PDA

View Full Version : FCC reveals Logitech Squeezebox Radio



brookheather
2009-08-21, 05:37
New Squeezebox Radio product revealed by engadget:

http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/fcc-reveals-logitech-squeezebox-radio-could-make-all-those-stre/

- Simon.

Siduhe
2009-08-21, 05:42
See a bit more of a detailed discussion in this thread (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=449673&highlight=fcc#post449673)...

andynormancx
2009-08-21, 05:46
This doesn't appear to be the Touch:

http://www.norman.cx/photos/links/sbrad.jpg

http://www.norman.cx/photos/links/sbradfront.jpg

Siduhe
2009-08-21, 05:48
Ah, got you. Interesting.

Chunkywizard
2009-08-21, 05:54
Looks a bit like it could be the rumoured baby Boom

CW

andynormancx
2009-08-21, 05:56
Looks a bit like it could be the rumoured baby Boom

With the colour LCD I'm guessing Jive based rather than "classic" based.

Sike
2009-08-21, 06:08
Ya beat me to it!

Next month is going to be expensive...

But good!!

Chunkywizard
2009-08-21, 06:15
With the colour LCD I'm guessing Jive based rather than "classic" based.

I was referring to the integrated speaker rather than the internal architecture. I wouldn't be surprised if all these new devices migrated to a new hardware platform.

CW

tamanaco
2009-08-21, 06:39
Given the current leaked pictures one would be let to assume that...

SB3 -> S-Touch
Boom -> Baby Boom (Given the sbrad.jpg it "should" have integrated speakers)
SBC -> ?
Duet Receiver -> ?

dem
2009-08-21, 06:59
According to the test report:


Squeezebox Radio model X-R0001 is a compact tabletop network music player and internet radio that lets you listen to virtually any internet radio station, music service or entire personal digital music collection. Providing remarkable sound in a compact footprint, the X-R0001 extends the power and ease-of-use of the Squeezebox to any room. The Squeezebox Radio model X-R0001 features:


Compact Design
Bi-amplified design with -inch high-definition, soft-dome tweeter
3-inch high-power, long-throw woofer
10W digital power amplifier
2.4 Color TFT LCD
Front panel controls including scroll wheel
802.11b/g Wi-Fi
One-touch WPS wireless setup
Built-in 10/100 Ethernet
Headphone Jack
Works with all Squeezebox family products



It sounds like the Radio is not stereo, so it's not a Boom replacement.

dem
2009-08-21, 07:08
Also shown in the test report is that it was apparently tested with both an AC adapter and a "Battery Power Pack".

amcluesent
2009-08-21, 07:09
>Duet Receiver -> ?<

Into the dumpster! And we will never mention it again :)

tamanaco
2009-08-21, 07:41
>Duet Receiver -> ?<

Into the dumpster! And we will never mention it again :)

From what I can gather in this forums I have to agree with you. Notice that I unbundled the Duet product to avoid confusion.

tamanaco
2009-08-21, 07:58
Also shown in the test report is that it was apparently tested with both an AC adapter and a "Battery Power Pack".

Are there any leaked pictures of this "Battery Power Pack"? Is it a build-in battery pack or external? In my experience using rechargeable batteries to listen to streamed music at a "decent" volume level over Wi-Fi for prolonged periods of time is not very practical. Specially with small (portable) batteries. Who knows, maybe they'll be using a "relatively" small and light rechargeable battery pack. I wonder what the playing time using the battery pack will be.

andynormancx
2009-08-21, 08:09
Are there any leaked pictures of this "Battery Power Pack"? Is it a build-in battery pack or external? In my experience using rechargeable batteries to listen to streamed music at a "decent" volume level over Wi-Fi for prolonged periods of time is not very practical. Specially with small (portable) batteries. Who knows, maybe they'll be using a "relatively" small and light rechargeable battery pack. I wonder what the playing time using the battery pack will be.

The shot of the bottom of the unit shows a removable door, presumably to access the battery.

Don't forget that the Radio will have a small LCD screen, rather than the VFD on the Boom. The LCD will use a lot less power than the VFD.

tamanaco
2009-08-21, 09:46
The shot of the bottom of the unit shows a removable door, presumably to access the battery.

I see...



Don't forget that the Radio will have a small LCD screen, rather than the VFD on the Boom. The LCD will use a lot less power than the VFD.

The LCD or VFD shouldn't be much of an issue as one can always turn the screen off and still listen to music. Can't say the same thing about the WiFi connection as constant power is required to drive the Wi-Fi adapter to download the stream and keep the connection alive. I read an announcement about a new generation of low power consumption Wi-Fi adpaters. Maybe this box will be using one of those.

andynormancx
2009-08-21, 09:50
I see...
The LCD or VFD shouldn't be much of an issue as one can always turn the screen off and still listen to music. Can't say the same thing about the WiFi connection as constant power is required to drive the Wi-Fi adapter to download the stream and keep the connection alive. I read an announcement about a new generation of low power consumption Wi-Fi adpaters. Maybe this box will be using one of those.
My iPhone will stream audio over wifi for 4-5 hours. It has a much smaller battery than the Radio is likely to have and probably a similar CPU, though admittedly it doesn't have a 10W amp...

tamanaco
2009-08-21, 10:28
My iPhone will stream audio over wifi for 4-5 hours. It has a much smaller battery than the Radio is likely to have and probably a similar CPU, though admittedly it doesn't have a 10W amp...

Wow, I'm impressed... My Smartphone only last about 45 Min using Wi-Fi using Pandora and about 2 hours when using a 3G connection. I guess the iPhone has a better (low-power-drain) WiFi adapter than my Smartphone. The other issue using batteries besides the power amp is going to be if the box plays streamed lossless formats like FLAC.

Ben Sandee
2009-08-21, 11:19
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 11:50 AM,
andynormancx<andynormancx.3xa2kn1250873521 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
> My iPhone will stream audio over wifi for 4-5 hours. It has a much
> smaller battery than the Radio is likely to have and probably a similar
> CPU, though admittedly it doesn't have a 10W amp...

I don't see why this device would have or need anywhere near the CPU
power of an iPhone.
Ben

Paul Webster
2009-08-21, 11:24
Odd that they call is "Squeezebox Radio" without including FM - good chance that it will confuse things in the stores.
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51748

4mula1
2009-08-21, 11:39
Like the Touch, the short term confidentiality letter specifies September 30 as the official launch.

If the baby Boom, er Radio, has an alarm it could be my new alarm clock. The Boom is definitely too big for my nightstand bu this could be about right.

ModelCitizen
2009-08-21, 11:48
If the baby Boom, er Radio, has an alarm it could be my new alarm clock. The Boom is definitely too big for my nightstand bu this could be about right.
Yes this would suit me well too. My current bedroom Boom would get displaced to the kitchen (and benefit from the addition of a cunningly concealed subwoofer). Great.

MC

4mula1
2009-08-21, 12:35
Yes this would suit me well too. My current bedroom Boom would get displaced to the kitchen (and benefit from the addition of a cunningly concealed subwoofer). Great.

It just hit me that this will be even better than the Boom for an alarm clock because of the battery pack.

If it has a traditional alarm sound that switches to music after you hit it I will definitely have one.

Goodsounds
2009-08-21, 14:11
Like the Touch, the short term confidentiality letter specifies September 30 as the official launch.



Like the Touch, that is the date on a submission to a government agency for its own internal process, and is likely not indicative of anything else.

4mula1
2009-08-21, 16:15
Item 3a from the short term confidentiality request is as follows:

"We further authorize the release of the above information after the official product launch scheduled for 9/30/09. Or a period not to exceed 90 days which ever comes first."

Goodsounds
2009-08-21, 16:41
Item 3a from the short term confidentiality request is as follows:

"We further authorize the release of the above information after the official product launch scheduled for 9/30/09. Or a period not to exceed 90 days which ever comes first."

Exactly, and consistent with my comment to your similar post in the other thread. Every agency has an SOP for such things.

Non-disclosure periods with government agencies are VERY common, and can normally be extended quite easily by a simple request. In many cases, the confidential treatment is to protect premature disclosure, to competitors and other "outsiders", of non-public information that the agency requires in the conduct of its mission.

In my view, this is no indication one way or the other of when the product will be released.

JJZolx
2009-08-21, 16:49
Exactly, and consistent with my comment to your similar post in the other thread. Every agency has an SOP for such things.

Non-disclosure periods with government agencies are VERY common, and can normally be extended quite easily by a simple request. In many cases, the confidential treatment is to protect premature disclosure, to competitors and other "outsiders", of non-public information that the agency requires in the conduct of its mission.

In my view, this is no indication one way or the other of when the product will be released.

It's true that the document has no weight when it comes to the actual release date. The FCC doesn't give a damn when the product is launched, if ever. But why would you give such a date unless you expected to actually launch the product by that date? It may be possible to request in the future that the documents be kept confidential until some later date, but it's got to be a pain in the ass to monitor all the applications and do that. If anything, I'd expect a confidentiality request to use a date later than the expected release date.

4mula1
2009-08-21, 17:58
To put "official launch date of 9/30/09" instead of requesting just a date seems indicative of a hard set date. If they had requested 9/30/09 by itself that gives them a product launch window up until that date.

I'd be happy if that were the launch date that way they will have time to manufacture product that can be purchased on release day, not an announcement that you can buy it in late November.

Goodsounds
2009-08-21, 22:34
It may be possible to request in the future that the documents be kept confidential until some later date, but it's got to be a pain in the ass to monitor all the applications and do that.

Ha. There are many jobs where someone has to monitor a calendar to insure timely action for various things. It's just like anything else. Court dates and deadlines, government filings, actions required by contract, even processing paychecks! Not something I'd find engaging, but it's important. Screw-ups can be very costly.



If anything, I'd expect a confidentiality request to use a date later than the expected release date.

Right, just to cut down handling. But as I said above, things like this are usually very easily extended (when appropriate and within the agency's guidelines). I have no specific FCC experience but I do know of some similar processes. The agency itself is walking a tightrope. As you may know, the Freedom of Information Act requires disclosure (if requested) of most federal governmental proceedings. The agencies themselves are usually most cooperative about maintaining confidentiality within the guidelines they have. But the guidelines are always time limited, and they need to watch the calendar too. Most agencies get FOIA requests daily by the box load, and they need to track what can and can't be disclosed, and if not, when. It's probably a bigger pain to them but they have no choice.

Paul Webster
2009-08-22, 03:50
I think that Logitech think that it is "Absolute Greatest"
http://dabdig.blogspot.com/2009/08/logitech-squeezebox-radio.html
(tie in for Touch and Baby Boom with upcoming Queen release)

lrossouw
2009-08-23, 19:48
Reminds me of a Tivoli.

Something like http://www.techgadgets.in/images/tivoli-radio.jpg

Paul Webster
2009-08-24, 00:57
I thought it was more like the Nokia - although I still haven't seen one in the Nokia shop
http://dabdig.blogspot.com/2009/01/nokia-enters-internet-radio-device.html

lrossouw
2009-08-24, 02:24
I thought it was more like the Nokia - although I still haven't seen one in the Nokia shop
http://dabdig.blogspot.com/2009/01/nokia-enters-internet-radio-device.html
Was speaking form a looks perspective, but yes from a functional (and design) perspective it is similar to the Nokia device.

Troutmaster
2009-08-24, 04:35
>Duet Receiver -> ?<

Into the dumpster! And we will never mention it again :)

Just out of interest what are the problems with the receiver? I ask because I bought the Duet receiver, found I couldn't set it up and had to buy the Duet controller. Now that it's setup the controller is on ebay but I am happy with the receiver. Although the output is a little muted I used the tone controls on my HiFi and it is acceptable.

Muele
2009-08-24, 04:56
Just out of interest what are the problems with the receiver? I ask because I bought the Duet receiver, found I couldn't set it up and had to buy the Duet controller. Now that it's setup the controller is on ebay but I am happy with the receiver. Although the output is a little muted I used the tone controls on my HiFi and it is acceptable.

Me too. I own two receivers. I recall NO isues with them at all during the 1 years since the first purchase.

dave77
2009-08-24, 05:38
Any speculation on price for this? I'd have one for the bedroom for sub 100

upstatemike
2009-08-24, 06:26
Just out of interest what are the problems with the receiver? I ask because I bought the Duet receiver, found I couldn't set it up and had to buy the Duet controller. Now that it's setup the controller is on ebay but I am happy with the receiver. Although the output is a little muted I used the tone controls on my HiFi and it is acceptable.

The setup is the main thing... in your case what happens if you change your network configuration? Do you buy another controller so you can change the settings on your reciever and then sell that controller on Ebay as well? This does not sound like a very practical appraoach! Having struggled with simple tasks like setting up a static IP address in the SBR I have to agree they belong in the dumpster. Maybe with the new hardware coming out Logitech will replace the Duet with a good bundled price for a Squeezebox Touch + Controller. Might be overkill for those who don't need the display on the music player but it would make all these setup problems go away once and for all and therefore be a worthwhile tradeoff. of course Logitech could simply provide a section in the Controller to manually edit settings in an SBR but if they haven't done it by now I suspect they never will... or maybe there is a hardware flaw in the SBR so they can't. Either way, it is time to end the SBR and replace it with something that can take standard network configuration settings.

tipsen
2009-08-24, 07:28
Just out of interest what are the problems with the receiver? I ask because I bought the Duet receiver, found I couldn't set it up and had to buy the Duet controller. Now that it's setup the controller is on ebay but I am happy with the receiver. Although the output is a little muted I used the tone controls on my HiFi and it is acceptable.
You could have used NET::UDAP instead of buying a controller.

toby10
2009-08-24, 08:12
You could have used NET::UDAP instead of buying a controller.

Indeed, and keep in mind the SBR was never intended for use without a SBC.

It is no different than those cordless phone "systems" where you buy the main "base station" and then buy as many cordless satellite phone handsets as you wish. But the satellite cordless phone requires the "base station" for use and setup. You may well be able to hack a use of that satellite cordless phone with a different type/brand base station, but it was never designed to be used without it's matched base station. :)

toby10
2009-08-24, 08:15
...... Either way, it is time to end the SBR and replace it with something that can take standard network configuration settings.

They've had this for years.....SB3/Classic. :)

upstatemike
2009-08-24, 09:07
They've had this for years.....SB3/Classic. :)

Exactly... dump the SBR/Duet and do a bundle price with the Contoller and the SB3/Classic (or SB Touch). Having a non-display device that requires a contoller to configure it is fine IF you actually provide the screens to expose all of the configuration settings. Logitech has not done that and some of the work-arounds such as NET::UDAP, temporarily reconfiguring your router to "force" certain settings, etc, are just not appropriate for a consumer audio product.

toby10
2009-08-24, 10:32
Exactly... dump the SBR/Duet and do a bundle price with the Contoller and the SB3/Classic (or SB Touch). Having a non-display device that requires a contoller to configure it is fine IF you actually provide the screens to expose all of the configuration settings. Logitech has not done that and some of the work-arounds such as NET::UDAP, temporarily reconfiguring your router to "force" certain settings, etc, are just not appropriate for a consumer audio product.

Like they say, you can never please everyone. :)

IMHO, leave it as it is and pay the $70 premium of an SB3 vs SBR.
Bundling an SBC with every SD player doesn't make sense to me, nor do I think it would sell much as a SBC+SB3 bundle as most would be content with the SB3 as a standalone player with it's own screen.
For non-SBR players it's more of an add-on the way I look at it.
Dumping the Duet/SBR is really silly if one desires that setup with a SBC, particularly with multiple SBR's.

I've never used a Duet/SBR/SBC myself so maybe I'm missing something....what network settings are not accessible via SBC?

Mnyb
2009-08-24, 10:41
Like they say, you can never please everyone. :)

IMHO, leave it as it is and pay the $70 premium of an SB3 vs SBR.
Bundling an SBC with every SD player doesn't make sense to me, nor do I think it would sell much as a SBC+SB3 bundle as most would be content with the SB3 as a standalone player with it's own screen.
For non-SBR players it's more of an add-on the way I look at it.
Dumping the Duet/SBR is really silly if one desires that setup with a SBC, particularly with multiple SBR's.

I've never used a Duet/SBR/SBC myself so maybe I'm missing something....what network settings are not accessible via SBC?

Most of them, in the SB3 or boom, you can simply hold the left arrow and go to setup scroll in current settings and edit *one* setting and be done with it.
If you want to change a single thing in an SBR you must put it to factory reset and reconfigure it from the beginning, thats daft to put it mildly ;)

upstatemike
2009-08-24, 10:43
Like they say, you can never please everyone. :)

IMHO, leave it as it is and pay the $70 premium of an SB3 vs SBR.
Bundling an SBC with every SD player doesn't make sense to me, nor do I think it would sell much as a SBC+SB3 bundle as most would be content with the SB3 as a standalone player with it's own screen.
For non-SBR players it's more of an add-on the way I look at it.
Dumping the Duet/SBR is really silly if one desires that setup with a SBC, particularly with multiple SBR's.

I've never used a Duet/SBR/SBC myself so maybe I'm missing something....what network settings are not accessible via SBC?

The SBR does not allow setting a static IP address (or any other manual settings)through either the Controller menus or through SqueezeCenter.

Not suggesting making anybody buy a Controller to get an SB3. Just ditch the Duet/SBR and make the options Controller alone, SB3 alone, or Controller+SB3 combo priced as a bundle to fill the niche currently held by the Duet (Say $479 for the combo for example).

toby10
2009-08-24, 10:57
Upsate: Ah, gotcha. I did not know static IP's could not be done even with a SBC. I've only ever used DHCP via router so I've not had to mess with static IP's.

Mnyb: Yes, factory reset on SBR to reconfigure network settings. Is that true if paired with SBC as well? Also, can Net/Udap reconfigure SBR without a complete reset?

Thanks to both. :)

Mnyb
2009-08-24, 11:02
Upsate: Ah, gotcha. I did not know static IP's could not be done even with a SBC. I've only ever used DHCP via router so I've not had to mess with static IP's.

Mnyb: Yes, factory reset on SBR to reconfigure network settings. Is that true if paired with SBC as well? Also, can Net/Udap reconfigure SBR without a complete reset?

Thanks to both. :)

No net udap requires an factory reset to, hence all request for an web based settings page (or standalone config tool with an GUI ) in SC were you could alter these settings.
I would like to change my DNS settings in my recieiver but i'm hesitating.
You now, open firewall cable the sbr factory reset and run udap, for that tiny change, it is functioning as it is.

Edit: paired with an SBC the receiver gets "discovered" by the SBC after it factory reset. You will then be guided trough a setup procedure.

toby10
2009-08-24, 11:39
Yeah, I hear ya. Many have asked for a configurable Network Setup & Edit UI for all players within SC. I would love it solely for WPA2 encryption key entry (cut & paste). I've passed up a number of opportunities to bring my Boom to various functions (people ask for it) but I decline if the host has WiFi encryption and does not want to disable it (or know how) cuz I do not want to re-enter my 63 character WPA2 encryption when I get back home. NOT FUN! :)

Being a networked device I'm surprised this is not offered. I assume it is related to various different WiFi chipsets in the players? WiFi chipsets not capable of such UI configuring? Dunno.

Mnyb
2009-08-24, 12:05
Yeah, I hear ya. Many have asked for a configurable Network Setup & Edit UI for all players within SC. I would love it solely for WPA2 encryption key entry (cut & paste). I've passed up a number of opportunities to bring my Boom to various functions (people ask for it) but I decline if the host has WiFi encryption and does not want to disable it (or know how) cuz I do not want to re-enter my 63 character WPA2 encryption when I get back home. NOT FUN! :)

Being a networked device I'm surprised this is not offered. I assume it is related to various different WiFi chipsets in the players? WiFi chipsets not capable of such UI configuring? Dunno.

Actually i think the new players, have a potential for this like the controller they will most likely have editable config files you can reach with SSH, edit reboot and your done. Or as they are files on a linux system somebody will come up with an plugin eventually.

To be honest this is only a problem while your system is in flux setting it up or changing things. When set the SBR do work just fine, lets not blow things out of proportion. But the SB2/3 boom setup is very well thought out it easy to do, kudos to the guys figuring that one out. Maybe we are spoiled with that way of doing things.

mark wollschlager
2009-08-24, 12:21
I brought up a new squeezebox receiver on my network last night using an already configured controller.
I was amazed at how easy it was.
Plugged in the receiver, waited less than a minute.
Checked the player list on the controller, there it was.
Highlighted and selected the new player ( receiver ).
After a few seconds the light on the receiver changed red to blinking red to green to blinking white( loading new firmware).
After about 3 minutes the receiver was ready for a new name and I could stream to it.
I use dhcp and it got the WPA2 passphrase info from the controller.
The initial setup of the Duet passphrase was a little pain with the controller, but this was pain free.
I expect to have a boom delivered today or tomorrow and I will try to setup that with the Controller too.
Hopefully its just as easy.

Mark.

Matt Wise
2009-08-24, 12:27
I brought up a new squeezebox receiver on my network last night using an already configured controller.
I was amazed at how easy it was.
Plugged in the receiver, waited less than a minute.
Checked the player list on the controller, there it was.
Highlighted and selected the new player ( receiver ).
After a few seconds the light on the receiver changed red to blinking red to green to blinking white( loading new firmware).
After about 3 minutes the receiver was ready for a new name and I could stream to it.
I use dhcp and it got the WPA2 passphrase info from the controller.
The initial setup of the Duet passphrase was a little pain with the controller, but this was pain free.
I expect to have a boom delivered today or tomorrow and I will try to setup that with the Controller too.
Hopefully its just as easy.

Mark.

Boom is configured by itself (onscreen controls) -- Receiver is the only product fully-configured by the Controller.

Matt Wise
2009-08-24, 12:33
Boom is configured by itself (onscreen controls) -- Receiver is the only product fully-configured by the Controller.

I should add, for completeness, that once configured, all Squeezebox products are controllable with the Squeezebox Controller. Setup is the only thing that the above relates to.

mark wollschlager
2009-08-24, 16:27
I should add, for completeness, that once configured, all Squeezebox products are controllable with the Squeezebox Controller. Setup is the only thing that the above relates to.

Ah, well that could be a future feature ( or product ).

Mark.

Troutmaster
2009-08-27, 03:07
You could have used NET::UDAP instead of buying a controller.

Exactly. I know that now that's why I sold the controller. The receiver is a nice unobstrusive box on my hifi. That is the main reason I didn't get the Sonos - the receiver is just too ugly, a big white box. This is also why I won't be buying the new SB touch - the colour screen would be out of place.

thing-fish
2009-08-27, 06:42
The setup is the main thing... in your case what happens if you change your network configuration? Do you buy another controller so you can change the settings on your reciever and then sell that controller on Ebay as well?

Agreed. I thought the strategy in the grandparent post was brilliant but it's definitely flawed in that sense.

Look, everyone needs to vote for bug #7502 (https://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=7502), which explicitly requests that the Receiver handle static IPs and implicitly (in the comments) requests that the Receiver be entirely configurable without the Controller. We have a way to make our voice heard in this, but we have to use it.

FredFredrickson
2009-08-27, 07:00
I just want to chime in here, I've had a duet and 2 receivers since the month they were released.

Although I have run into various issues (rhapsody problems anyone?) I have found the receivers to be incredibly stable. It was the controller that would act up periodically. But the receivers are a must-have for unobtrusive audio equipment, I love to tuck those suckers into small places and expand my music network..

Paul Webster
2009-09-03, 01:31
Confirmed by Logitech.
Battery and Remote are optional.

and includes (presumably for all of the devices once the software is released) the ability to post info to Facebook

http://www.logitechsqueezebox.com/products/squeezebox-radio.html#tab2

autopilot
2009-09-03, 01:40
Confirmed by Logitech.
Battery and Remote are optional.

and includes (presumably for all of the devices once the software is released) the ability to post info to Facebook

http://www.logitechsqueezebox.com/products/squeezebox-radio.html#tab2

It can display facebook feeds to, so you can have your news feed, inc photos, as a screen saver etc. Looks much better on the Touch though.

It sounds great too :)

SteveEast
2009-09-03, 07:29
Pre-ordered mine on Amazon for $179.99.

Steve.