PDA

View Full Version : WiFi in Squeezebox



Manager Matt
2004-04-21, 09:56
I'm going to buy a wireless Squeezebox for downstairs, and I don't have WiFi yet. I'm looking at .11b, or maybe .11g so I can
upgrade to a bridge in the future (for if/when I need more network downstairs). Before I buy a AP/router I was wondering...

Does anyone know what PCCard/chipset is used for the Squeezebox WiFi?

Has anybody had any problems running with a specific brand WiFi AP? recommendations?

How bad is the slowdown of a .11g network when streaming your MP3s?

(OT?)
Linux users:
I run a linux NAT/fileserver/slimserver and I was thinking about separating the wired and wireless networks (different interfaces)
for security. Does anybody out there run a Linux-based WiFi AP?


Thanks for your help/advise.

Matt

Mark Hughes
2004-04-21, 10:27
Manager Matt wrote:

>
> Has anybody had any problems running with a specific brand WiFi AP? recommendations?
>
> How bad is the slowdown of a .11g network when streaming your MP3s?
>
> (OT?)
> Linux users:
> I run a linux NAT/fileserver/slimserver and I was thinking about separating the wired and wireless networks (different interfaces)
> for security. Does anybody out there run a Linux-based WiFi AP?
>

Hi,

I had a nightmare trying to get my Belkin 802.11g wireless router
working with the squezebox - was getting frequent dropouts despite
having a strong signal. In the end I just bought a card with a prism 2.5
chipset (Netgear MA311) and using the hostap drivers, am now happily
running the card in a linux server as an AP for my squeezeboxes:

You can find more info abaout Host AP here:

http://hostap.epitest.fi/

Cheers.

Daryle A. Tilroe
2004-04-21, 20:40
After some playing around with convert.conf and the file format
conversion setup I have become convinced that this behaviour is
wrong. For example I want to stream to softsqueeze at work but
of course need flac->mp3 enabled to get a nice low bandwidth;
however I still want to stream flac->wav (at least until
native flac is working <wink> <wink> ;-)) to my wireless
squeezebox which works fine now. This is rather a pain with
the hardcoded default for wireless.

As far as I'm concerned the user should decide what bit rate
is suitable for what player as it is already implemented (which
works great for softsqueeze and I presume wired squeezeboxes).
If I select 0 I expect to get wav from flac if I have a squeezebox;
regardless of if it is wired or not. If the wireless can't
hack it, fine; I can easily throttle it back to 320 and get
the lame <sic> conversion.

At the very least there should be an advanced option to turn off
this feature. If there already is a tweak for slimserver.pref,
great: what is it?

Sorry if this comes across a little petulant. Software guessing
what is best for me (when it is often not) is a pet peeve.

--
Daryle A. Tilroe

kdf
2004-04-21, 21:31
Quoting "Daryle A. Tilroe" <daryle (AT) micralyne (DOT) com>:

> After some playing around with convert.conf and the file format
> conversion setup I have become convinced that this behaviour is
> wrong. For example I want to stream to softsqueeze at work but
> of course need flac->mp3 enabled to get a nice low bandwidth;
> however I still want to stream flac->wav (at least until
> native flac is working <wink> <wink> ;-)) to my wireless
> squeezebox which works fine now. This is rather a pain with
> the hardcoded default for wireless.
>
> As far as I'm concerned the user should decide what bit rate
> is suitable for what player as it is already implemented (which
> works great for softsqueeze and I presume wired squeezeboxes).
> If I select 0 I expect to get wav from flac if I have a squeezebox;
> regardless of if it is wired or not. If the wireless can't
> hack it, fine; I can easily throttle it back to 320 and get
> the lame <sic> conversion.
>
> At the very least there should be an advanced option to turn off
> this feature. If there already is a tweak for slimserver.pref,
> great: what is it?
>
> Sorry if this comes across a little petulant. Software guessing
> what is best for me (when it is often not) is a pet peeve.
There isn't a simple setting for this as yet. However,
there is something you can do. The convert.conf allows you to specify by client
ID as well. The last item, mostly shown as * in the default convert.conf can be
changed to the client ID. For hardware players (softsqueeze too) this would be
the player MAC address. This way, you can make a specific override for the
softsqueeze like so:

flc mp3 * 00:00:00:00:00:00
[flac] -dcs $FILE$ | [lame] --resample 44100 --silent -q 9 -b $BITRATE$ - -

where the zeros must be change to the MAC address. Current versions of the
server will show you the player mac address at the bottom of the player
settings. For software (http) players, the id is the IP address.

hope that helps.
-kdf

Daryle A. Tilroe
2004-04-21, 22:00
kdf wrote:

> There isn't a simple setting for this as yet. However,
> there is something you can do. The convert.conf allows you to specify by client
> ID as well. The last item, mostly shown as * in the default convert.conf can be
> changed to the client ID. For hardware players (softsqueeze too) this would be
> the player MAC address. This way, you can make a specific override for the
> softsqueeze like so:
>
> flc mp3 * 00:00:00:00:00:00
> [flac] -dcs $FILE$ | [lame] --resample 44100 --silent -q 9 -b $BITRATE$ - -
>
> where the zeros must be change to the MAC address. Current versions of the
> server will show you the player mac address at the bottom of the player
> settings. For software (http) players, the id is the IP address.

I did try this but it didn't seem to work. I may have made a mistake
somewhere and could try again; however I still think this feature is
ill advised and should be turned off. Users should just use the bitrate
throttling setting if their wireless cannot handle the bandwidth. It
is simple enough: if you get dropouts either fool with your antennas and
device placement or dial back the bitrate or both.

The only trouble I have with wav to my wireless is the microwave. Even
when/if we get native flac I suspect the microwave noise will still cause
problems. Actually I should do some tests to see if lower bitrate mp3
streams survive warming up my lunch :-). I really wish someone made a
16 bit PCMCIA 802.11a card which would solve all these wireless issues.

--
Daryle A. Tilroe

Daryle A. Tilroe
2004-04-22, 12:04
For all who care I have filed an enhancement bug report
to either remove this or, if it is thought to be a
desireable "idiot proofing" feature, at least have the
option to disable it.

http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=270

--
Daryle A. Tilroe

Daryle A. Tilroe
2004-04-22, 12:08
I have just noticed something that I think has changed since
5.1.1 or so. IIRC when you had a playlist playing and
browsed to a new selection/s and hit 'Play' it would append
the new selection/s to the end of the existing playlist and
start playing it/them. Now it seems doing this replaces your
existing playlist with the new selection/s. Am I imagining
how it used to work?

--
Daryle A. Tilroe

kdf
2004-04-22, 12:14
Quoting "Daryle A. Tilroe" <daryle (AT) micralyne (DOT) com>:

> I have just noticed something that I think has changed since
> 5.1.1 or so. IIRC when you had a playlist playing and
> browsed to a new selection/s and hit 'Play' it would append
> the new selection/s to the end of the existing playlist and
> start playing it/them. Now it seems doing this replaces your
> existing playlist with the new selection/s. Am I imagining
> how it used to work?
>
pressing play, replaces the playlist. It has done this for some time (at least
back through 5.x and 4.x). Using ADD will add to an existing playlist, but
won't start playback or interrupt existing playback

-kdf

kdf
2004-04-22, 13:12
its in process.

Quoting "Daryle A. Tilroe" <daryle (AT) micralyne (DOT) com>:

> For all who care I have filed an enhancement bug report
> to either remove this or, if it is thought to be a
> desireable "idiot proofing" feature, at least have the
> option to disable it.
>
> http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=270
>
> --
> Daryle A. Tilroe
>
>

Daryle A. Tilroe
2004-04-22, 14:04
kdf wrote:

> Quoting "Daryle A. Tilroe" <daryle (AT) micralyne (DOT) com>:
>
>>I have just noticed something that I think has changed since
>>5.1.1 or so. IIRC when you had a playlist playing and
>>browsed to a new selection/s and hit 'Play' it would append
>>the new selection/s to the end of the existing playlist and
>>start playing it/them. Now it seems doing this replaces your
>>existing playlist with the new selection/s. Am I imagining
>>how it used to work?
>
> pressing play, replaces the playlist. It has done this for some time (at least
> back through 5.x and 4.x). Using ADD will add to an existing playlist, but
> won't start playback or interrupt existing playback

I guess it's just my memory playing tricks on me. It does
seem that that behaviour would not be completely undesirable.
Did that make sense? :-) Can anyone see any drawbacks to
doing it that way?

--
Daryle A. Tilroe

kdf
2004-04-22, 14:17
Quoting "Daryle A. Tilroe" <daryle (AT) micralyne (DOT) com>:

> kdf wrote:
>
> > Quoting "Daryle A. Tilroe" <daryle (AT) micralyne (DOT) com>:
> >
> >>I have just noticed something that I think has changed since
> >>5.1.1 or so. IIRC when you had a playlist playing and
> >>browsed to a new selection/s and hit 'Play' it would append
> >>the new selection/s to the end of the existing playlist and
> >>start playing it/them. Now it seems doing this replaces your
> >>existing playlist with the new selection/s. Am I imagining
> >>how it used to work?
> >
> > pressing play, replaces the playlist. It has done this for some time (at
> least
> > back through 5.x and 4.x). Using ADD will add to an existing playlist,
> but
> > won't start playback or interrupt existing playback
>
> I guess it's just my memory playing tricks on me. It does
> seem that that behaviour would not be completely undesirable.
> Did that make sense? :-) Can anyone see any drawbacks to
> doing it that way?
>
seems intuitive to my mind. You press PLAY on a selection, and you play that
selection. If you have an existing playlist, you press ADD to simply add to it.
If you change it to always just add, then you are always stuck clearing your
playlist any time you want a new one.
-kdf

Steve Baumgarten
2004-04-24, 16:24
> Or am I missing something more fundamental here - i.e. Do I need to
> select the playlist on winamp and the shoutcast just relays it to
> the SB?

That's right. The server always talks to Shoutcast and plays whatever
it's sending; Shoutcast listens to Winamp and relays whatever MP3 stream
Winamp is sending via its Shoutcast DSP module.

So you need to use Winamp to "change the station", as it were. All the
Slimserver can do is relay the Shoutcast stream, whatever it may be;
anything beyond that is currently out of its hands.

So an interesting Slimserver plug-in would be one that directed Winamp to
play something else; this requires automating Winamp, and wouldn't you
know it, but someone has done this:

http://www.kostaa.com/winamp/

I downloaded it but haven't yet played around with it. But it might be a
good solution -- even more Rube Goldbergian than the current situation,
but you could conceivably have a Slimserver plug-in that understood a real
playlist of different kinds of WMA/Real streams; then the plug-in would
talk to the Winamp httpQ server (see the URL above); the httpQ server
tells Winamp to switch to a different stream; Winamp does so and feeds the
MP3 version of the new stream to the Shoutcast server, which continues to
relay it to the Slimserver, which continues to relay it to the Squeezebox.

Phew.

Basically the plug-in would be a remote control for Winamp via the httpQ
server. And since the httpQ server speaks HTTP (hence its name), talking
to it would be a snap in perl.

Just a matter of putting all the pieces together -- as it always is...

SBB