PDA

View Full Version : New Duet Reciever vs. used Squeezebox



slydog75
2008-08-04, 16:40
I currently have a Duet system with a single reciever. I want to add another 'zone' to my system. A new duet reciever is $150. However it seems I can get some pretty good deals on older used Squeezeboxen. Are there any drawbacks to getting one like in this picture, vs a new Duet Receiver (assuming the used one works fine)? An uneducated comparison would actually suggest this is a better solution (for the zone I want to put it in at least) as it has a display while the Duet reciever does not.

radish
2008-08-04, 19:24
That looks like an original Squeezebox. The comparison is here: http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/HardwareComparison

Personally, I wouldn't use an SB1 in a wireless situation. It only supports 802.11b (not g) and has a fairly small buffer. As a result, getting lossless files to play reliably over wireless is a challenge. It also lacks newer features such as SN support. There's certainly nothing wrong with the SB2 or 3, but my originals have all been retired.

slydog75
2008-08-04, 19:59
That looks like an original Squeezebox. The comparison is here: http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/HardwareComparison

Personally, I wouldn't use an SB1 in a wireless situation. It only supports 802.11b (not g) and has a fairly small buffer. As a result, getting lossless files to play reliably over wireless is a challenge. It also lacks newer features such as SN support. There's certainly nothing wrong with the SB2 or 3, but my originals have all been retired.

Lacks SqueezeNetwork support? If I'm logged into SqueezeCenter can I still play Rhapsody/Sirius/Pandora? Not supporting 802.11g is a bit of a problem. If I can get it cheap enough it may be worth it to run cat5 to it.

radish
2008-08-04, 20:11
If I'm logged into SqueezeCenter can I still play Rhapsody/Sirius/Pandora?

Not 100% sure, but I don't think so.

ToddSTS
2008-08-05, 07:09
Isn't it also true that the sync playback feature on the SB1 doesn't work as well as on the SB2/3/R? I thought I had read that somewhere on the board.

Todd

slydog75
2008-08-05, 16:21
Isn't it also true that the sync playback feature on the SB1 doesn't work as well as on the SB2/3/R? I thought I had read that somewhere on the board.

Todd

THAT would be a dealbreaker, sync definetely has to work. I'll hold out for an SB2 or 3 then.. or maybe just give in and pay for a brand new Duet reciever.

sebage
2008-08-05, 17:03
I have an SB1 and an SB3. Both players are quite happily synced at the moment. I can play last.fm and pandora streams on either independently or both simultaniously. I also listen to a lot of lossless files (FLAC) streamed from my SC and both boxes play well together in that regard both synced and otherwise.

Neither use wireless as I live in a very densely populated urban area and there is just too much mucky-muck in the airwaves. It is true that the SB1 is not a friend to lossless over wireless (small buffer). So, I use homeplugs which have caused me zero issues over the past 18 months (haven't even had cause to unplug them!). So if you are thinking about lossless, then factor the cost of cat5 or a homeplug solution into your cost/value judgement.

There is a definite difference in the sound of the analogue outputs of the SB1 and the SB3 - the DAC produces a noticably (to me at least) better sound in the SB3. SB1 is fine, but if you are thinking about critical listening on a better than budget system, you will appreciate the sound of the SB3. Unless you have an external DAC to hand in which case it will be that you will be hearing.

It looks like the one in your picture you posted is the SB1, not the slightly later modification the SB1G, which has a higher res display. A worthwhile enhancement, particularly if you are needing to view the display from across the room.

JJZolx
2008-08-05, 20:17
I wouldn't buy an original Squeezebox. Mine is retired too. There's also the issue of an increased likelihood of dropouts due to the much smaller buffer size.

Squeezebox 2's, on the other hand, are wonderful.