PDA

View Full Version : NEW SB hardware?



jasell
2011-06-06, 02:04
Hi,
It was a while since the latest hardware was introduced. Are there any rumours of what's cooking? Do logitech work on new devices at all? Are they merging this product line with some other they already have?

I was under the impression that logitech should push out new devices in a even higher pace. This is what they normally do, right? But it seems like the SB development rather turned to an end.

I would like to see a battery driven all in one weather proof player (similar to the Boom or the Radio) to be used in the garden. It would be great to move it around and have music while dinning or shooting hoops, or just accompany you when doing some of that not so fun gardening maintenance work.

toby10
2011-06-06, 02:59
New players: Most do not know the answer. Those few that might know are not allowed to say anything.
I highly doubt a "weather proof" player is high on their list. I'd suggest you simply buy the Radio and not get it wet. ;)

aubuti
2011-06-06, 03:41
In general, Logitech doesn't comment on yet-to-be released products. Like toby says, anyone who claims to know about new hardware products is probably faking it. And anyone who really knows isn't allowed to say.

The Touch has been out a little over a year. Have you considered that (a) new products often kill off old products, and (b) you need to recoup the investment in the old products? As for the pace of the product releases, take a look at the release dates on the hardware comparison page on the wiki (http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/Hardware_comparison). Sometimes less than a year, sometimes more.

SB development has hardly turned to an end. Look at the Beta forums for proof.

+1 on buy a Radio with a battery and don't leave it out in the rain/snow.

naokaji
2011-06-06, 07:51
As long as product is not finalized and ready to be announced to the public even the majority of Logitech Employees is left in the dark about its existance, so in short, unless you have access to the Team who actually develops the product there is no way to find out about future products.

aubuti
2011-06-06, 07:59
There are places like engadget.com where you can get "informed speculation." They post info from people who track things like applications for FCC approval for new devices, etc. But it's still speculation.

verypsb
2011-06-06, 10:42
Well, I think they should come up with some new devices quick. Right now you can chose between a Squeezebox Touch and a Squeezebox Radio. Not a very big lineup. What about multiroom audio? The Sonos field looks greener every time I look at it...
I think a new Receiver II would be welcome, and maybe a Receiver II with integrated amp, and a Boom II. Maybe a Squeezebox that could integrate Apple Airport Express, for our diehard Apple fans... A new controller isn't necessary, if you could set up your new Receiver II from your PC, iPod, Android.
This would result in a complete lineup with a squeezebox for every situation.

aubuti
2011-06-06, 11:34
What about multi-room audio? The Touch works fine for multi-room audio. I have 8 SBs (6 different models) spread around the house.

I agree that if they want to keep the SB product line going then they need to have some new models in the works. I'm not sure the "if" condition is satisfied. From there it only gets less uncertain re new models in development, which features, production schedules, etc.

EDIT: Just saw your sig, and our SB collections are similar. Mine is:
2x SB2, 1x SB3, 2x SBReceiver, 3x SBController, 1x Boom, 1x Radio, 1x Touch

HectorHughMunro
2011-06-11, 14:23
It's quite highly developed now. The only things that the Touch needs are faster processor/more memory and something that will handle large USB drives better than the Touch does. Tiny SBS is a rather poor piece of work.

Boom looks very dated now. Needs a touch screen.

gruntwolla
2011-06-14, 18:38
[QUOTE=aubuti;635105]What about multi-room audio? The Touch works fine for multi-room audio.

What direction are Logitech going? Not many people are going to buy a Touch for every room ( plus speakers )and the radio, although good at what it does, cannot be considered as part of a multi room audio system. Perhaps an option to buy a receiver(s) at a slightly reduced price as part of a bundle would be good for those that want good quality music in additional rooms.

Surely there needs to be something to plug the gap between the high quality sound that is possible with the Touch, and the radio.

I really don't inderstand why there isn't more emphasis on multi-room synching in Logitech's marketing. To me it's one of the best things about the whole Squeezebox experience, and the current available hardware doesn't (imho) encourage extra purchases.
Trev

aubuti
2011-06-15, 03:56
@gruntwolla: Of course you're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. Why not a Touch in every place one might otherwise have a Receiver? The price difference (about $150) is small compared to the overall cost when you include amp and speakers, and you get better quality and more functionality.

And saying the Radio "cannot be considered as part of a multi room audio system" is just bonkers. While the Radio isn't high-end audio, it's fine for places where you may not want/need a full separates setup. More to the point, it shares the same music library with the rest of the SBs, can be sync'd, etc., which are the core characteristics of a multi room system.

garym
2011-06-15, 04:24
@gruntwolla: Of course you're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. Why not a Touch in every place one might otherwise have a Receiver? The price difference (about $150) is small compared to the overall cost when you include amp and speakers, and you get better quality and more functionality.

And saying the Radio "cannot be considered as part of a multi room audio system" is just bonkers. While the Radio isn't high-end audio, it's fine for places where you may not want/need a full separates setup. More to the point, it shares the same music library with the rest of the SBs, can be sync'd, etc., which are the core characteristics of a multi room system.

+1 on both the touch and radio. I keep a radio in my wife's giant dressing room/walk in closet which is perfect for her in the morning listening to NPR while getting ready for work. It has a battery, so I can also drag it out to the front porch or back patio if I want outside music. Also use one at our weekend place in the very tiny galley kitchen where the sound from the main system is just not quite reaching the space clearly. And again, as a bonus, it has a battery and I can also drag it out to the deck for outside music. And as noted, I can sync with other players, access my own music, etc.

Mnyb
2011-06-15, 04:39
Touch is worth the extra price for also having a decent interface(s) for setup and diagnostics.
Wifi is also better than the reciever.

receiver is rather annoying in that it's only comunicating to you with 1 button and a colored led ;) try to make sense about that.

Touch also supports more native formats will help the server greatly so you can have a much weaker server as transcoding is not needed that much .

What server is needed if 8 recievers would tune in different AAC channels ?

I do multiroom with boom in the bedroom and Classic with speakers in the kitchen, Classic in the kitchen may be exchanged for a Touch in the future and a radio in the bath or balcony .

imho Touch is perfect for multiroom

aubuti
2011-06-15, 05:19
I should say that while I think the current offerings are enough to equip a multi-room system, it would be good to see new developments, while working to improve the reliability of the current offerings in parallel.

If we want to speculate about what would be a good next step, I agree with HectorHughMunro's suggestion earlier in this thread (and similar suggestions scattered around other threads) for an upgraded Touch. The upgraded version should have enough processing oomph to run TinySBS reliably with a wide range of USB drives. And a bigger screen. But I'm not holding my breath for either.

Mnyb
2011-06-15, 05:26
And a new bigger radio to replace both boom and radio boom2, boooom

I'm unsure if any upgraded Touch could be big enough to run the server, this could be wasted resources to have so much cpu in each player, better a logitech branded "base station" who is an atom based server .

Imho decent server performance is atom and better.
But if Touch2 comes out woth more cpu to run a server, why not scrap Tiny SBS completely from the Touch and keep it and lover it's price 10% so that feature is not expected.

bluegaspode
2011-06-15, 06:26
I'm just thinking of how marketing would cope with a Touch Pro / Touch II / Touch Base Station.

"Now it really works. All USB-Drives + Large Libraries"
would hit the nail, but doesn't sound all too good.

Guess they'd need to implement some new special features (hopefully that doesn't cost much in development, but can be printed in large letters on the package).

- Access to Samba-File-Shares (to better compete with Sonos) ?
- "Touch Base Station" ... missing audio outs (what a waste ...) ?
- Upgraded Visuals/Screensavers ?

maggior
2011-06-15, 06:43
- Access to Samba-File-Shares (to better compete with Sonos) ?
- "Touch Base Station" ... missing audio outs (what a waste ...) ?
- Upgraded Visuals/Screensavers ?

- Retina display
- Can play Angry Birds
- Slimmer

:-)

On a serious note, in addition to Bluegaspode's suggestions, I think it would be nice to see an adjustable stand. The angle works well in some situations, but not others. Even if the adjustment was as inelegant as having to loosen some screws, I think it would be worth doing.

TiredLegs
2011-06-15, 09:19
The old hardware most obviously in need of a next generation is the Boom, and since the Boom has been end-of-lifed, there's no conflict with existing products. (The Radio ain't even close to being a suitable replacement for the Boom.) Heck, Logitech could even re-use the identical rear housing from the Boom, and upgrade it with new guts and front panel/display.

eganders
2011-06-15, 09:24
The old hardware most obviously in need of a next generation is the Boom, and since the Boom has been end-of-lifed, there's no conflict with existing products. (The Radio ain't even close to being a suitable replacement for the Boom.) Heck, Logitech could even re-use the identical rear housing from the Boom, and upgrade it with new guts and front panel/display.

+1

Spot on.

toby10
2011-06-15, 09:25
I'd bet Slim/Logitech learned their lesson (the hard way) with the Duet and will likely never offer another player absent a screen.
No screen, relying on another hardware device (Controller), with no web UI setup, is just another CSR nightmare in the making. ;)

ajkidle
2011-06-15, 09:36
The old hardware most obviously in need of a next generation is the Boom, and since the Boom has been end-of-lifed, there's no conflict with existing products. (The Radio ain't even close to being a suitable replacement for the Boom.) Heck, Logitech could even re-use the identical rear housing from the Boom, and upgrade it with new guts and front panel/display.

Totally agree. The Boom is an incredible piece of equipment. If we ever do see a Boom2, I just hope it sounds as good as the original.

aubuti
2011-06-15, 09:40
The old hardware most obviously in need of a next generation is the Boom, and since the Boom has been end-of-lifed, there's no conflict with existing products. (The Radio ain't even close to being a suitable replacement for the Boom.) Heck, Logitech could even re-use the identical rear housing from the Boom, and upgrade it with new guts and front panel/display.
+1
And fix the problem with the woofer mounting/surrounds....(http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82497)

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 09:43
have you guys seen the apple TV?

for $99 you have a simple, easy to use piece of hardware that can stream audio and video digitally. your ipod and/or iphone can control it as soon as its plugged in, or use the tiny 3 button remote that comes with it.

what does logitech have to compete with that? SBS? the revue?

this is the problem. logitech solutions have basically one selling point: "do you hate apple? then use us."

yes, i like the HQ audio things, and of course SBS is better in many ways than itunes, but how many people care about that? for most people, (not me, but most others) itunes sounds and acts fine.

how many also want some kind of video for their money? and we saw what a gigantic thud flop the revue was, and not surprising given the money involved.

i think logitech needs to really reduce the cost of the hardware first of all. and secondly, the hardware ought to support DLNA, so you can use other stuff besides SBS, like WMP for example.

its getting harder and harder to justify going the slim way. it is positioned, as far as i can tell, only for audiophiles who hate apple, and out of those, only those audiophiles for who other easier, cheaper solutions aren't good enough.

did i mention video? obviously they have clue about this, as the coming transition to LMS is slated to finally, finally include DLNA in the server, as well as some (planned anyway) video support. but talk bout coming late to the party.

imo, the current hardware is too expensive, too poorly thought out, and not capable of sustaining slim as things quickly evolve around them. for now, i am avoiding the apple universe, and other competing solutions to SBS have their own drawbacks and so on that don't yet overcome my investment in slim, but if someone came out with say, a $99 product that wasn't apple, that let me use whatever software i want to send audio or video to it, to play on my stereo or whatever, i'd dump slim in a second.

Mnyb
2011-06-15, 09:44
+1
And fix the problem with the woofer mounting/surrounds....(http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82497)

++++1

basically the woofer will eventually cut lose it's only a matter of time and hove loud you play.

erland
2011-06-15, 09:48
I'm just thinking of how marketing would cope with a Touch Pro / Touch II / Touch Base Station.

"Now it really works. All USB-Drives + Large Libraries"
would hit the nail, but doesn't sound all too good.

Guess they'd need to implement some new special features (hopefully that doesn't cost much in development, but can be printed in large letters on the package).

- Access to Samba-File-Shares (to better compete with Sonos) ?
- "Touch Base Station" ... missing audio outs (what a waste ...) ?
- Upgraded Visuals/Screensavers ?

Think "VortexBox Appliance" but cheaper:
- Automatic ripping and tagging
- Simple small display with small letters mainly used for troubleshooting
- Built-in player
- Built-in Squeezebox Server

This will give people a choice so they could either choose:

1. Logitech Squeezebox Touch
- Central color display in the room that shows what's playing
- Reliable highend audio
- Use a computer of their choice or mysqueezebox.com as server

or

2. Logitech Media Server
- Silent and fast media server, both for video and audio streaming
- Built-in CDROM for automatic ripping and tagging
- Use external USB drive or external NAS for storage
- Built-in mid-end audio hardware with auto output for people who don't care about audio quality but want a player in the room where they have the server


This way people who want highend audio or a central display will go for the Touch, people that primarily want a silent fast server will go for the Logitech Media Server and people who want both will get both.

The CDROM could maybe just be a USB port which allows an USB CDROM to be connected but with todays prices on CDROM's I suspect a built-in one might be justified.

The tricky part is going to be how to handle the built-in server in the Touch, it's going to make users upset if it's just dropped but Logitech probably don't want to spend a lot of support/maintenance time to maintain it.

(For those that wonders, LMS mentioned in the beta section of the forum is just software, I just reused the name above since it would also work for new hardware)

erland
2011-06-15, 10:05
have you guys seen the apple TV?

Yes but they have decided to not sell it in Sweden, at least not yet.

I could import it but it still loose a lot of its attractiveness without support for Netflix and similar services which aren't available in Sweden. Streaming from iTunes on a desktop is not something I plan to do.



imo, the current hardware is too expensive, too poorly thought out, and not capable of sustaining slim as things quickly evolve around them.

And AppleTV is too cheap. Well, I'm happy it's this cheep, but compared to anything else it's really cheap for what it does. Apple can release it this cheep because they can sell a lot of them, someone like Logitech would have a hard time selling similar amount of devices so they need to increase the prices a little bit.

However, I do agree with you partly, the Touch have too slow CPU and too little memory to be a server and too fast CPU and too much memory to just be a player, so if the CPU and/or memory results in a higher price they definitely selected the wrong hardware configuration.

Personally I suspect it's a lot of other things than CPU/memory that sets the price, for example the display, and I also suspect the CPU/memory were restricted by the selected hardware platform at the time so they maybe didn't have much choices. They do now, but not when they started to develop the Touch.



for now, i am avoiding the apple universe, and other competing solutions to SBS have their own drawbacks and so on that don't yet overcome my investment in slim, but if someone came out with say, a $99 product that wasn't apple, that let me use whatever software i want to send audio or video to it, to play on my stereo or whatever, i'd dump slim in a second.
Apple is mass market, so if you want mid-range audio quality and simplicity, that's where you should go.

If you want high-end audio and customization possibilities, you will never get that from Apple because things like that doesn't sell on the mass market it just increase the price and maintenance/support costs.

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 10:26
Yes but they have decided to not sell it in Sweden, at least not yet.

I could import it but it still loose a lot of its attractiveness without support for Netflix and similar services which aren't available in Sweden. Streaming from iTunes on a desktop is not something I plan to do.

just fyi, you don't have to. many NAS boxes, like readynas for example, come with a built in itunes server. whats great about that, is you can then use apple hardware, without actually needing a mac, or running itunes on a computer.


And AppleTV is too cheep. Well, I'm happy it's this cheep, but compared to anything else it's really cheep for what it does. Apple can release it this cheep because they can sell a lot of them, someone like Logitech would have a hard time selling similar amount of devices so they need to increase the prices a little bit.

well, over here, we don't pity the losers. you compete or you get out.

with the touch / revue being THREE TIMES the price of apple TV, (and airport express is even cheaper) logitech needs to up its game, BIG TIME. its not a small difference.


However, I do agree with you partly, the Touch have too slow CPU and too little memory to be a server and too fast CPU and too much memory to just be a player, so if the CPU and/or memory results in a higher price they definitely selected the wrong hardware configuration.

Personally I suspect it's a lot of other things than CPU/memory that sets the price, for example the display, and I also suspect the CPU/memory were restricted by the selected hardware platform at the time so they maybe didn't have much choices. They do now, but not when they started to develop the Touch.

i basically agree with you, but i said from the start that the touch was a dopey, flawed product. as you make clear, its too expensive to be just aplayer, and too under powered to be a true server, and i would add to that, that most people will have it attached to a stereo, and won't want or need to sit right next to it to control it, and likewise will be too far away from it for the screen to truly matter.

the whole thing is just really poorly thought out imo.

what should they have? two devices with no screens. one (more expensive) with server and one without. then let phone apps (or computer based SP) control them, set them up, and act as remotes. if that "takes off" and sales are good, then consider a third model which adds a screen.

the devices should also support DLNA; DLNA shouldn't be on the server (7.6) only.


Apple is mass market, so if you want mid-range audio quality and simplicity, that's where you should go.

If you want high-end audio and customization possibilities, you will never get that from Apple because things like that doesn't sell on the mass market it just increase the price and maintenance/support costs.

i would argue that if someone was sending music digitally to their stereo via apple hardware/itunes, you would be hard pressed to actually hear the difference in a similar SBS digital setup. but i know there's a lot of religious audiophiles here, so i'll just say i think most people would fail a double blind test between the two.

but i do agree that apples software is totally lacking and crap, and there are many good reasons i agree with, not to use it.

jean2
2011-06-15, 11:07
I'm unsure if any upgraded Touch could be big enough to run the server, this could be wasted resources to have so much cpu in each player...

The Touch can not do 192 kHz because of the CPU, the rest of the HW could do it, to support 192 kHz you probably would need twice the amount of CPU of the current Touch. 192 kHz is essential for bragging rights.

From my experience, what is sucking CPU and memory is usually not the server functions, but the user interface. I've put a web server, PHP and a database on the first gen Gumstix, which is slower than the current Touch. On the other hand, if you want smoother VU meters and frequency analysers, you will want more CPU and memory. Same for smooth coverflow.

Moore's law always work in your favor. Every 18 months, you get double the CPU and memory for the same price. What goes today in your cell phone will trickle to your Touch.


better a logitech branded "base station" who is an atom based server.

From what I can see, normal people don't buy infrastructure. Geeks have a long term plan and invest in infrastructure, because they see the value. Normal people want instant gratification of their emotional purchase. This is why everybody goes with a Cloud approach, it's far easier to sell infrastructure as a service.

In other words, a device that does nothing by itself is to me a non starter, unless you bundle it as a useful package.



Guess they'd need to implement some new special features (hopefully that doesn't cost much in development, but can be printed in large letters on the package).


1) Bigger screen. Those tablet/PMP screens are reaching large volume, making them more affordable. 7in should be the new sweet spot.
2) 192 kHz support. It's bigger, it must be better. The only way to put it on the cover of Stereophile and TAS.
3) USB DAC support, two USB ports. Same as above.
4) Offer web server interface when running TinySB. Access it with any browser, any device, no app required (unless you care about usability).
5) Facebook integration (I would prefer Skype integration, but that would be too difficult)
I believe all those are not difficult and would improve the appeal. But I also believe the Touch2 would not come soon, the Touch is not that old.

Regards,

Jean

aubuti
2011-06-15, 11:17
I'm neither an audiophile nor an Apple-hater, but AppleTV is completely useless to me simply because it doesn't have analog audio outputs. Yes, it streams audio, but does everyone have amps with digital inputs these days?

erland
2011-06-15, 11:17
what should they have? two devices with no screens. one (more expensive) with server and one without. then let phone apps (or computer based SP) control them, set them up, and act as remotes. if that "takes off" and sales are good, then consider a third model which adds a screen.

Without the display the Touch would be completely useless to me. I prioritize the display a lot higher than then built-in server, but I realize I'm not the target user of Logitech neither is most of the people on this forum.



the devices should also support DLNA; DLNA shouldn't be on the server (7.6) only.

How would DNLA support on player side result in higher earnings for Logitech ?
- It will cause more support issues from users with third party servers
- It will cause more time in quality assurance to ensure their players works towards third party servers
- It will result in decreased number of sold server hardware boxes (if they decided to release server hardware)

I guess theoretically, it could result in more sold players if Logitech creates a crappy server and there is someone else creating a better DLNA server. Still, I've a hard time seeing how Logitech will benefit from DLNA on player side. I still believe the main reason they do it on the server side is to get support for Logitech Revue and possibly because they have some big plans to create future simple DLNA players which won't need SqueezeOS based firmware and due to this not support things like mysqueezebox.com and multi room audio. A simple player with simpler software would be more similar to other stuff Logitech produces.



i would argue that if someone was sending music digitally to their stereo via apple hardware/itunes, you would be hard pressed to actually hear the difference in a similar SBS digital setup. but i know there's a lot of religious audiophiles here, so i'll just say i think most people would fail a double blind test between the two.

I completely agree, most people don't even hear difference between high bitrate MP3 and FLAC, some people will object but they'd still fail a MP3 vs FLAC blind test.



but i do agree that apples software is totally lacking and crap, and there are many good reasons i agree with, not to use it.

Main problem for me with iTunes is that it isn't server based, it means that I have to use a specific desktop computer to access my music library. Still, I'm not their typical user, so you can't really blame them. At least they will finally make wireless syncing with portable devices possible in next release, so they are moving in the right direction.

Apple does a lot of great things but iTunes isn't one of them, at least not yet.

erland
2011-06-15, 11:25
I'm neither an audiophile nor an Apple-hater, but AppleTV is completely useless to me simply because it doesn't have analog audio outputs. Yes, it streams audio, but does everyone have amps with digital inputs these days?

I bet most of the users who would consider getting a AppleTV have an amp with digital input or a TV with HDMI input.

The rest would either not need/afford a AppleTV or wouldn't buy it because it's too limited/restricted.

Mnyb
2011-06-15, 11:38
The Touch can not do 192 kHz because of the CPU, the rest of the HW could do it, to support 192 kHz you probably would need twice the amount of CPU of the current Touch. 192 kHz is essential for bragging rights.

From my experience, what is sucking CPU and memory is usually not the server functions, but the user interface. I've put a web server, PHP and a database on the first gen Gumstix, which is slower than the current Touch. On the other hand, if you want smoother VU meters and frequency analysers, you will want more CPU and memory. Same for smooth coverflow.

Moore's law always work in your favor. Every 18 months, you get double the CPU and memory for the same price. What goes today in your cell phone will trickle to your Touch.



From what I can see, normal people don't buy infrastructure. Geeks have a long term plan and invest in infrastructure, because they see the value. Normal people want instant gratification of their emotional purchase. This is why everybody goes with a Cloud approach, it's far easier to sell infrastructure as a service.

In other words, a device that does nothing by itself is to me a non starter, unless you bundle it as a useful package.



1) Bigger screen. Those tablet/PMP screens are reaching large volume, making them more affordable. 7in should be the new sweet spot.
2) 192 kHz support. It's bigger, it must be better. The only way to put it on the cover of Stereophile and TAS.
3) USB DAC support, two USB ports. Same as above.
4) Offer web server interface when running TinySB. Access it with any browser, any device, no app required (unless you care about usability).
5) Facebook integration (I would prefer Skype integration, but that would be too difficult)
I believe all those are not difficult and would improve the appeal. But I also believe the Touch2 would not come soon, the Touch is not that old.

Regards,

Jean

For some reason the SBS server is CPU intensive in some situations when doing dB operations, for example thats why Touch is limited to 100 song playlist and no web-UI because of performance, it has only 128mB of ram the server uses more on normal platforms ?

The curent facebook app could be improved thats an understatement but it exist, you can only push ready made posts about what your are listening to and see wall, news and photos , not write an actual post.

An improved Tiny SC server must run plugins, it basically has to be the full server, not crippled. That might fly with the help of moores law but it is usually abused by programmers to be lazy/fast so that even more inefficient methods of programming can be used to do the same thing as before.

The Youtube plugin thats available should have some massmarket apeal.

An up to date email checker that works on all devices and with gmail and stuff .

Some people *shrug* probably wants msn or yahoo's chat thing ?

Seamless integration with portable players and phones, it should just work to stream to yourself while out of home with your phone etc ?
So you just plonk your phone in friends dock or airshare it or something.
Basically run your own private cloud from the Touch to compete with google-music mp3Tunes and iCloud.

Mnyb
2011-06-15, 11:56
I'm neither an audiophile nor an Apple-hater, but AppleTV is completely useless to me simply because it doesn't have analog audio outputs. Yes, it streams audio, but does everyone have amps with digital inputs these days?

Yes !

All audio is digital these days an analog interface does not make sense between 2 digital boxes, assuming a HT reciever or processor or HTIB , the archaic use of an old fashioned analog 2ch amp is not very common these days :)
HDMI is what everything uses these days.

10 years ago it was sdif or TOS when dvd came, so old TV-boxes and sat boxes have toslink .

The audiophiles will use an USB-dac or other high end solutions with spdiff or maybe hdmi.

A future Touch2 should have spdiff toslink 2*USB and hdmi .

For multiroom use the current Touch with analog RCA and spdiff + toslink .
Or a new box with similar spec but cheaper hardware due to moores law, simply reinvent Touch sans TinySC with to get a lower price.

aubuti
2011-06-15, 12:08
Yes !

All audio is digital these days an analog interface does not make sense between 2 digital boxes, assuming a HT reciever or processor or HTIB , the archaic use of an old fashioned analog 2ch amp is not very common these days :)
HDMI is what everything uses these days.
Hmm, then I suppose I'll have to take back the NAD integrated amp I got a couple years ago and tell them they forgot to include some of the inputs. ;-)

A/V receivers and HTIB are understandably the norm now for home theater setups, but for audio systems too? Or are you telling me that everyone has a tv connected to their ste^H^H^H audio systems now?

Maybe I need to get out more often....

erland
2011-06-15, 12:19
A/V receivers and HTIB are understandably the norm now for home theater setups, but for audio systems too? Or are you telling me that everyone has a tv connected to their ste^H^H^H audio systems now?

Everyone who consider to get an AppleTV does.

garym
2011-06-15, 12:20
Hmm, then I suppose I'll have to take back the NAD integrated amp I got a couple years ago and tell them they forgot to include some of the inputs. ;-)

A/V receivers and HTIB are understandably the norm now for home theater setups, but for audio systems too? Or are you telling me that everyone has a tv connected to their ste^H^H^H audio systems now?

Maybe I need to get out more often....

Most of my friends, I'm sad to say, ONLY have their home theater tv setup with audio through this as an afterthought. To them a connected iPod is very high tech. I'm the odd ball with a complete stereo and separate home theater system not to mention multi r oom synched stuff. They like my system but have essentially no interest in anything similar. Even my friend with 15,000 CDs who does have a separate stereo doesn't get why he would want anything other than a decent cd player. And many of my friends have dumped their cd collection entirely and listen to pandora only thru a smartphone connected to a boom box. Again, I'm the odd man out. Maybe I need new friends.

aubuti
2011-06-15, 12:41
I should count myself lucky then. Most of my friends have audio separates in the living room/lounge parts of the house, ie, the more "public" parts of the home. The tv is usually in a smaller rec room or media room, and may or may not be connected to a HT audio system.

I have thought about replacing my old 2-channel setup that is currently connected to my hdtv with a 5.1 HT system, but my wife doesn't like the "audio overload" of surround, and I don't know where I'd put the 2-channel rig.

garym
2011-06-15, 12:48
I should count myself lucky then. Most of my friends have audio separates in the living room/lounge parts of the house, ie, the more "public" parts of the home. The tv is usually in a smaller rec room or media room, and may or may not be connected to a HT audio system.

I have thought about replacing my old 2-channel setup that is currently connected to my hdtv with a 5.1 HT system, but my wife doesn't like the "audio overload" of surround, and I don't know where I'd put the 2-channel rig.

I should add that most of my friends have had to abandon enjoyment of their homes (for all practical purposes) because of the "invasion" of their teenage children and their friends. But that's an entirely new topic. ;-)

Mnyb
2011-06-15, 13:00
I live by myself in small apartment I can not have 2 setups like one hifi and one HT .

So I do hiend HT which is fun to with multichannel music and movies sounds very good .


If you have house and familly thats desirable with 2 rigs one hifi and something small and trendy to the living room TV, but im my case that would have been 2 multichannel setups anyway... But not 2 meridian kits , then I have to rob banks..


With current trends in SQ in music , some movies actually sound better and more dramatic dynamic and involving than most music produced today :-/

aubuti
2011-06-15, 13:02
I should add that most of my friends have had to abandon enjoyment of their homes (for all practical purposes) because of the "invasion" of their teenage children and their friends. But that's an entirely new topic. ;-)
I, and most of my friends with separate audio systems, also have teenage kids with packs of friends. That's part of the strategy of putting the tv (and the Wii / XBox / PS3) in another part of the house. I don't really want to stop the invasion, just redirect it a little bit.

It's also another reason why my system connected to the tv doesn't have a subwoofer.

dasmueller
2011-06-15, 13:43
Loving my Garrard turntable which runs through a 30 yr old Pioneer Rcvr which powers a couple of little B&W CM1s and my Touch !

garym
2011-06-15, 15:02
It's also another reason why my system connected to the tv doesn't have a subwoofL
er.

;-)

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 15:50
I'm neither an audiophile nor an Apple-hater, but AppleTV is completely useless to me simply because it doesn't have analog audio outputs. Yes, it streams audio, but does everyone have amps with digital inputs these days?

i can't say about apple tv, as i have had little exposure to it.

but airport express and other similar apple devices let you do analog or digital. however, my guess is the analog DAC sucks.

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 16:10
Without the display the Touch would be completely useless to me. I prioritize the display a lot higher than then built-in server, but I realize I'm not the target user of Logitech neither is most of the people on this forum.

it would still be a player, and while i can see limited cases where it "fits" as is, i think in trying to be all things to all people, it actually succeeds in being aggravating to most people.

i will NEVER buy a touch.


How would DNLA support on player side result in higher earnings for Logitech ?

its obvious! people want flexible solutions.

if i could use ANYTHING other than SBS to power the hardware, i would! and so would many other people! i would love to use software i feel is better, more fun, more familiar, to play on the HQ slim hardware. thats my DREAM.

if the players had this, i'd have like 3 or 4 more slim devices FOR SURE. and yes, i realize i'd not be able to sync without SBS, so i know that, but i could still fire up SBS, and knowing that wouldn't stop me from getting more boxes. sync'ing is great, but not foremost on most peoples minds when doing this stuff. let SBS be available to do those kinds of distiguishing functions.

the hardware is where they make money, not developing the software!


- It will cause more support issues from users with third party servers
- It will cause more time in quality assurance to ensure their players works towards third party servers
- It will result in decreased number of sold server hardware boxes (if they decided to release server hardware)

funny, LOTS of companies seem totally able to sell successful dlna players, are you saying logitech can't?

the biggest drain on logitech is developing SBS imo. if they had more sales, they could get avg users into other apps to power the hardware, and still have more resources for developing the player and SBS. it could be win win.


I guess theoretically, it could result in more sold players if Logitech creates a crappy server and there is someone else creating a better DLNA server. Still, I've a hard time seeing how Logitech will benefit from DLNA on player side. I still believe the main reason they do it on the server side is to get support for Logitech Revue and possibly because they have some big plans to create future simple DLNA players which won't need SqueezeOS based firmware and due to this not support things like mysqueezebox.com and multi room audio. A simple player with simpler software would be more similar to other stuff Logitech produces.

who knows what they have planned or why. i see little rhyme or reason in ANYTHING they do. but if someone wants to buy the hardware to use with a different piece of software, like WMP which is a DLNA server, then that only makes the potential marketplace for their hardware bigger! most people i show SBS to don't get it and think it sucks, and they are basically right. its complex, not fun, not flexible, and generally a pain in the ass.


I completely agree, most people don't even hear difference between high bitrate MP3 and FLAC, some people will object but they'd still fail a MP3 vs FLAC blind test.

yep. :)


Main problem for me with iTunes is that it isn't server based, it means that I have to use a specific desktop computer to access my music library. Still, I'm not their typical user, so you can't really blame them. At least they will finally make wireless syncing with portable devices possible in next release, so they are moving in the right direction.

Apple does a lot of great things but iTunes isn't one of them, at least not yet.

i don't understand you here. itunes IS a server app. also, like i said, a lot of NAS boxes, even cheap ones, come with an itunes server built in.

so in other words, you could run a NAS box, or cheapo headless system with itunes in a closet, and stream from your iphone to your apple tv via it, np. its the best thing about what they do, b/c where the music is played from, & where its played to, is all very easy to control and very flexible not to mention intuitive.

pippin
2011-06-15, 16:40
If you believe you'll get more flexibility out of DLNA you are wrong.
DLNA is OK for video (where the controller is in the player and you are dealing with single files) but for audio it's a failed technology and will go away - and I say that as someone who's actually doing active DLNA related development right now!

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 16:43
If you believe you'll get more flexibility out of DLNA you are wrong.
DLNA is OK for video (where the controller is in the player and you are dealing with single files) but for audio it's a failed technology and will go away - and I say that as someone who's actually doing active DLNA related development right now!

thats not what i meant.

i want DLNA to allow me the flexibility to not use SBS. ie. to power the slim hardware with other software solutions.

so i wasn't wrong.

pippin
2011-06-15, 17:49
I didn't say you were wrong.

I just wanted to say that if you are used to Squeezeboxes and then you would have to use some DLNA based SB, you would be disappointed.

It's not just syncing, it's also the remote control capabilities.

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 18:11
other servers that do DLNA can be remote controlled.

pippin
2011-06-15, 18:15
other servers that do DLNA can be remote controlled.

No. Not a single one.
"Servers" are never remote controlled via DLNA. Renderers are. That's the problem.
A server in DLNA is just a data source, all the logic has to be in the renderer.

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 18:18
No. Not a single one.
"Servers" are never remote controlled via DLNA. Renderers are. That's the problem.
A server in DLNA is just a data source, all the logic has to be in the renderer.

i didn't say the server would be remote controlled by DLNA.

i said "other servers that do DLNA can be remote controlled."

pippin
2011-06-15, 18:21
i didn't say the server would be remote controlled by DLNA.

i said "other servers that do DLNA can be remote controlled."

Sorry, but this is nonsense. No need for that kind of discussion.
My server can do DLNA and I can control it remotely through SSH. Cool. What does that tell me? Nothing.

The weather's fine here, too, not as cold as it was in SF.

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 18:29
this is EXACTLY what SBS is doing. i guess you think thats nonsense?

sbs 7.6 will do DLNA, and 7.6 can be remote controlled by your app, theirs, or others. SBS is not the only server of which that paradigm will be true.

i don't know why you're so intent with finding fault with what i said, but i have said nothing wrong, nothing nonsensical. i think you misconstrued my meaning at each step however.

pippin
2011-06-15, 18:41
this is EXACTLY what SBS is doing. i guess you think thats nonsense?

sbs 7.6 will do DLNA, and 7.6 can be remote controlled by your app, theirs, or others. SBS is not the only server of which that paradigm will be true.

Yes, but what's the point about that in this discussion?
If you want to use SBS with your SBs, you don't need DLNA
And if you use DLNA, with whatever streaming client, SBS or not, you will get lousy remote control capabilities for that client.

In none of these cases you are remotely controlling the server, not even with SBS. With SBS the server is remotely controlling the client (renderer), with DLNA devices it's not.

EDIT: Here I'm of course wrong. If you use Gordon's SvrPowerControl plugin you can of course remotely control the server using SBS.

If you want to remotely control the server, for whatever reason that should be, you need to use SSH or something.


i don't know why you're so intent with finding fault with what i said, but i have said nothing wrong, nothing nonsensical. i think you misconstrued my meaning at each step however.
I'm not intent with finding fault with what you say, I just don't get the point.
I could not misconstruct any meaning since I don't understand the meaning.

End of discussion for me, actually there was no real discussion, just try a DLNA client and you'll see what I mean. It's fine for TVs and bad for music devices.

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 18:59
my apologies if i am mistaken then, but i was under the impression that if you have a DLNA client, like say a PS3, you could send to it video or music files from say WMP, which is a DLNA server. meaning, that a user, via WMP directly, could control what went out over the DLNA client.

so, are you saying that isn't the case? that only the DLNA client can control whats called to play?

if so my fault entirely then for misunderstanding how it all works. i might be confusing what microsoft can do with its media center and xbox 360, which i know is different, but i thought roughly the same.

i thought with twonky or foobar or whatever DLNA server, you could use the app/server to control what went out to the DLNA device. pleaase let me know if i have this all wrong.

pippin
2011-06-15, 19:09
my apologies if i am mistaken then, but i was under the impression that if you have a DLNA client, like say a PS3, you could send to it video or music files from say WMP, which is a DLNA server. meaning, that a user, via WMP directly, could control what went out over the DLNA client.

No, you can't. That was my point.

You can REQUEST such data from e.g. the PS3 (renderer) and you can have a 3rd device in the network (control point) that controls all this by talking to BOTH the renderer and the server but there are actually very few combinations in which this works really well.

There are a lot of examples in which the renderer and control point are on the same machine, e.g. for AV receivers that use the TV screen to give visual feedback and these often kind of work, but are not what I would really call "remote control". I don't see controlling something on a TV screen with an IR remote "remote control" for audio.
It can be fine for TV, of course, since you need that TV screen to view that anyway.


so, are you saying that isn't the case? that only the DLNA client can control whats called to play?

Well, as mentioned above, it's even more complicated than that...
There are also cases (Windows Media or however this is being called now, for example) where all three logical devices reside on the same machine and obviously that's what works best.

Also, with Windows Media you can have the control point and the server on the same machine and this also works well since the control point now has permanent and direct access to the data and can create things like playlists and if you drive a remote streaming client with that combination (supported by some renderers but not the majority) you can get good remote control as long as you sit in front of your server...


if so my fault entirely then for misunderstanding how it all works. i might be confusing what microsoft can do with its media center and xbox 360, which i know is different, but i thought roughly the same.

i thought with twonky or foobar or whatever DLNA server, you could use the app/server to control what went out to the DLNA device. pleaase let me know if i have this all wrong.
Twonky and MS both have control points that run on the server. The Twonky one actually can even be remotely controlled but if it does so, it - funny enough - doesn't use DLNA anymore but something proprietary Twonky invented and which also some clients support...

DLNA is a mess.

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 19:37
ok, so tell me if i have this straight:

if, in theory, you had a single piece of software that was both a DLNA server, and a DLNA control point, it could, in theory, be remote controlled by an app similar to ipeng, and control what is played over the DLNA renderer?

is that possible in at least theory as laid out above?

b/c if it is, thats what i'd want. let the slim hardware be the DLNA renderer, and let something else, that can be remote controlled by droid/iphone, etc, be the DLNA server and CP. that would, in theory, free you from SBS.

this is what i thought was/could be possible and what i was advocating. obviously, it would benefit logitech b/c their hardware would be solutions for people who otherwise have DLNA servers/control points and don't want to use SBS.

pippin
2011-06-15, 19:44
if, in theory, you had a single piece of software that was both a DLNA server, and a DLNA control point, it could, in theory, be remote controlled by an app similar to ipeng, and control what is played over the DLNA renderer?

If the renderer supports being remotely controlled by another control point (a lot of the cheap streaming devices only support their built-in control point): yes.


b/c if it is, thats what i'd want. let the slim hardware be the DLNA renderer, and let something else, that can be remote controlled by droid/iphone, etc, be the DLNA server and CP. that would, in theory, free you from SBS.

Yes. But be aware that in THAT scenario (control point and server being on the same machine) all of your music would have to be on that phone as well and would have to be streamed from there.

That aside, you'll see some restrictions. The most nasty one is that the way DLNA works, the control point has to do ALL the control functionality, like SBS does. That means that your remote has to be permanently active since it's responsible for such trivial things as playing the next track once the currently playing track has finished.
This means your remote has to be always on.

There are some ways around this - there are DLNA extensions for playlists, for example - but I believe PS3 and XBox are pretty much the only devices out there which support that.



this is what i thought was/could be possible and what i was advocating. obviously, it would benefit logitech b/c their hardware would be solutions for people who otherwise have DLNA servers/control points and don't want to use SBS.
I don't think it would benefit Logitech because they would sell people a solution that sucks (as a user experience) and it never does you any good to do that.
Which was my point.

I believe Logitech will probably do it anyway...

erland
2011-06-15, 19:56
my apologies if i am mistaken then, but i was under the impression that if you have a DLNA client, like say a PS3, you could send to it video or music files from say WMP, which is a DLNA server. meaning, that a user, via WMP directly, could control what went out over the DLNA client.

Remote control means to me that:
1. I have a DLNA player(renderer) (for example PS3)
2. I have a DLNA server (for example WMP on a computer)
3. I'm sitting somewhere with only my iPhone/Android device in my hand and want to remotely control what's playing on the DLNA player streamed from my DLNA server

Can I do this via DLNA ?

I know I can do it with a Remote Desktop app on the iPhone/Android which shows the computer screen on my iPhone/Android device, but that's not particularly user friendly and I'm not sure how that would be preferred solution.

I know I can do it with SBS, Squeezebox'es and iPeng, but then I'm not combining server and player from multiple companies like you want, neither is SBS<->Squeezebox nor iPeng<->SBS currently communicating via DLNA in this scenario as far as I know.

So can you mention three different products from three different companies which can be combined to together and work as point 1, 2 and 3 in the above scenario ?

As pippin says, you can do it if:
- Point 1(renderer) and 3(control) is inside the same product
or
- Point 2(server) and 3(control) is inside the same product

The problem with having point 1(renderer/player) and 3(control) in the same box is that then you have to use a separate remote control for each player, one for PS3 and another one for Squeezebox, so it doesn't work in a multi room scenario. In most cases this also means that the remote you get is a IR remote which in most cases means that music selection doesn't get particularly user friendly.

The problem with having 2(server) and 3(control) in the same box often means no remote control as you typically have to sit beside the computer to locally control it in this scenario. If you do all controls from a computer, this is fine, but I suspect most users don't want to go to the computer to control the music, they want to sit in the living room and start playing something even if the computer currently is in another room.

So DLNA might in theory mean that you are free to combine devices from different manufacturers but in practice there are very few (if even any) product on the market that's able to do this via DLNA for audio today.

In theory you can do a Android/iOS remote control (not using DLNA) which is tied to a specific 2+3(server+control) setup, remotely communicating with something else than DLNA.

However, can you mention one such remote that exist today except for IR-remotes ?
And also one which works with the excellent DLNA server you would like to use instead of SBS ?

As long as it doesn't exist, this whole discussion is very theoretical, when it exists and it's combined with an excellent server+control product, then I agree it makes some sense for Logitech to start producing DLNA players and also go into a partnership with the company producing this server+control product which is better than Logitech's own server. Personally, I've a hard time seeing this happening, but that's just me.

To me it feels like Logitech could provide a lot better user experience by focus on their own server and players and allow them to be remote controlled and customized in similar fashion as they are today, no reason to spend time doing DLNA stuff if it won't result in a better user experience than Logitech's own solution. Why invite other companies to compete with you when you know your own solution is the best one available ?

The only scenario that makes sense to me is DLNA player support to be able to stream and control stuff from a computer (for example by using WMP), but I wonder how many users that want to be tied to a computer this way, a lot of the discussions on this forum seems to go in the other direction, most people want to play music without having to turn on their computer.

gruntwolla
2011-06-16, 17:45
@gruntwolla: Of course you're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. Why not a Touch in every place one might otherwise have a Receiver? The price difference (about $150) is small compared to the overall cost when you include amp and speakers, and you get better quality and more functionality.

And saying the Radio "cannot be considered as part of a multi room audio system" is just bonkers. While the Radio isn't high-end audio, it's fine for places where you may not want/need a full separates setup. More to the point, it shares the same music library with the rest of the SBs, can be sync'd, etc., which are the core characteristics of a multi room system.

I guess I need to clarify what I meant, as I sure didn't mean to suggest the radio is an inferior product - just that it isn't for me.

At present, I have a duet with AE5 speakers in the lounge, an SB3 with my hii fi in the conservatory, and a couple of Booms upstairs. When synched, my house is filled with pretty good quality music without having the volume cranked up high, and all is good.

But..... if or when one of the Booms dies, what do I replace it with. A Touch with powered speakers would work out twice the price, and I don't really want speaker cables in the bedroom. Or should I go with the radio with external speakers? That would be ok price wise, but as far as I can see it's not what the radio is designed for, although I appreciate the fact that I perhaps shouldn't have described it the way I did.

So from my point of view I hope there will be an updated version of the Boom in the future

aubuti
2011-06-16, 19:17
I guess I need to clarify what I meant, as I sure didn't mean to suggest the radio is an inferior product - just that it isn't for me.
<snip>
So from my point of view I hope there will be an updated version of the Boom in the future
In your earlier post you were talking about the need for Receivers, and now you're talking about a successor to the Boom, so I hope you can where I was unclear about what you meant. But now I think I get your point and I agree completely that it would be good to have a successor to the Boom.

naokaji
2011-06-17, 07:10
Maybe they could just make a leap forward and bring a unified SB / Revue / Nas device, stores everything, plays everything, streams everything

Juggler
2011-06-21, 06:11
I've been reading this thread with much interest. I currently have the original SqueezePlayer and a Radio--both are fantastic pieces of hardware and with SqueeboxServer now supporting sync, everything is great.

That being said, I've now moved into a larger house and would like to start whole-home audio with speakers etc. I was very sad to see that they've now killed off the Duet. This was the ideal box: < $100, screen-less (I prefer to control things with a smartphone) and of course part of the family.

I'm really hoping Logitech comes up with a replacement, keeping in mind the price point. Ideal case:
$75
screen-less
analog & digital out
GigE
802.11N

... thoughts? Speculations?

aubuti
2011-06-21, 06:42
... thoughts? Speculations?
Let's keep the price point realistic. Except for perhaps some very special, very temporary promotions by particular resellers, the Receiver (SBR) was not priced less than US$100. The list price was $150, and when Logitech's supplies got low the resellers on Amazon were asking a lot more than that.

If you want to hit that price point, then Gb ethernet and "n" wireless are a waste of money. You don't need that bandwidth even for hi-res files. Cutting corners on sound quality for bandwidth you don't need doesn't make any sense to me.

It's also important to remember that they could sell the SBR for half the price of an SB3/Classic because the SB3's VFD screen was the most expensive component in the device. That's not at all true of the Touch's LCD touchscreen, which is relatively cheap. So to get a screenless device down to a much lower price point you have to sacrifice other features, though I still think they'd never go below $100 because that's too low a price point in this market.

Or instead of sacrificing features that are in the current Touch, perhaps take advantage of the fact that the Touch hardware is now 2 years old (even though it was released 14 months ago, the hardware was decided and in place at least a year before that). So they could squeeze a little more mileage out of that "old" technology by using it as the basis for an SBR2. They could potentially re-package the current Touch in a screenless device, provided it could be setup and configured via web browser or wifi remote. And they should make no promises about TinySBS. I don't think that's gonna happen, but that's one way it could go.

EDIT: as for your current needs, there's nothing wrong with a Touch for multi-room audio, other than exceeding your ideal price point. Go ahead and use your smartphone to control it -- you can even turn off the Touch's screen if you like.

fuzzyT
2011-06-21, 08:56
I have an AppleTV v2. It does indeed require an outboard DAC before it
can render analog audio. An outboard DAC with an optical input no less.

If I wanted to use the AppleTV as an audio output device, I would need
to either:

Using TV interface -

Turn on Stereo
Turn on DAC
Select AppleTV input on DAC
Turn on TV
Select AppleTV input
Wake up AppleTV
Navigate to Music options
Choose and Play

Using AirPlay -

Turn on Stereo
Turn on DAC
Select AppleTV input on DAC
Wake up the AppleTV (it sleeps)
Grab a laptop or iPhone and fire up a music player
Navigate to music, choose and play
Select AppleTV AirPlay output

Granted some of these steps may be avoidable (stereo already on or
auto-sensing, DAC has only one input, etc.), but this is still a lot of
switching and selecting just to play a few tracks.

I'm not at all excited about the option of using a 50" plasma TV for an
audio controller UI. Seems ridiculous.

And you still don't get sync.

And I don't know about the audio quality implications of AirPlay - does
it do lossless? (certainly not FLAC), is there compression in the
transmission?, etc.

I don't really see this as a big use case for the AppleTV until Apple
adds analog outs and gets serious about simplifying usage.

erland
2011-06-21, 10:48
Let's keep the price point realistic. Except for perhaps some very special, very temporary promotions by particular resellers, the Receiver (SBR) was not priced less than US$100. The list price was $150, and when Logitech's supplies got low the resellers on Amazon were asking a lot more than that.

If you want to hit that price point, then Gb ethernet and "n" wireless are a waste of money. You don't need that bandwidth even for hi-res files. Cutting corners on sound quality for bandwidth you don't need doesn't make any sense to me.

...

So to get a screenless device down to a much lower price point you have to sacrifice other features, though I still think they'd never go below $100 because that's too low a price point in this market.

I think the issue is that people are going to start comparing it with AppleTV, which have Wireless "n" and costs $99 and supports video besides audio.

A device with a screen is easier to sell even if it's more expensive because it has something AppleTV doesn't provide.

For people that just wants Squeezebox support in another room, most of them are going to want something with built-in speakers like the Radio or Boom, because they don't have an external amplifier in that room. I know there are people with external amplifiers and powered speakers, but I think most of the customers would be happy with a Squeezebox with built-in speakers.



Or instead of sacrificing features that are in the current Touch, perhaps take advantage of the fact that the Touch hardware is now 2 years old (even though it was released 14 months ago, the hardware was decided and in place at least a year before that). So they could squeeze a little more mileage out of that "old" technology by using it as the basis for an SBR2. They could potentially re-package the current Touch in a screenless device, provided it could be setup and configured via web browser or wifi remote. And they should make no promises about TinySBS. I don't think that's gonna happen, but that's one way it could go.

The question is just how much development it would require to support setup via web browser and how much cheaper it would get without the screen. If it requires extra development and the screen isn't a big part of the hardware costs, it might be better to just lower the price of the current Touch. Just place something in front of the screen if you don't want to see it :-)

More models aren't always better, I think it's often better to have fewer models and instead lower the price a bit to raise the quantities, that way you only have to handle support costs for one model instead of two. And I also believe the support costs for a device without a screen is higher than a device with a screen where you can get user friendly error messages.

signor_rossi
2011-06-21, 10:53
Maybe they could just make a leap forward and bring a unified SB / Revue / Nas device, stores everything, plays everything, streams everything

Logitech surely should have sneaked in SBS in their Revue or should do so with the next Google-TV device (if Logitech is the one doing it, I read online that an ARM based cheaper one is coming, dunno if the processor would be powerful enough), maybe they could disguise it as a DLNA media server... ;)

erland
2011-06-21, 10:55
I have an AppleTV v2. It does indeed require an outboard DAC before it
can render analog audio. An outboard DAC with an optical input no less.

If I wanted to use the AppleTV as an audio output device, I would need
to either:

Using TV interface -

Turn on Stereo
Turn on DAC
Select AppleTV input on DAC
Turn on TV
Select AppleTV input
Wake up AppleTV
Navigate to Music options
Choose and Play

Using AirPlay -

Turn on Stereo
Turn on DAC
Select AppleTV input on DAC
Wake up the AppleTV (it sleeps)
Grab a laptop or iPhone and fire up a music player
Navigate to music, choose and play
Select AppleTV AirPlay output

Granted some of these steps may be avoidable (stereo already on or
auto-sensing, DAC has only one input, etc.), but this is still a lot of
switching and selecting just to play a few tracks.

Just get a Logitech Harmony remote and get a "Play Music" button that does everything of the above with a single click. I haven't tried it myself but it should work as long as all devices are controlled with a IR remote.



And I don't know about the audio quality implications of AirPlay - does
it do lossless? (certainly not FLAC), is there compression in the
transmission?, etc.

I don't really see this as a big use case for the AppleTV until Apple
adds analog outs and gets serious about simplifying usage.

Depends who you are talking about, it's important to remember that most users doesn't care about lossless quality, they are quite happy with just using MP3.

If you care about audio quality, there are better products than those produced by Apple. I'm not saying Apple is bad, I'm just saying that they will select a compromise which is good enough for most people and this doesn't include audiophiles.

Juggler
2011-06-21, 10:58
Interesting comments. The one point I want to draw attention to is that Logitech is not being viewed by the average joe for home audio--they will turn to their iPod/AirPlay for that.

Understood the points on 802.11n and GigE being too expensive... but what would fit my bill exactly as a reasonably priced (not cheap), headless audio player that I could use in each of my rooms with speakers.

I also think we'd be surprised at just how many new homes actually have speakers or speaker wire already built in... there is a market here!

No point including a screen; everyone is married to their smartphone anyway.

My $0.02

erland
2011-06-21, 11:16
Understood the points on 802.11n and GigE being too expensive... but what would fit my bill exactly as a reasonably priced (not cheap), headless audio player that I could use in each of my rooms with speakers.

If you want high quality, just get a Touch or a used Classic.
You can put a cloth on top of it if you don't want to see the screen. :-)
Both works perfectly to control with a Android or iOS smartphone.

If you are satisfied with good audio quality, there are probably more choices out there but I don't have any personal experience of these.



No point including a screen; everyone is married to their smartphone anyway.

Actually, there is a point, there are several points:
1.
It's a lot harder to troubleshoot a device without a screen and more or less 100% of the sold Squeezeboxes needs troubleshooting at least one time during their life time. I hate the Duet for this specific reason, it just shows what's going on with it's LED and I have to turn to Google to see what it means.

2.
It makes it different than anything else out there. A display visible from 10-15 feets in the middle of the room means that everyone can see what's playing not just the person holding the smartphone. For me the display is a lot more about showing what's playing than controlling the device.

Mnyb
2011-06-21, 11:32
And.

3. With an interface display + touch screen , the initial setup or changes to said setup could be caried out at the device itself :)

toby10
2011-06-21, 11:51
4. Not everyone has a smart phone. Those that do may need it for something else (phone call?) leaving the other person with no readily available control point for the player.

Smartphones are great devices, versatile & handy. But not always great at simultaneous multi-tasking especially among two or more people.

firedog
2011-06-21, 21:37
Just by some used SB devices. Or keep a lookout for Logitech deals or other deals online. They do turn up occasionally.

fuzzyT
2011-06-23, 11:58
On 6/21/11 1:55 PM, erland wrote:

> Just get a Logitech Harmony remote and get a "Play Music" button that
> does everything of the above with a single click. I haven't tried it
> myself but it should work as long as all devices are controlled with a
> IR remote.

I have a Harmony. It is set up for all of my devices, and I really
tried to like it, but the Harmony is consistently less usable for each
device than the respective native remote. And there are functions that
it will not access on some of my gear. Therefore I don't really use it.
After all, what's the point if you still have to (or even want to)
keep all the native remotes handy?

> Depends who you are talking about, it's important to remember that most
> users doesn't care about lossless quality, they are quite happy with
> just using MP3.

I wasn't speaking to the wants/needs/experience of 'most users', only my
own experience, in my home, with my system.

> If you care about audio quality, there are better products than those
> produced by Apple. I'm not saying Apple is bad, I'm just saying that
> they will select a compromise which is good enough for most people and
> this doesn't include audiophiles.

And it doesn't currently include me. The right piece of gear from Apple
(AirPlay endpoint with a great DAC) and I might even transcode all of
those FLACs, but not today.

justreturned
2011-06-23, 15:54
In my opinion SB3 is still the most awesome-looking piece of hardware every made in this product line (designed by Slimdevices). I own Booms, a Radio, a Receiver and a SB3, and while the SB3's fluorescent display is not as flexible as a touchscreen, it just looks classy and is nicely readable even from a distance. Also, can't beat it dimmed in the sleeping room where an LCD is always too bright.

Boom and radio are nice in terms of not needing an amplifier, they fit their purpose, but they just don't have the looks of the SB3 and seem built with less care for quality...too much plastic. As for the receiver/controller pair, I might trade it any day for an SB3, especially in these times of iPeng the controller is slow, inflexible and not very userfriendly. The touch aims at continuing the SB3's line, but the display is just not the same feel.

Logitech, please bring back an SB3-like model, with nice design, maybe a (tiny) set of somewhat hidden and invisible buttons (e.g. on the side or on top), and with a bigger fluorescent display, and I'll be in Squeezebox heaven. Maybe also a flat one for wall-mounting?

tamanaco
2011-06-23, 17:02
In my opinion SB3 is still the most awesome-looking piece of hardware every made in this product line (designed by Slimdevices). I own Booms, a Radio, a Receiver and a SB3, and while the SB3's fluorescent display is not as flexible as a touchscreen, it just looks classy and is nicely readable even from a distance. Also, can't beat it dimmed in the sleeping room where an LCD is always too bright.

Boom and radio are nice in terms of not needing an amplifier, they fit their purpose, but they just don't have the looks of the SB3 and seem built with less care for quality...too much plastic. As for the receiver/controller pair, I might trade it any day for an SB3, especially in these times of iPeng the controller is slow, inflexible and not very userfriendly. The touch aims at continuing the SB3's line, but the display is just not the same feel.

Logitech, please bring back an SB3-like model, with nice design, maybe a (tiny) set of somewhat hidden and invisible buttons (e.g. on the side or on top), and with a bigger fluorescent display, and I'll be in Squeezebox heaven. Maybe also a flat one for wall-mounting?

I'm on the same boat... the SB3 up to this point (for me) has been the pinnacle of the SB players. Great sound quality without too many bells and whistles. The ability to "quickly" select a track, album or streamed service that I want to listen, at that moment, is most important. Want a display?... You got it!... Don't want or need a the native display?... dim it or turn it off. Need a remote? Use the included dummy remote. If you want to get fancy and want color album art, info and lyrics on the palm of your hand... get a one of the remote apps for smartphones or buy the controller.

Most important thing when I get home and want to relax... is to get a drink and and turn on the music without too much fuzz. Listen to what I feel like and avoid having to interact with the apparatus that's playing the music... I just want to relax and listen. That's the reason I got the box in the first place.

TiredLegs
2011-06-24, 03:11
In my opinion SB3 is still the most awesome-looking piece of hardware every made in this product line (designed by Slimdevices). I own Booms, a Radio, a Receiver and a SB3, and while the SB3's fluorescent display is not as flexible as a touchscreen, it just looks classy and is nicely readable even from a distance. Also, can't beat it dimmed in the sleeping room where an LCD is always too bright.

Boom and radio are nice in terms of not needing an amplifier, they fit their purpose, but they just don't have the looks of the SB3 and seem built with less care for quality...too much plastic. As for the receiver/controller pair, I might trade it any day for an SB3, especially in these times of iPeng the controller is slow, inflexible and not very userfriendly. The touch aims at continuing the SB3's line, but the display is just not the same feel.

Logitech, please bring back an SB3-like model, with nice design, maybe a (tiny) set of somewhat hidden and invisible buttons (e.g. on the side or on top), and with a bigger fluorescent display, and I'll be in Squeezebox heaven. Maybe also a flat one for wall-mounting?
+1. I've got four SB3s that I'm hanging on to. However, I actually prefer the SB2, which is essentially the same electronically as the SB3, but in the older low-profile form factor.

pablolie
2011-06-28, 22:03
...
Logitech, please bring back an SB3-like model, with nice design, maybe a (tiny) set of somewhat hidden and invisible buttons (e.g. on the side or on top)...

I would agree. I just got a SB Touch and like it, but also thing it has strayed away from the "slim" concept, with all the pros and cons that brings along... but I like the "slim" concept, without quite as much capability. The first product to stray away from slim was the Duet, and it does remain the most temperamental and my least favorite SB design by a mile. It is relegated to bedroom duty. The SB3 and Boom just work and work (other than the occasional SBS upgrade hickup that never lasts long).

The Touch... I like it a lot. Not sure how much additional cost and complexity the integrated SBS adds. One aspect I *hate* I that adding albums to a playlist now takes 2 steps (the where to add dialog) as opposed to just hitting +...

gruntwolla
2011-07-01, 21:29
In your earlier post you were talking about the need for Receivers, and now you're talking about a successor to the Boom, so I hope you can where I was unclear about what you meant. But now I think I get your point and I agree completely that it would be good to have a successor to the Boom.

Hi again Aubuti - you may be interested to know I went and bought a radio for my sons room, and it is a much much better piece of kit than I thought. My son loves it ( he's 9)and so do I. I wish it came with a remote, but otherwise very happy.Thank you for helping to convince me!

Trev

aubuti
2011-07-02, 04:15
Hey Trev, glad to hear it. I think a Radio is a great choice for a 9 year-old. Now with some judicious selections for the six presets you have a fighting chance that you can steer him towards good musical taste. No guarantee, but a chance.

jasell
2011-07-10, 07:31
This is the kind of player I'm looking for:
http://gizmodo.com/181262/grundig-psw-500-wireless-speaker
(looks weather proof enough, mobile to place whereever you are in the garden or garage, operates on battery or mains, big speaker to produce good sound (strong not high quality))

I hope I can find one, cheap, and rip out the interior and replace the streaming electronics with some reciver hardware.

slippyr4
2011-07-11, 04:28
well, i'm new to the squeezebox scene (i got a radio last wednesday and liked it so much I bought a touch on sunday).

The touch is for my hifi in the living room; the radio is great in the kitchen. But now i want a device for the dining room:-

Stereo
Integrated Speakers
Touchscreen
Support for Spotify

If they brought that out (Boom 2 maybe?) I'd buy one tomorrow.

slip

ajkidle
2011-07-12, 17:22
well, i'm new to the squeezebox scene (i got a radio last wednesday and liked it so much I bought a touch on sunday).

The touch is for my hifi in the living room; the radio is great in the kitchen. But now i want a device for the dining room:-

Stereo
Integrated Speakers
Touchscreen
Support for Spotify

If they brought that out (Boom 2 maybe?) I'd buy one tomorrow.

slip

I don't know anything about Spotify support, and obviously it doesn't have a touch screen, but the Boom is a great device. Can't recommend it highly enough; the Radio pales in comparison. I'd suggest you buy one today. And then get the Boom 2 tomorrow.

gruntwolla
2011-07-13, 13:33
well, i'm new to the squeezebox scene (i got a radio last wednesday and liked it so much I bought a touch on sunday).

The touch is for my hifi in the living room; the radio is great in the kitchen. But now i want a device for the dining room:-

Stereo
Integrated Speakers
Touchscreen
Support for Spotify

If they brought that out (Boom 2 maybe?) I'd buy one tomorrow.

slip

Looks like the nearest to your requirements at present would be a Touch with powered bookshelf speakers. That meets 3 out of your 4 needs. If integrated speakers are a top priority then find a boom whilst you still can,and install the Triode spotify plugin. No touchscreen there though, so take tour pick or wait for Logitech to hopefully launch Boom 2!

Ikabob
2011-07-13, 15:06
Slip, they really do multiply like rabbits. I found that out and to me they are worth it.

eganders
2011-07-14, 10:48
The idea that either a monophonic Radio, or the conglomeration of a Touch plus separate amplified speakers, is a substitute for a decent table stereo player, is laughable on many levels, including cost, functionality, ease of use, etc.

I've had recent opportunities where a "Boom 2", or the like, would have been a perfect choice. Unfortunately no such device exists today, so we've had to go a different direction.

Sad.

slippyr4
2011-07-14, 11:45
indeed. there are products i **could** make work... but a mythical boom 2 would be ideal, and I shall wait and hope one comes out.

I don't think it would be very difficult... we're told the audio stages of the radio are based on the boom; the embedded platform that the logic of the touch and the radio is based on seems to work well - so it's surely just a joining of existing bits of tech into a new product.

i hope that logitech are still developing squeezebox products. it'd be very sad if the product line was discontinued just after i get on board.

i note today that logitech are bragging about the spotify support of radio and touch, with the launch of spotify in america.

aubuti
2011-07-14, 11:49
The idea that either a monophonic Radio, or the conglomeration of a Touch plus separate amplified speakers, is a substitute for a decent table stereo player, is laughable on many levels, including cost, functionality, ease of use, etc.

I've had recent opportunities where a "Boom 2", or the like, would have been a perfect choice. Unfortunately no such device exists today, so we've had to go a different direction.

Sad.
I don't know where you are located, but the original Boom is still available a lot of places. With triode's Spotify plugin it ticks 3 of the 4 boxes, lacking only the touchscreen. Is the touchscreen really that essential? That seems more "laughable" to me.

TCM
2011-07-14, 12:43
I'm still waiting for the arrival of the Atomic Squeezebox... ;)

http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=28816

gruntwolla
2011-07-14, 17:55
The idea that either a monophonic Radio, or the conglomeration of a Touch plus separate amplified speakers, is a substitute for a decent table stereo player, is laughable on many levels, including cost, functionality, ease of use, etc.

I've had recent opportunities where a "Boom 2", or the like, would have been a perfect choice. Unfortunately no such device exists today, so we've had to go a different direction.

Sad.

Which direction did you go? I'd love to know of decent table stereo that has better functionality than a squeezebox. Can it access spotify/napster/pandora etc. Can it sync with other music systems?

I think many of us agree that a Boom2 with previously mentioned features would be an excellent device, but in the meantime at least compare like for like

eganders
2011-07-16, 08:48
I don't know where you are located, but the original Boom is still available a lot of places. With triode's Spotify plugin it ticks 3 of the 4 boxes, lacking only the touchscreen. Is the touchscreen really that essential? That seems more "laughable" to me.

I know you were being helpful. I didn't intend to come across as picking on your generosity. Certainly my "laughable" comment was most definitely not aimed at you, but rather at anyone from Logitech who might believe that because a Touch can plug into amplifiers and speakers, is therefore reasonable to not offer an all-in-one, integrated, stereo (or better) desktop player; in other words, a new, improved, Boom 2.

I like the original Boom. I own several myself. But, much as I appreciate the original, yes, I do think the new Radio / Touch interface is easier to work with, as well as less intimidating to new users. It's obvious Logitech thinks so too, as going forward, the direction for SB's (apart from the LMS) clearly has been to use these newer displays and hardware.

Logitech needs a Boom 2 in their Squeezebox lineup.

eganders
2011-07-16, 08:52
Which direction did you go? I'd love to know of decent table stereo that has better functionality than a squeezebox. Can it access spotify/napster/pandora etc. Can it sync with other music systems?

I think many of us agree that a Boom2 with previously mentioned features would be an excellent device, but in the meantime at least compare like for like

I provided entirely different items. No "Boom 2" replacement exists. As you suggest, there really isn't anything quite like it. Too bad for everyone involved.