PDA

View Full Version : Why do I need the SqueezeCenter server to play my MP3 files?



RudolfJan
2008-11-01, 07:11
Maybe a stupid question, but important for me. Even my cheapest MP3 player is capable to create a listing of all items and tags. The squeezebox Duet needs a 30-60Mb server pack to achieve this. This prevents me from using a cheap NAS for file storage. I think this really is a major drawback.

What I would like: use the Squeezecenter software to configure playlists and album info files. Store these on the NAS, make the Squeezebox connect to the NAS to retrieve these info, just like my simple cheap MP3 player can do.

Why would this be difficult to achieve? Al alternative would be to extend the Squeezenetwork server to support this feature. So, just store the metadata on this server and retrieve the files from the NAS.

This is even more important if you want to store the files in a lossless format. Hiring server space would be quite expensive and cumbersome, due to limited download speeds.

radish
2008-11-01, 08:35
It's a design approach. In order to provide the most functionality and flexibility with relatively low cost/power players the heavy lifting is performed by the server (everything from drawing the screen to scanning the library to searching, etc). This brings many, many advantages over the alternatives (plugins, for one) and is the way it's always been for SD products.

In terms of running on a NAS, there are plenty of NAS units which can run SC (see the 3rd party hardware forum) - but I've never seen what I'd call a "cheap" NAS - they're all wildly overpriced for what they actually are (IMHO).

bhaagensen
2008-11-01, 10:17
Al alternative would be to extend the Squeezenetwork server to support this feature. So, just store the metadata on this server and retrieve the files from the NAS.


There are rumours that something like this, i.e. upnp support via SqueezeNetwork is coming sometime in the future. And I'm not joking when I say *sometime*. I don't even know whether it has been decided, much less when it can be expected to land. But take it is a confirmation that it is at least being considered.

CatBus
2008-11-01, 11:04
What I would like: use the Squeezecenter software to configure playlists and album info files. Store these on the NAS, make the Squeezebox connect to the NAS to retrieve these info, just like my simple cheap MP3 player can do.

Why would this be difficult to achieve?

Here's why it will never happen--SqueezeCenter does more than store a database of your tags, and far more than any cheap (or even expensive) MP3 player could do. For example, it draws every pixel on all of your units' displays. If SqueezeCenter was stripped down to a tags database, among other things, you wouldn't be able to see what was playing. Or synchronize multiple players. That sort of thing.

The SlimDevices units are "thin clients", designed to have something smart at the other end of the network or they're more-or-less useless. Big advantages of this design are simplicity, longevity, and upgradability. The disadvantage is when someone doesn't want something smart at the other end of the network, there's not enough power in the end-units themselves to do what you want. Sorry, that's all there is to it.

As others have suggested, you may be able to accomplish something like this with SqueezeNetwork or Internet services like MP3Tunes now or someday in the future.

peter
2008-11-01, 11:25
CatBus wrote:
> RudolfJan;355615 Wrote:
>
>> What I would like: use the Squeezecenter software to configure playlists
>> and album info files. Store these on the NAS, make the Squeezebox
>> connect to the NAS to retrieve these info, just like my simple cheap
>> MP3 player can do.
>>
>> Why would this be difficult to achieve?
>>
>
> Here's why it will never happen--SqueezeCenter does more than store a
> database of your tags, and far more than any cheap (or even expensive)
> MP3 player could do. For example, it draws every pixel on all of your
> units' displays. If SqueezeCenter was stripped down to a tags
> database, among other things, you wouldn't be able to see what was
> playing. Or synchronize multiple players. That sort of thing.
>
> The SlimDevices units are "thin clients", designed to have something
> smart at the other end of the network or they're more-or-less useless.
> Big advantages of this design are simplicity, longevity, and
> upgradability. The disadvantage is when someone doesn't want something
> smart at the other end of the network, there's not enough power in the
> end-units themselves to do what you want. Sorry, that's all there is
> to it.
>
> As others have suggested, you may be able to accomplish something like
> this with SqueezeNetwork or Internet services like MP3Tunes now or
> someday in the future.
>

It's been announced already. The SB players will combine upnp with a
squeezecenter connection to play your local files.

Regards,
Peter

peter
2008-11-01, 11:28
RudolfJan wrote:
> Maybe a stupid question, but important for me. Even my cheapest MP3
> player is capable to create a listing of all items and tags. The
> squeezebox Duet needs a 30-60Mb server pack to achieve this. This
> prevents me from using a cheap NAS for file storage. I think this
> really is a major drawback.
>

Squeezeboxes are client devices for use with a *Server*. If you want 'a
simple mp3 player' buy yourself one. Smart people run servers in their
homes to 'serve' them. I've been running one since at least 1994, so I
should know. ;)

Regards,
Peter

Themis
2008-11-01, 11:51
Home data are getting bigger and bigger. Everything: music, photos, films etc start being stored on hard disks at home. As the price of HD diminishes, no-one feels the need anymore to rip to a CD or DVD their data.
So, having a "server" is becoming a "necessity" for most households: they need to store, organize, stream and backup their numerous files.
Even if my listening device (duet) wouldn't oblige me to have a server software, in fact, I would need one all the same.

Even my iPod obliges me to have a "server" software: iTunes. :)
And even Microsoft released a Home Server software lately (WHS) ;)

mherger
2008-11-02, 05:41
> It's been announced already. The SB players will combine upnp with a
> squeezecenter connection to play your local files.

Make this SqueezeNetwork instead of SquezeCenter.

--

Michael

peter
2008-11-02, 06:14
Michael Herger wrote:
>> It's been announced already. The SB players will combine upnp with a
>> squeezecenter connection to play your local files.
>>
>
> Make this SqueezeNetwork instead of SquezeCenter.
>

Thanks, that's what I was meaning to say. (would be utter nonsense
otherwise)

Regards,
Peter

peter
2008-11-02, 06:16
Peter wrote:
> Michael Herger wrote:
>
>>> It's been announced already. The SB players will combine upnp with a
>>> squeezecenter connection to play your local files.
>>>
>>>
>> Make this SqueezeNetwork instead of SquezeCenter.
>>
>>
>
> Thanks, that's what I was meaning to say. (would be utter nonsense
> otherwise)
>

I wonder if this wouldn't basically give SqueezeNetwork access to your
local NAS drives... That could be a bit of a privacy issue for some people.

Regards,
Peter

slimkid
2008-11-02, 06:48
Does that mean that SB would pick up musical files directly from the local network and 'commands and guidance' from SN, or the music data would have to travel to SN first in order to be served back to SB?

K

mherger
2008-11-02, 07:43
> I wonder if this wouldn't basically give SqueezeNetwork access to your
> local NAS drives... That could be a bit of a privacy issue for some people.

We should make this optional. A flag set in SB whether it should or not forward UPnP communication.

--

Michael

peter
2008-11-02, 09:40
slimkid wrote:
> Does that mean that SB would pick up musical files directly from the
> local network and 'commands and guidance' from SN, or the music data
> would have to travel to SN first in order to be served back to SB?
>

Sounds unlikely, but I think the SN server should have at least the
knowledge of what files are on your shares to be able to build a tag
database. The actual music data would probably go from the NAS to the SB
directly.

Regards,
Peter

andyg
2008-11-02, 09:54
It will be optional.

SN will not maintain any sort of tag database or knowledge of your files. That's the job of the UPnP server.

scrubby
2008-11-17, 10:49
Hey andyg, I am trying not to be so confused and have just the simplest of questions regarding the possible support for upnp. Is that support from the point of view of the player? So, to put a finer point on it, would I be able to play my files (hosted on a Terastion/PowerPC set up with Twonky upnp service) using a Squeezebox Boom? Does this mean the SqueezeBoom would have upnp support? I am really hoping this is the case as upnp is serving up other devices in the home and I would like to capitalize on that.

And thanks for a super forum and your time!!

andyg
2008-11-17, 11:49
Yes, but don't think of it like the Boom has UPnP support. It only supports the bare minimum needed to proxy the necessary packets back to a server (SN) and SN handles the interface and control functions as usual by integrating the UPnP server into the Music Library menu as a new option. When playing music the files are streamed from the UPnP server to the Boom, no data from the audio files goes to SN.

scrubby
2008-11-17, 12:43
Ah, OK, I think I am getting it. Am I correct in guessing, then, that I am still going to need SqueezeCenter running somewhere? And is it correct to guess that Squeezcenter is the service that will - pending development - be able to recognize Twonky and incorporate those files into the library as a upnp resource?

So what I really want to do, then, is figure out how to get SqueezeCenter running on my Terastation, and all that running alongside Twonky! That'd be the ticket I am guessing!!

Many thanks for your time, andyg!!

andyg
2008-11-17, 13:00
Ah, OK, I think I am getting it. Am I correct in guessing, then, that I am still going to need SqueezeCenter running somewhere? And is it correct to guess that Squeezcenter is the service that will - pending development - be able to recognize Twonky and incorporate those files into the library as a upnp resource?


No. SC already supports UPnP servers (but not really that well) but it is disabled by default as it's not very useful. SC's UPnP support will get better as a result of this (it will be mostly the same code) but most people won't need to use it.



So what I really want to do, then, is figure out how to get SqueezeCenter running on my Terastation, and all that running alongside Twonky! That'd be the ticket I am guessing!!
!

Why? SC is way better at organizing and handling your music than Twonky is, so the only reason to run Twonky if you also run SC is to serve other devices on your network. There is another enhancement to make SC a proper UPnP *server* for those kinds of devices. Personally I'd like to do it but I'm in the minority on that one. I don't see it happening any time soon if at all.

scrubby
2008-11-17, 13:15
You are spot on; I do indeed have other devices in the house that require upnp in order to run. I am realizing now that my goal has always been to get SC to run on my Terastation NAS as I am keen on running as few PCs in the house as possible. I will keep my eye open for the upnp enhancements as they come down the pike. And I will start in on the heavy lifting of getting SC running on my Terastation - ugh! Let's see how I do on that one!!

Hey andyg, again many, many thanks! You are a credit to the community.

funkstar
2008-11-17, 14:22
You are spot on; I do indeed have other devices in the house that require upnp in order to run. I am realizing now that my goal has always been to get SC to run on my Terastation NAS as I am keen on running as few PCs in the house as possible. I will keep my eye open for the upnp enhancements as they come down the pike. And I will start in on the heavy lifting of getting SC running on my Terastation - ugh! Let's see how I do on that one!!
Which Terrastation do you have?

There is already a large community of SC users running on Buffalo, Synology and Qnap NAS boxes. Have a search for SSODS (SlimServer On DiskStation - SlimServer being the former name from SqueezeCenter) on these forums and the internet as a whole, there is a lot of information on this out there.

scrubby
2008-11-17, 14:56
Hey Funkstar,

Thanks very much for the tip. I have had success running SS on my Terastation (Regular PowerPC Terastation, not "Terastation Live", or "Terastation Pro" or "Terastation Home" sheesh!) but, it was my understanding that the Duet requires SC, is that incorrect? And the Duet is coming for sure, thank goodness for Christmas! There are a couple of threads on this very forum regarding SC on Terastation but my private messages have so far gone unaswered. Hopefully I'll be able to get 'er done.

Take care,
Scrub

funkstar
2008-11-18, 02:48
Thanks very much for the tip. I have had success running SS on my Terastation (Regular PowerPC Terastation, not "Terastation Live", or "Terastation Pro" or "Terastation Home" sheesh!) but, it was my understanding that the Duet requires SC, is that incorrect? And the Duet is coming for sure, thank goodness for Christmas! There are a couple of threads on this very forum regarding SC on Terastation but my private messages have so far gone unaswered. Hopefully I'll be able to get 'er done
You are right, the Controller and Reciever require SC7 as opposed to SlimServer.

I don't know how up to date this is, but here is a list of hardware revisions that SSODS will/won't run on: http://oinkzwurgl.org/ssods_hardware