive, it says the following:


From the web interface: Settings>Status

ezkcdude
2008-01-09, 17:57
From the web interface: Settings>Status

Do you mean SlimServer or the Jive remote? Either way I can't find any menu that says "Status".

Skunk
2008-01-09, 18:04
Do you mean SlimServer or the Jive remote? Either way I can't find any menu that says "Status".

Squeezecenter. At the bottom right is settings. The link looks like a gear. In settings is status.

ezkcdude
2008-01-09, 18:09
Squeezecenter. At the bottom right is settings. The link looks like a gear. In settings is status.

I remember something about Squeezecenter, but I don't think I have it. Is that a replacement for SlimServer?

Edit: Ok, I realized SqueezeCenter is the newest version of SlimServer 7.0. I hadn't gotten around to installing it, so I'm doing so now. Let's see what happens.

IRJ
2008-01-09, 18:26
It's my understanding that a WiFi router is only as fast as the units it speaks to. i.e. If you have a "N" WiFi router and you match it with one say SBC or SBR maxing at "G" speeds then the whole system defaults to max "G" speeds. I ask because the SBC appears to be on 100% of the time.

Am I way out here?

Thanks

kdf
2008-01-09, 18:42
I remember something about Squeezecenter, but I don't think I have it. Is that a replacement for SlimServer?

Edit: Ok, I realized SqueezeCenter is the newest version of SlimServer 7.0. I hadn't gotten around to installing it, so I'm doing so now. Let's see what happens.

Part of the expectation of the Beta program was to keep up with the changes. You've missed out on a lot by staying at v477 of Jive.

There were a few tricky updates along the way, which I hope don't leave you stuck now. If you have an sdcard handy, that will probably make it easier for upgrading Jive. Make sure you do a factory reset on the controller after the upgrade (hold + while rebooting)

good luck.
-kdf

kdf
2008-01-09, 18:44
Quoting IRJ <IRJ.32y57z1199928601 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:


> Am I way out here?
>
I know that was the case with 802.11G, that having any device on the
network with 802.11B caused a dramatic slow down (although completely
down to B). I don't know what the draft N claims, but my specific
router (Belkin Pre-N) claims to be able to handle mixed G and B
without any slowdown.

-kdf

ezkcdude
2008-01-09, 18:46
Part of the expectation of the Beta program was to keep up with the changes. You've missed out on a lot by staying at v477 of Jive.

There were a few tricky updates along the way, which I hope don't leave you stuck now. If you have an sdcard handy, that will probably make it easier for upgrading Jive. Make sure you do a factory reset on the controller after the upgrade (hold + while rebooting)

good luck.
-kdf

Yeah, I was busy the last several months as I had to move for a new job. You're right about missing out on a lot, though! The improvements made are quite substantial, not the least of which is the on/off feature. Even the setup of the remote - namely, entering the passkey - has been made substantially easier. Many of the problems I had written about many months ago seemed to be solved. I think the jive remote will now be my only remote from now on.

BetterDAC
2008-01-09, 19:17
[QUOTE=Mark Lanctot;256592]Why not go with the Transporter then?


Becasue the Transporter is $2,000 and SB Receiver is $150. I was looking for a good solution for several rooms, and the Transporter isn't priced right for that. All they had to do was invest another $3 per Receiver and they could have had a much better DAC for the SB Reciver, and which would have given them a huge audiophile lead over Sonos. The SB receiver is about 2 years newer than the SB3, and given how technology advances it was natural to expect a better DAC than the SB3. And they really don't cost that much more.

BetterDAC
2008-01-09, 19:25
I don't see it that way because most audiophiles had the SB3 connected to an external DAC anyway. Even a lot of non-audiophiles just connect it to a HT receiver, negating the quality of the built in converter.

Comparing the SB3 to Squeezebox Receiver you get the same level of jitter on the SPDIF output, the same well implemented digital volume control, and the same bit perfect digital passthrough allowing external DTS and HDCD decoding, for $150 less. All that and the gold plated connectors should make it even more appealing to audiophiles on a budget IMO. Real audiophiles should just get a Transporter anyway.

I use an external DAC for my stereo system, but I am not going to make that kind of investment for multiple rooms in my house. Nor do I need that level of music in those other rooms. The SB receiver is priced perfect for multiple rooms, and they could have really improved the DAC if they had just invested a couple more $ per DAC. But given the DAC that SD chose, it seems to me that Slim assumes their target customers primarily listen to lossy compressed music.

seanadams
2008-01-09, 19:36
I use an external DAC for my stereo system, but I am not going to make that kind of investment for multiple rooms in my house. Nor do I need that level of music in those other rooms. The SB receiver is priced perfect for multiple rooms, and they could have really improved the DAC if they had just invested a couple more $ per DAC. But given the DAC that SD chose, it seems to me that Slim assumes their target customers primarily listen to lossy compressed music.

What is wrong with the DAC?

Mitch Harding
2008-01-09, 19:41
Have you had a chance to compare the SB3 DAC to the SBR DAC? How
audible is the difference?

On Jan 9, 2008 8:25 PM, BetterDAC
<BetterDAC.32y7zz1199932201 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> But given the DAC
> that SD chose, it seems to me that Slim assumes their target customers
> primarily listen to lossy compressed music.
>

ezkcdude
2008-01-09, 19:52
[QUOTE=Mark Lanctot;256592]Why not go with the Transporter then?


Becasue the Transporter is $2,000 and SB Receiver is $150. I was looking for a good solution for several rooms, and the Transporter isn't priced right for that. All they had to do was invest another $3 per Receiver and they could have had a much better DAC for the SB Reciver, and which would have given them a huge audiophile lead over Sonos. The SB receiver is about 2 years newer than the SB3, and given how technology advances it was natural to expect a better DAC than the SB3. And they really don't cost that much more.

What qualifies you to make this judgement?

kdf
2008-01-09, 19:56
On 9-Jan-08, at 5:46 PM, ezkcdude wrote:

>
> Yeah, I was busy the last several months as I had to move for a new
> job. You're right about missing out on a lot, though! The improvements
> made are quite substantial, not the least of which is the on/off
> feature.

phew. I had this vision that you were going to come back with news of
a brick :)

There are some even cooler changes coming up.

-kdf

BetterDAC
2008-01-09, 20:00
[QUOTE=BetterDAC;256641]

What qualifies you to make this judgement?

I am able to understand the difference between $2,000 and $150.

snarlydwarf
2008-01-09, 20:10
I am able to understand the difference between $2,000 and $150.

I believe ezkcdude was asking for why you stated this:


it was natural to expect a better DAC than the SB3.

Why do you believe the SBR has a worse DAC than the SB3?

BetterDAC
2008-01-09, 20:11
Why not go with the Transporter then?



From http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.cgi?HardwareComparison

SBR DAC: WM8501

SBC DAC: WM8750

It's still early days yet, it's not fair to conclude there was a concerted effort to hide it.

Thanks for the info. I went to Wolfson's website to check out the specs, and it seems the published specs by Wolfson exceed what Slim published. Wolfson says the WM8501 supports data input word lengths from 16 to 24-bits and sampling rates up to 192kHz, which is much better than the 48k that Slim quotes.

And the WM8750 DAC in the Controller is really quite good for a handheld device

Skunk
2008-01-09, 20:53
Does the lack of VFD (and its processor/memory usage) make 24/96 playback any more likely?

BetterDAC
2008-01-09, 21:50
I believe ezkcdude was asking for why you stated this:



Why do you believe the SBR has a worse DAC than the SB3?

I shouldn't say it's worse. In fact the specs from the Wolfson website show that it has some good features, but it seems that Slim doesn't take full advantage of them. At least not yet. But given the criticism that the SB3 didn't have 24x96k capability, I think a lot of users were hoping/expecting for that with the new Duet Receiver.

Ben Sandee
2008-01-09, 21:58
On Jan 9, 2008 10:50 PM, BetterDAC <
BetterDAC.32yepn1199940901 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:

>
> I shouldn't say it's worse. In fact the specs from the Wolfson website
> show that it has some good features, but it seems that Slim doesn't
> take full advantage of them. At least not yet. But given the criticism
> that the SB3 didn't have 24x96k capability, I think a lot of users were
> hoping/expecting for that with the new Duet Receiver.


Maybe some were, but far more were asking for something cheaper.

Ben

erland
2008-01-09, 22:41
- will it be possible to generate MusicIP playlists using the Squeezebox Controller? (you can do this by holding down the play button on the current IR remote)

Launching MusicIP mixes from the SqueezeBox Controller doesn't work in the current software, but this is something that is planned and hopefully it will be implemented even before the Controller actually is available in the stores. If not, I assume it will be implemented soon after.

aweitzner
2008-01-10, 06:38
It's my understanding that a WiFi router is only as fast as the units it speaks to. i.e. If you have a "N" WiFi router and you match it with one say SBC or SBR maxing at "G" speeds then the whole system defaults to max "G" speeds. I ask because the SBC appears to be on 100% of the time.

Am I way out here?

Thanks

Not exactly, the WiFi Access Point communicates as fast as it can with each client. You CAN mix 802.11n and 802.11g clients on the same network. The drawback is that 11g clients need more airtime to transmit the same amount of data. The fastest 11g clients only pass data at 50% of their physical layer rate. So for example an 11g client running at 54Mbps will use 1/54th of the available airtime to transmit a 500kbps audio stream while an 11n client can get up to ~67% efficiency at 300Mbps (or 1/400th of the available airtime for the 500kbps stream). The problem that can occur is when the 11g client is too far from the access point - i.e a device running at only 2Mbps would use 50% of the airtime to transport the same audio stream

tamanaco
2008-01-10, 06:47
Not exactly, the WiFi Access Point communicates as fast as it can with each client. You CAN mix 802.11n and 802.11g clients on the same network. The drawback is that 11g clients need more airtime to transmit the same amount of data. The fastest 11g clients only pass data at 50% of their physical layer rate. So for example an 11g client running at 54Mbps will use 1/54th of the available airtime to transmit a 500kbps audio stream while an 11n client can get up to ~67% efficiency at 300Mbps (or 1/400th of the available airtime for the 500kbps stream). The problem that can occur is when the 11g client is too far from the access point - i.e a device running at only 2Mbps would use 50% of the airtime to transport the same audio stream

I think the issue is when multiple a,g,n adapters are connected continously and simultaneously to the same AP. The AP has to use the lowest common denominator to maintain communications with all the adapters.

aweitzner
2008-01-10, 07:59
I think the issue is when multiple a,g,n adapters are connected continously and simultaneously to the same AP. The AP has to use the lowest common denominator to maintain communications with all the adapters.

Tamanaco

A WiFi 802.11n Certified AP requires backward compatible that allows it to talk 11g to an 11g client while talking 11n to an 11n client on the same active network. This is referred to as Mixed Mode by the WiFi Alliance. I have this exact configuration up and running in my home network. I can operate my 11g laptop at 54Mbps while my wife's 11n laptop is connected at 300Mbps. The 11n client runs in 11n mode and does not need to find a common denominator in this case. The 802.11 standard is designed so that each client can burst data at its maximum speed - clients on the same network do not need to find a common denominator.

You don't need to have an all 11n network to take advantage of 11n but mixing 11n and 11g does slow down the whole network because the 11g clients are using 5x-6x more air time to transmit the same amount of data.

Perhaps it may be appropriate to discuss the finer points if WiFi in a different thread if you would like

funkstar
2008-01-10, 08:04
I shouldn't say it's worse. In fact the specs from the Wolfson website show that it has some good features, but it seems that Slim doesn't take full advantage of them. At least not yet. But given the criticism that the SB3 didn't have 24x96k capability, I think a lot of users were hoping/expecting for that with the new Duet Receiver.
Sean has said in a previous post that he expects them to change the published specs once they put some retail (ie. final mass hardware, not beta units) though some lab testing. The published figures are conservative based on the spec sheets.

As for higher resolution audio, that may well appear with software upgrades. But that will be after the product ships, I'm sure they are all pretty busy with finalising SC7, pre-hardware launch and CES :)

BetterDAC
2008-01-10, 08:11
On Jan 9, 2008 10:50 PM, BetterDAC <
BetterDAC.32yepn1199940901 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:

>
> I shouldn't say it's worse. In fact the specs from the Wolfson website
> show that it has some good features, but it seems that Slim doesn't
> take full advantage of them. At least not yet. But given the criticism
> that the SB3 didn't have 24x96k capability, I think a lot of users were
> hoping/expecting for that with the new Duet Receiver.


Maybe some were, but far more were asking for something cheaper.

Ben

You were hoping for cheaper than $150 for the Receiver? I can't think of a comparable competitor that is even close to such a low price point? The Receiver is very competively priced.

I think the Controller is over-priced, but not the Receiver.