PDA

View Full Version : Why Purchase a Touch??



sawdin
2010-04-01, 17:39
Just curious...

Many SB owners are 'techies' and/or audiophiles. I'm curious as to how many SB owners have built their own inexpensive (under $1,000) digital music servers (e.g., by using a laptop or by building a server from scratch using something like an Atom 1.6 Ghz processor, etc.)?

For those 'techie tinkerers' who could have built a server but did not, why did you choose to forgo doing so and purchase a SB product?

In addition, what do SB users consider to be the Pros/Cons of going the SB route? Likewise, what do you consider to be the Pros/Cons of building your own server?

Below is a post I put up on Computer Audiophile in a thread on DIY music servers, in which I took a newbie stab at the Touch vs. DIY server question. I received one reply, in which the person noted that he decided to build a server due to issues w/ multiple SB release delays (not sure if this was in reference to Touch or other SB products), and he found 'Squeezecenter to be slow and buggy and the wireless remote controller felt nice, but it would hang multiple times per day.'
============
Why not just get a $299 Squeezebox Touch? The DAC is supposedly pretty good (24/96). It has a USB connector, so if one wanted to, they could connect an external HDD directly to the Touch. Alternatively, you could just send the files wirelessly from an external HDD that is connected to the main pc via a wireless router. If one doesn't like the DAC's, just connect an outboard DAC between the Touch and the audio system.

Advantages of Squeezebox Touch:
1) Fairly simple.
2) Remote interface/controller.
3) Can use I-Pod or Droid for graphic controller.
4) Inexpensive, thus $ available for additional DAC if needed.
5) Tech support via Logitech and other users.

Disadvantage of Squeezebox:
1) Less flexibility in terms of software, though app's are available (e.g., peng).
2) Need to purchase another unit if you want to use in another room (unless you move the unit each time, which would be a pain). However, using a DIY music server, what do you use for the controller if you want to connect to audio systems in another room?
3) Is it 'noisier'? If yes, what introduces the noise as it is fan-less.
I'm sure I'm missing something, but I've been debating which way to go and my guess is that it is going to be more expensive to build a DIY server, and that does not take into account the time to do the research on how to build it, where to get the parts, software, etc. . Thus, spending less money on a Touch frees up $$ that can be put into an upgraded DAC.

So, what am I missing?

agillis
2010-04-01, 18:00
Building a music server is easy. All you need is a VortexBox and iPeng you could have the whole system running in a hour. So simplicity is not a reason to go with SqueezeBox.

I find it's really nice to have purpose built hardware. The squeezeBox Radio is brilliant. Right down to the screen that dims when you shut off the room lights and very low cost for what it does.

I have both a VortexBox music server that rips my CDs, stores them, and plays them through some speakers in my house and also my SqueezeBox connected to my stereo and my SqueezeBox Radios in each bedroom.

So the answer is for a full whole system you need both.

To answer your question about audio distribution with a home built audio server I use a BreatheAudio http://astore.amazon.com/vort-20/detail/B001EPGFA4 connected directly to my VortexBox. This get's me 4 independent zones I can control with iPeng.

firedog
2010-04-02, 00:44
I have a purpose built music server, which I will continue to use when I get a Touch - the touch will just be the interface.

Advantages of server over Touch + USB drive:
1. Don't like USB drives - prefer internal drives. I can upgrade internal drive to larger or SSD drive as needed.

2. My server is fanless and virtually silent. Purpose setup as music server.

3. My server is not particularly powerful (ATOM 330 + 2GB RAM) but it performs flawlessly with all types of files and hi-res. Better than any USB external drive. Gives wired and wireless capability, File transfer, tagging and other functions are faster. Integration with home network is better than with external USB drive. For example, I have a laptop that doesn't have SS software on it, but I can play music files from my networked server on it with just about any player software. Just have to define the network music drive as the library folder. This might work with external USB drive and touch, might not. I think it would be problematic to setup and run without glitches if it is possible.

4. Windows based, so it gives me compatibility with lots of existing software and lots of flexibility in terms of installing any program I want on the server, etc.

5. If I decide to change operating system, dump the Squeezebox system, or go to VortexBox software, no problem: I just convert server to setup I want.

6. I also have my server setup to automatically rip bit perfect copies of CDs and tag them on insertion to drive (like VortexBox).

7. I have enough storage capacity on server to act as Backup for my main (non music server), and to do double backup of my ripped music files on second hard drive.

None of these reasons may appeal to you, but for me they they make music server superior to Touch plus external HDD. However, I think the Touch and an external HD are a very good solution in general, and certainly more economical than the method I've chosen.

bpa
2010-04-02, 01:06
Disadvantage of Squeezebox:
1) Less flexibility in terms of software, though app's are available (e.g., peng).
2) Need to purchase another unit if you want to use in another room (unless you move the unit each time, which would be a pain). However, using a DIY music server, what do you use for the controller if you want to connect to audio systems in another room?
3) Is it 'noisier'? If yes, what introduces the noise as it is fan-less.
I'm sure I'm missing something, but I've been debating which way to go and my guess is that it is going to be more expensive to build a DIY server, and that does not take into account the time to do the research on how to build it, where to get the parts, software, etc. . Thus, spending less money on a Touch frees up $$ that can be put into an upgraded DAC.

So, what am I missing?

I think you may be mixing some of the older Squeezebox and Squeezebox Server. So assuming you mean SqueezeBox Server (SBS) - I think "disadvantages" is wrong - comparison may be better.
1. More flexibility as you can use plugins which are not supported on SqueezeBox Touch which can provide access to other services, devices and also do audio processing.
2. Support all Squeezebox devices from SliMP3 to Radio, Touch
3. Transcoding supported on SBS so that many more audio formats can be supported across all devices.
4. Same graphic controller will work with SBS as Touch so no difference.
5. SBS server does not normally play audio so noise issue is the same as a HTPC kept beside a TV.

Touch and SBS are not exclusive - they are steps on a possible growth paths which will be determined by how you are acquire players, how you control them and what you play on them.

Mnyb
2010-04-02, 01:35
One piont of an sbs server is also to not have it in the stereo rack it's elsewhere providing music over the network to all your squeezeboxes.

Touch with it's on-board server can do that to:

But:

With an whirring usb drive besides it ?

No transcoding for the older players (not squeezeplay based):
Meaning for example some formats like 24/96 flac or alac won't play on all players, some radio stations won't sound either.

No web-UI:
Web-UI is nice if you want use access the server from all your computers.
An adjust settings browsing music or build playlists in an more convient manner than from the player or remote.

The onboard "Tiny sbs" on touch has less setting thus is less flexible.

No plugins.

Mr_Sukebe
2010-04-02, 01:58
I'll be moving from using an SB3 connecting via wireless to my PC to a Touch.

As I see it, the key changes will be:
- No need to power up my PC. I never managed to get WOL working to my satisfaction, so I'm very much looking forward to that. Additionally, I expect that a Touch will start up much faster tham my PC does. Clearly there will be a good power saving from the move as the Touch supposedly only uses something like 4 watts whilst running.
- No option to run a plug in like Inguz. As it happens, I don't use any plugins, but I have in the past when using my system in a room with poor acoustics.
- The design of my house means that when the microwave is used, my wireless connection drops out, so no music. That is more than a little annoying. Similarly, the PC I use for streaming is located in my study. That room is sometimes used for guests, resulting in the PC being turned off becuase of how noisy it is. It'll be lovely to have a fully contained system by my stereo which won't have interuptions. I know it'll mean a HDD being located in the same room as my stereo, my I have a fairly long USB lead, so can hide the external HDD.
- Unlike a PC or NAS, the Touch can't stream other formats (e.g. video). Again, this doesn't really bother me as I don't have any other media to stream, however I'm sure that it must be a consideration for other potential users. If you need that ability, the Touch might not be the right solution.
- The Touch will support 24/96 FLAC files. Many of the other streaming products won't (e.g. WD TV Live).
- According to the reports, the digital output on the Touch has been focused on to improve it's performance and reduce jitter. Chances are that this won't be that important for most actual SB users. However my upcoming Touch will be used in a fairly serious system, and it certainly is of importance to me, particularly so when considering how it might compare to say streaming from a Netbook (another option).

About the only additional point that I'd like from the Touch would be the option of audio streaming via a HDMI connection, but that's only because my long term plans include the use of a Meridian HD621, which is best served by that type of connection.

Mnyb
2010-04-02, 02:53
I will eventually have Touch and a running squeezeboxservers i Like options .
I don't like to be out of options/inputs/whatever

Locking forward to use my 24/96 flac files wo trans-coding anyway, my server can do it, but it loads it about 70% .

OT:
Btw I have an Meridian HD621 for my blueray player and HD-dtv box to interface with my G68J works pretty well a bit buggy compared to a geffen switch (Meridian is another charming brand that's into the bugz thing ;) )

socistep
2010-04-02, 04:40
Its a very good question this one.

For me I built a low powered atom based server about a year ago, on that I installed the vortexbox OS, the main benefits for me is that I get automated ripping, tagging, cover art and SB reindexing - it works really well, new cd's get popped in the drive and 15mins later i'm listening to the music without having to do anything - in addition Andrew developed the VB player which works well and I have hooked up a pair of wireless headphones so in effect another 'zone' for free.

As an aside the current limitation on the set-up for me is due to personal set-up, I decided to run a desktop environment on the VB and have this hooked to a monitor upstairs, its connected to the router via homeplugs which aren't giving me the network speed I need - I use the server for docs, photos etc. (a media server) and transferring over the homeplugs is causing rebuffering when playing music and general low speeds - this is something I'm working to resolve currently.

In terms of the touch I am very tempted to get one for the living room, would it replace the server - probably not - however I can see a lot of benefits for people who haven't got a server and are looking at SB players - usb drives are inexpensive and it sounds great to be able to plug this in without having a pc/server running

sebp
2010-04-02, 10:47
For those 'techie tinkerers' who could have built a server but did not, why did you choose to forgo doing so and purchase a SB product?
I indeed had built such a server, and got it running in my living room for three years.
I bought my first SB because I wanted to be able to listen to all my music in my bedroom, with zero noise.
Bought the second one because the server died.
The others came because I wanted to be able to listen to music in my whole house. ;)


In addition, what do SB users consider to be the Pros/Cons of going the SB route? Likewise, what do you consider to be the Pros/Cons of building your own server?
Pros : absolute silence.
Cons : tiedous playlist management.

mlsstl
2010-04-02, 11:40
Though others have said this in a bit of a beat-around-the-bush way, one big attraction for me is the Squeezebox system makes it very easy to run multiple stereo systems off of one music source. Add a player to the network and that's that.

I also find the sound is excellent and easily upgradeable if one wants to improve on the stock units I've had to date.

I know playlist creation isn't quite as easy on the Squeezeboxserver as some other programs, but I can count the number of playlists I've created over the past 7 or 8 years of using a computer for music playback on one hand.

When I sit down for serious listening I've only decided what I want to listen to at that moment. Yesterday's, last week's or last month's music choices aren't very relevant to me. I realize some people put together extensive playlists for parties and the like, but that's not particularly useful to me. So it is meaningless to me that some other programs make playlist creation easier.

It'd be interesting to do a survey to map out users on a scale that runs from serious playlist creators to casual users to those like me who rarely use them.

JohnSwenson
2010-04-02, 13:03
When you talk about a server it sounds like you are talking about a computer in the listening room that you interact directly with which either has an internal soundcard or USB DAC or equivalent to send audio to a stereo system.

In SB land there can also be a server, but you don't have to interact with it directly, it can sit in some other room, the basement etc.

The Touch allows you to have a server in the player, but you don't have to run it that way, it still works very well with an external server.

There are several advantages to using a Touch: the audio quality is very good, not quite as good as the best audiophile DACs, but quite a bit better than anything I have heard in its price range. Its going to be better than almost any soundcard you can put in your computer, including ones that cost many times as much. There are a couple out there which cost 3-4 times as much which when used with a highly optimized computer are about on par. The Touch is that good.

Footprint in listening room. The Touch is small and very electrically quiet. Even specially designed fanless computers usually put out quite a lot crud into the air and onto the AC lines which can get picked up by the other components in a stereo system, which can subtly degrade the sound quality. The Touch is extremely low in this regard.

Flexibility in control. There are MANY ways to control the Touch. Use its own touch screen, IR remote that comes with it, use a SB controler, use iPeng on iPod Touch or iPhone, apps that run on many other smart phones. Dedicated apps for anything windows, Mac or linux. If you use an external server with the touch you can control it from anything that has a web browser.

Multiple playback locations. The SB server (either separate or the one in the Touch) can serve music to many players throughout your house. You can also have virtual players on any computers you have. For example in my house there are 4 physical players and virtual players on every computer. So I can be listening to music as I type this on the office computer while my wife is listening to music in her sewing room. She can listen over her laptop when out reading on the patio while I'm in the listening room with the "big rig".

I personally think the best flexibility is to have a separate server somewhere in the house feeding the players (hardware or virtual types). It doesn't have to be a big expensive computer. These days I recommend either the Vortexbox or a sheeva plug. The Vortexbox comes with disk and CD drive to rip CDs and all the software preinstalled, its the easiest thing in the known universe to use. With the sheeva plug you need to attach your own USB drives, but it only takes a couple watts, BUT you do have to load the software your self.

If it were me I would get a Vortexbox and a Touch and add players as desired. Once you start with the SB system they tend to proliferate!

John S.

JJZolx
2010-04-02, 13:49
So, what am I missing?

Your post seems to be more of a question than a comparison of advantages and disadvantages.


1) Less flexibility in terms of software, though app's are available (e.g., peng).

The software is perhaps the single biggest negative that I read about from people who were dissatisfied with the Squeezebox (the other being wifi connection problems). But it's funny that it's often self-described audiophiles who have this complaint, as you'd think that the basic task of playing music would be sufficient, and Squeezebox Server certainly does that and much more.

But Squeezebox Server also has its advantages: It offers several different interfaces right out of the box: the IR remote interface, the web interface, and now a Touch interface on the Squeezebox Touch. The web interface means that you can connect to the controlling server and manage any Squeezebox on your network from any computer in your home. And it can be run on several different operating system platforms, unlike a lot of other software products.


2) Need to purchase another unit if you want to use in another room (unless you move the unit each time, which would be a pain). However, using a DIY music server, what do you use for the controller if you want to connect to audio systems in another room?

It's not much different than any other audio source component. I don't see how a PC music server can be used in more than one room. You could use a Squeezebox as an audio source in a whole-house audio system and feed more than one room. In that scenario it has advantages over almost any other source component (such a CD player or dedicated PC music server) in that you can control it using the web interface or an app like iPeng from anywhere in the house.


3) Is it 'noisier'? If yes, what introduces the noise as it is fan-less.

It's silent.

chrislemasters
2010-04-02, 14:33
To answer your question about audio distribution with a home built audio server I use a BreatheAudio http://astore.amazon.com/vort-20/detail/B001EPGFA4 connected directly to my VortexBox. This get's me 4 independent zones I can control with iPeng.

Wow - why have I not seen the BreatheAudio product before?! Very nice, great price.

How do you control the 4 zones on the BreatheAudio box? With their remote? Certainly not via iPeng (that would be amazing if possible). Thanks for the tip!

Chris

sawdin
2010-04-03, 06:33
I am, once again, amazed by the civility and level of detail in the replies to questions I have posed on this forum.

However, those thoughtful replies have brought up many new questions (hope that's okay) and I hope to be able to post some of those questions this weekend.

Again, thanks for the informative replies - this forum is by far the best music-related forum that I have encountered on the web.

Sincerely,
Dino

PS...Although I have 'instant email notification' selected, I did not receive notification of any replies beyond the first. Do follow-up notifications only occur after you log on and read the first reply?

socistep
2010-04-03, 11:32
====
I personally think the best flexibility is to have a separate server somewhere in the house feeding the players (hardware or virtual types). It doesn't have to be a big expensive computer. These days I recommend either the Vortexbox or a sheeva plug. The Vortexbox comes with disk and CD drive to rip CDs and all the software preinstalled, its the easiest thing in the known universe to use. With the sheeva plug you need to attach your own USB drives, but it only takes a couple watts, BUT you do have to load the software your self.
=====

The vortexbox appliance or installing the OS on your own system is great, it makes the whole thing so much easier for ripping/tagging etc. - the touch looks great but you would still need to have to use a seperate pc to rip/tag your music and I love the automation/reindexing from the VB.

However perhaps you could configure so that /storage/music/flac on the VB is mapped to the actual usb drive on the touch, that way you could use the VB to rip/tag and then music is stored on the touch, although seems a bit of a hassle and would be restricted by your network capability.

JJZolx
2010-04-03, 11:34
PS...Although I have 'instant email notification' selected, I did not receive notification of any replies beyond the first. Do follow-up notifications only occur after you log on and read the first reply?

You only receive one notification per subscribed thread until you again visit the forums.

Kevin Haskins
2010-04-03, 12:17
For me it is the form-factor and dedicated design. PCs are great all-purpose tools but they rarely have the elegance of a purpose designed application hardware/software platform.

The Touch is compact, has a nice form factor and easy interface, can act as its own server (so I can plug-in an external drive), and from all accounts, respectable hardware for audio reproduction.

Sure... I could build a fan-less computer, throw a copy of Windows on it and run a touchscreen LCD, either a high-end sound card or run to an external DAC but it isn't as polished as a dedicated product.

sawdin
2010-04-04, 07:44
I know playlist creation isn't quite as easy on the Squeezeboxserver as some other programs, but I can count the number of playlists I've created over the past 7 or 8 years of using a computer for music playback on one hand.

I do not use Napster or Rhapsody. Sometimes I listen to Pandora, but for most of my streaming music I use MOG (most streams are at 320kbps), and I have started to develop various playlists. I'm not sure, but I might continue to create and modify playlists upon completion of ripping my CD's (300+). MOG has stated that they are working on SB support/compatibility, time will tell.

I'm not sure how I'll manage the various playlists, though my desire would be to have one central database that is easy to use. JRiver MC 15 may be able to do this, but I'm not sure.

Thanks for the information.

sawdin
2010-04-04, 09:37
When you talk about a server it sounds like you are talking about a computer in the listening room that you interact directly with which either has an internal soundcard or USB DAC or equivalent to send audio to a stereo system.....In SB land there can also be a server, but you don't have to interact with it directly, it can sit in some other room, the basement etc.
I probably was unclear as to what my preference would be. Ultimately, I'd like to have a mobile device (e.g., a remote) that is easy to control (thus easy to see and manipulate), which I can use from any location (e.g., a chair in the living room, in the kitchen, etc.) Thus, the location of the server (whatever shape or form it takes), becomes somewhat irrelevant. When creating or managing playlists or making changes to my music library, I imagine that it would be easiest to do that using my primary pc as I can use a full-size keyboard and monitor.



The Touch allows you to have a server in the player, but you don't have to run it that way, it still works very well with an external server.
Isn't there more than one version of the SB server software (a 'regular' version that cannot be run on the Touch and one called 'Tiny' that can be run on a Touch, but which has less features)?



If it were me I would get a Vortebox and a Touch and add players as desired. Once you start with the SB system they tend to proliferate!

John S.
The Vortebox appliance sounds like a nice solution. Would I just add the Vortebox appliance to my router-based home wireless network and control/access it via: 1) any pc that is also connected to the network; 2) a SB Touch (either the unit itself or the remote; 3) an I-Phone or Droid running an app? Finally, what server software do you recommend if going the route of V-appliance + Touch?

Thanks for the suggestions,
Dino

aubuti
2010-04-04, 10:40
Isn't there more than one version of the SB server software (a 'regular' version that cannot be run on the Touch and one called 'Tiny' that can be run on a Touch, but which has less features)?
It's actually the same software, along the lines of the embedded branch of 7.5.0 (now 7.6). The differences are that the version that runs on the Touch only works with SQLite (a regular server can use either SQLite or MySQL) and the SBS on the Touch is invoked with some of the capabilities disabled, including web ui, transcoding, and 3rd party plugin support.

socistep
2010-04-04, 13:59
I probably was unclear as to what my preference would be. Ultimately, I'd like to have a mobile device (e.g., a remote) that is easy to control (thus easy to see and manipulate), which I can use from any location (e.g., a chair in the living room, in the kitchen, etc.) Thus, the location of the server (whatever shape or form it takes), becomes somewhat irrelevant. When creating or managing playlists or making changes to my music library, I imagine that it would be easiest to do that using my primary pc as I can use a full-size keyboard and monitor.



Isn't there more than one version of the SB server software (a 'regular' version that cannot be run on the Touch and one called 'Tiny' that can be run on a Touch, but which has less features)?



The Vortebox appliance sounds like a nice solution. Would I just add the Vortebox appliance to my router-based home wireless network and control/access it via: 1) any pc that is also connected to the network; 2) a SB Touch (either the unit itself or the remote; 3) an I-Phone or Droid running an app? Finally, what server software do you recommend if going the route of V-appliance + Touch?

Thanks for the suggestions,
Dino

yes thats exactly it, you just plug it into your router and then whichever zones you have will get the music from the VB. I have a boom, radio and duet currently and will probably get the touch when it comes out - i use the Duet controller and my iphone running iPeng (5) for controllers, my girlfriend also has the iphone app which helps and then the web page from time to time if on laptop

In terms of server software, not sure what you mean but the VB appliance comes pre-installed with squeezebox server, the full blown version

sawdin
2010-04-04, 15:10
Thanks again to all who have replied to this thread....this really is a great forum!

Subarctic Audiophile
2010-04-07, 11:59
There are now lots of options for streaming music from a computer or directly from a hard drive, so this is a very timely question.

I originally purchased an SB3 in 2006 primarily for its Internet radio abilities. But I also experimented with using Slimserver (now Squeezeserver) to stream FLAC files from a computer on my network. I have now ripped my music collection to FLAC using XLD and have done lots of re-tagging using Sbooth's Tag.

After experimenting with a direct connection from the computer to my DAC via USB, I've realized (1) that having an intermediary layer such as SS/Squeezebox allows a lot more flexibility in the control of the system (i.e. it can be controlled from any computer on the network and via iPeng), and (2) I can use my music server as a central repository of files for playback on a second system in my house.

I'm looking forward to purchasing a Touch primarily for its ability to stream 24/96 files. My SB3 will then be used in my office/studio.

Although there are many other good options for streaming music files, I think that - for my purposes - the squeezebox concept works well. My guess is that this stuff will mature and become much more standardized and easier to use in the near future!

--------------------------------
System: SB3, Cambridge Audio DacMagic, Monolithic Sound preamp, NAD C272 power amp, Magnepan 1.6 QR speakers. Mac Mini dedicated music server. Music database: 20,100 FLAC files on 2TB drive with automated backup.

agillis
2010-04-07, 12:11
Wow - why have I not seen the BreatheAudio product before?! Very nice, great price.

How do you control the 4 zones on the BreatheAudio box? With their remote? Certainly not via iPeng (that would be amazing if possible). Thanks for the tip!

Chris

Yup, all via iPeng! The only thing you need to control in each room is master volume and what player you are listening to. Once that is set you can control the volume with iPeng as well.

sawdin
2010-04-07, 12:36
More questions, TIA, once again:

1) Does the SB server software enable a person to access playlists (i.e., actually just links to tracks) in a music service such as MOG? I do not use Rhapsody/Napster, and would like to continue to use MOG as most of the tracks stream at 320kbps, a few at 256.

2) If the Vortebox Appliance is set up to rip CD's and tag, does the software also provide catalog/library management capabilities similar to products like JRiver Media Center or Foobar, or does it just provide for ripping and tagging of CD's?

Thanks,
Dino

agillis
2010-04-07, 13:03
The Vortebox appliance sounds like a nice solution. Would I just add the Vortebox appliance to my router-based home wireless network and control/access it via: 1) any pc that is also connected to the network; 2) a SB Touch (either the unit itself or the remote; 3) an I-Phone or Droid running an app? Finally, what server software do you recommend if going the route of V-appliance + Touch?

Thanks for the suggestions,
Dino

1. yes, VortexBox has a web interface you cna access from any PC
2. Yes you can control the VortexBox with the SB Touch
3. iPeng is the best iPhone app for controlling your VortexBox and SqueezeBox players
4. The VortexBox Appliance SqueezeBox server and everything you need pre-installed. You don't need to load and software.

agillis
2010-04-07, 13:09
More questions, TIA, once again:

1) Does the SB server software enable a person to access playlists (i.e., actually just links to tracks) in a music service such as MOG? I do not use Rhapsody/Napster, and would like to continue to use MOG as most of the tracks stream at 320kbps, a few at 256.

2) If the Vortebox Appliance is set up to rip CD's and tag, does the software also provide catalog/library management capabilities similar to products like JRiver Media Center or Foobar, or does it just provide for ripping and tagging of CD's?

Thanks,
Dino

1. SBS allows you to listen to you own music, playlists, and streaming music. I'm not sure Squeezebox has MOG integration but it might be a future feature.

2. It does provide music management but I'm not sure it's like jRiver or Foobar.

sawdin
2010-04-07, 15:27
Thanks for the information! MOG claims they are planning on integrating w/ SB, but they do not have any timeframe.