PDA

View Full Version : Softsqueeze 0.5



2004-05-24, 16:43
I created a new key pair with OpenSSH and got SoftSqueeze 0.5 to work. The SSH tunnel is working now using public key authentication. My initial impression though is that the connection is rather sluggish as compared to when I was using stand-alone SSH to create the tunnel. In particular, the Slimserver web interface is so slow that it is all but unusable. Also, the track time elapsed is even futher off than it was under version 0.4 of SoftSqueeze. The display is typically more than a full minute ahead of the music that is playing.

rtitmuss
2004-05-25, 03:29
> I created a new key pair with OpenSSH and got SoftSqueeze 0.5 to work.
The SSH tunnel is working now using public key authentication. My initial
impression though is that the connection is rather sluggish as compared to
when I was using stand-alone SSH to create the tunnel. In particular, the
Slimserver web interface is so slow that it is all but unusable. Also, the
track time elapsed is even futher off than it was under version 0.4 of
SoftSqueeze. The display is typically more than a full minute ahead of the
music that is playing.

The ssh library (jsch) does not handle streamed music correctly, and I have
already had to work around this to get acceptable display and remote control
performance. Could you try using the web interface before you start playing
music, and let me know if that responds any better. If this helps I could
open an additional port, say 9001 for the web interface until the bug in
jsch is fixed.

I am concerned about the the elapsed track time is incorrect, this should
have been fixed in an earlier release. This works OK for me, what slimserver
version and file formats are you using?

Regards,
Richard

Roy M. Silvernail
2004-05-25, 11:09
Just a curiosity... I've got the bitrate cap set to 96kb so I don't
absorb too much of the measly T-1 here at work. But looking at the
track properties (right-arrow from Now Playing), SoftSqueeze shows the
track's bitrate as saved on the server. Is there a way to display the
actual received bitrate?
--
Roy M. Silvernail is roy (AT) rant-central (DOT) com, and you're not
Never Forget: It's Only 1's and 0's!
SpamAssassin->procmail->/dev/null->bliss
http://www.rant-central.com

rtitmuss
2004-05-25, 16:03
Can you try Softsqueeze 0.5.2. The web interface is now more responsive over
the ssh tunnel.

I have made a fix to the elapsed time, but the bug would have meant the
display was behind the music not ahead. Still confused about this one.

Regards,
Richard


----- Original Message -----
From: <trmp3 (AT) hoghill (DOT) net>
To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 12:43 AM
Subject: [slim] Softsqueeze 0.5


> I created a new key pair with OpenSSH and got SoftSqueeze 0.5 to work.
The SSH tunnel is working now using public key authentication. My initial
impression though is that the connection is rather sluggish as compared to
when I was using stand-alone SSH to create the tunnel. In particular, the
Slimserver web interface is so slow that it is all but unusable. Also, the
track time elapsed is even futher off than it was under version 0.4 of
SoftSqueeze. The display is typically more than a full minute ahead of the
music that is playing.
>
>

Daryle A. Tilroe
2004-05-25, 18:02
I am finding something seriously wrong with 0.5.1 and 0.5.2 as
compared to pre0.5a. I have actually had to revert back and,
near as I can see, it seems not to have been noticed/reported
yet.

The symptoms are basically that the display, when navigating with
the arrow button, no longer moves smoothly; it sort of stutters
with the top and bottom rows not in sync. Worse, the arrow
navigation buttons, particularly the right and left, seem to
register two clicks instead of one much of the time. Quite hard
to navigate as you might imagine.

--
Daryle A. Tilroe

rtitmuss
2004-05-26, 06:00
Roy,

When I use the bitrate limiting (with a recent nightly) the track properties
reports both the original and converted bit rates like this:
Bitrate 192kbps VBR (Converted to 64kbp CBR)

At the moment you cannot display the received bitrate in Softsqueeze.

Regards,
Richard


----- Original Message -----
From: "Roy M. Silvernail" <roy (AT) rant-central (DOT) com>
To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 7:09 PM
Subject: [slim] Softsqueeze 0.5


> Just a curiosity... I've got the bitrate cap set to 96kb so I don't
> absorb too much of the measly T-1 here at work. But looking at the
> track properties (right-arrow from Now Playing), SoftSqueeze shows the
> track's bitrate as saved on the server. Is there a way to display the
> actual received bitrate?
> --
> Roy M. Silvernail is roy (AT) rant-central (DOT) com, and you're not
> Never Forget: It's Only 1's and 0's!
> SpamAssassin->procmail->/dev/null->bliss
> http://www.rant-central.com
>

rtitmuss
2004-05-26, 06:05
Darlye,

Can you recreate this and check the cpu usage. Is Softsqueeze maxed out?

Regards,
Richard


----- Original Message -----
From: "Daryle A. Tilroe" <daryle (AT) micralyne (DOT) com>
To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
Cc: <richard_titmuss (AT) yahoo (DOT) co.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 2:02 AM
Subject: [slim] Softsqueeze 0.5


> I am finding something seriously wrong with 0.5.1 and 0.5.2 as
> compared to pre0.5a. I have actually had to revert back and,
> near as I can see, it seems not to have been noticed/reported
> yet.
>
> The symptoms are basically that the display, when navigating with
> the arrow button, no longer moves smoothly; it sort of stutters
> with the top and bottom rows not in sync. Worse, the arrow
> navigation buttons, particularly the right and left, seem to
> register two clicks instead of one much of the time. Quite hard
> to navigate as you might imagine.
>
> --
> Daryle A. Tilroe
>

Daryle A. Tilroe
2004-05-26, 10:37
Richard Titmuss wrote:

> Darlye,
>
> Can you recreate this and check the cpu usage. Is Softsqueeze maxed out?

IIRC the CPU usage was moderate. It is not hard to recreate
as it occurs every time it is run :-). I will double check
all this and my java when I get home tonight. I do note that
remotely from work the display and buttons seem better/properly
behaved.

I also note that the level still seems a trifle high but I will
double check from home.

--
Daryle A. Tilroe

Daryle A. Tilroe
2004-05-26, 17:25
OK I think I have tracked down the cause:

Up to now I have usually launched SoftSqueeze by
the .jnlp file thus:

codebase="file:///c:/Temp/SoftSqueeze-0.5.1"
....
<property name="slimserver" value="127.0.0.1"/>

This worked fine up until 0.5.x; previously directly
launching the .jar file did not. Now if I launch
the .jar file everything seems fine, and it works of
course. However if I launch from the .jnlp locally
I get the weird display and button behaviour; remotely
everything is fine (ie. from work) regardless of how
I launch it. So it appears the issue is with launching
from the .jnlp file when it points to the localhost/loopback
address (127.0.0.1).

--
Daryle A. Tilroe

Daryle A. Tilroe
2004-05-26, 17:42
PS. I'm pretty sure I'm still getting some sort of
digital "clipping" at '40'. Seems to go away if I
step down even one to '39' without any audible loss of
level. I also note that the analogue/digital output level
setting or fixing in the player settings is gone; I
assume it is intentional.


--
Daryle A. Tilroe