PDA

View Full Version : What The **** Do I Need?



RockinFX
2011-06-08, 20:49
OK, OK ... that's possibly a broader question in my case, but I mean as regards a Squeezebox-based system. All I really want is 2.1 channel audio through an existing AVR which has both wired and wireless capability by streaming FLAC audio files and internet radio from and/or controlled by my laptop to a single room.

I have been through the FAQs and forum posts and I am still somewhat lost. I don't need or want anything with a speaker and I really think Squeezebox does way more than I need it to do, but ... I had to ask. Is there a Squeezebox solution for this config (or do I need a NAS or some other "appliance")??

Thanks!

JJZolx
2011-06-08, 21:13
You need a **** in your ****, with a **** and probably a ****, too. If you don't want to **** then a **** will work with your existing ****, but don't **** if you can't at least ****.

Good ****!

RockinFX
2011-06-08, 21:17
You need a **** in your ****, with a **** and probably a ****, too. If you don't want to **** then a **** will work with your existing ****, but don't **** if you can't at least ****.

Good ****!

Gee, thanks so much. Nice to know there are no flaming a**h***s on here. Really appreciate it.

ModelCitizen
2011-06-08, 21:54
The obfuscated swear word in your post gives the impression that you are angry and accusatory. It's not a great way to present yourself when you are requesting free advice and help. You post isn't angry and accusatory though, so here goes....

You can host SqueezeBox Server and your flac files on your laptop and stream them wirelessly to your music system but you will need some hardware to pick up the stream at the music system. A touch for instance.

Alternatively you could wire the audio out from your laptop to your hifi and run the software player Squeezeplay on your laptop (as well as running the SqueezeBox Server and hosting your flac files on it too).

I hope I've understood your question correctly and this helps you.

MC

SuperQ
2011-06-08, 21:56
OK, OK ... that's possibly a broader question in my case, but I mean as regards a Squeezebox-based system. All I really want is 2.1 channel audio through an existing AVR which has both wired and wireless capability by streaming FLAC audio files and internet radio from and/or controlled by my laptop to a single room.

I have been through the FAQs and forum posts and I am still somewhat lost. I don't need or want anything with a speaker and I really think Squeezebox does way more than I need it to do, but ... I had to ask. Is there a Squeezebox solution for this config (or do I need a NAS or some other "appliance")??

Thanks!

Yup, a squeezebox touch will do this exactly. The Squeezebox is a client+server system. Generally you install Squeezebox Server software (free download even before you buy it) on your laptop or a desktop PC and it provides the streaming source to the Touch connected to your stereo.

If you install the server software on another PC from your laptop you can still control it using the web interface that is part of the server.

SuperQ
2011-06-08, 21:58
Gee, thanks so much. Nice to know there are no flaming a**h***s on here. Really appreciate it.

Atleast one person in this thread has a sense of humor.

Mnyb
2011-06-08, 22:05
Touch is the player made for ht or stereo systems, it has all the outputs you need for that .

radio is a standalone box.

they can all be used together with a server oftware used on PC ( squeezeboxserver ) for your localfiles and radio, for services and webradio only it is possible to do without the server.

the server have a web interface for setup and controll via any PC on the network ( not just the one where the server resides ).

However the main paradigm of squeezeboxes is to not controll via the PC, the server can be in your office or a closet, all players have ir remotes or Touch interface or knobs to controll them, pulling music from your server.

There is also a wide variety of apple or andriod apps to controll the system.

NAS ? Thats one option, server runs under windows mac and linux etc so it can be hosted on what you see fit for purpose, in your case a laptop.

erland
2011-06-08, 22:07
All I really want is 2.1 channel audio through an existing AVR which has both wired and wireless capability by streaming FLAC audio files and internet radio from and/or controlled by my laptop to a single room.

I have been through the FAQs and forum posts and I am still somewhat lost. I don't need or want anything with a speaker and I really think Squeezebox does way more than I need it to do, but ... I had to ask. Is there a Squeezebox solution for this config (or do I need a NAS or some other "appliance")??

It depends.

If your music is on your laptop and you only plan to listen to music when your laptop is powered on, then you don't need a NAS or other server hardware, you just have to install Squeezebox Server on your laptop.

If you want to be able to play music without the laptop powered on, you will need some kind of server. I'll always recommend a normal computer or old laptop put away somewhere, because that usually gives a lot better performance than NAS boxes which aren't designed to run the Squeezebox Server software.

Theoretically, you can connect an external USB drive with music directly to a Squeezebox Touch but in practice this often cause a lot of problems because the Touch hardware is too limited to get good performance.

If you are only interested in playing online streams and not locally stored music files, you don't need a server at all, in this case you can use Logitech central Squeezebox Server on mysqueezebox.com.

Regarding the actual Squeezebox devices, you have a number of choices:
- Get a used Squeezebox Classic on eBay or similar site
- Get a new Squeezebox Touch
- Get a new Squeezebox Duet

I would personally not recommend the Duet if you have a iPhone/iPad or Android device, because then you aren't going to need the graphical control provided in the Duet package as the iPhone/iPad/Android solutions are better.

The choice between Classic and Touch is based on:
- Do you want a new device (Touch) or are you satisfied with an old used device (Classic).
- Do you want top audio quality (Touch) or are you satisfied with very good audio quality (Classic). Unless you have a high-end hifi system you probably don't hear much difference between them.
- Do you want a central LCD color screen where you can see album covers and what's playing (Touch) or do you prefer a monochrome VFD display with better long range visibility (Classic)

At least in theory the Touch might probably be maintained/supported a bit longer, in practice Logitech still supports SlimMp3 which was release 2001 so it probably doesn't make much difference.

My personal feeling is that the Squeezebox Classic has a bit less problems but the Squeezebox Touch is overall a better device. My old Classic has been replaced with a Touch and I'll never go back, the Classic now only works a clock.

Finally, even though this is the Squeezebox forums, it's a good idea to mention that if you don't require high-end audio quality and you are going to control the music from the laptop, there are cheaper solutions on the market than Logitech's Squeezebox products. Squeezeboxes are mainly designed to be controlled from a remote control (IR, Android, iPhone/iPad) and this together with the audio quality and multi-room support is where they show their biggest advantages compared to the competition.

JJZolx
2011-06-08, 22:18
Let's try this, then...

If you want the networked AVR to play music then you're looking in the wrong place. You would want some kind of UPnP or DLNA server software running on a NAS or computer. A Squeezebox would not be part of the setup.

If you want to use a Squeezebox as a music source (much as though it were a CD player) and use the AVR as an amplifier, then a Squeezebox will work. You obviously don't want a Squeezebox Radio or Boom, as you already have amplification and (I assume) speakers.

So your Squeezebox choices from the current product line are:


Sqeezebox Duet



About $400 in the US.

This is a displayless player (the "Receiver"), plus a hand-held wireless remote control (the "Controller").

The Controller is a wifi device, so can be used from anywhere that you have a wireless signal in your home. It therefore requires a wireless router or access point in your home.

For playing your own music (instead of being limited to internet radio or services like Pandora) it requires a computer (or possibly a NAS) to run Squeezebox Server.



Squeezebox Touch


About $300 in the US.

This player has a full color touch screen, plus an infrared remote. The infrared remote requires a site line to the player.

It also has the ability to run a slimmed-down version of the server software and pull music from an attached USB drive or SD card, so doesn't necessarily require a computer to run Squeezebox Server. The server is kinda slow and it has some limitations (like no web interface and no transcoding of non-native file formats), so it's usually recommended only if you _really_ don't want to run a computer or NAS when playing your music.




The most important thing to understand is that Squeezboxes _must_ work in conjunction with a Squeezebox Server running somewhere. It could be running on a computer on your network, it could be on an NAS on your network, it could be the internal Squeezebox Server running on the Touch, or it could be MySqueezbox.com (radio and services only) from the internet.

In addition to controlling the player from either the touch screen or IR remote (Touch) or wifi Controller (Duet) you can use apps for the iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad, Android phones or devices, or from any computer on your network by using the web interface that runs on Squeezebox Server (but as explained above, the web server isn't available on the Touch's version of the server).

The Touch is a newer product, a bit easier to set up, and is considered by most people to have better sound quality than the Duet.

RockinFX
2011-06-08, 22:19
Well, it was honestly meant to convey nothing more than my abject level of frustration and desperation as I am well and truly lost. I have tried to get my head around the technology, I really have. Obviously to little or no avail. My sincere apologies for any misunderstanding.

That said, I really appreciate the advice. I am seriously networked audio challenged and didn't have a grasp of what is required in terms of ancillary devices needed in addition to my laptop and receiver. I was set for Sonos until I discovered that I'd need a NAS or stand-alone computer to host the files in a way that Sonos supported. I knew then I did not have a handle on this project as it seems (to me) a fairly simple task for a powerful laptop and very under-utilized network.

A single device to provide the glue was what I hoped for and it appears that the Touch and Squeezebox Server would let me do exactly what I want without having to continuously power additional storage. Sweet!

Thanks to you both!

MrSinatra
2011-06-09, 01:48
Well, it was honestly meant to convey nothing more than my abject level of frustration and desperation as I am well and truly lost. I have tried to get my head around the technology, I really have. Obviously to little or no avail. My sincere apologies for any misunderstanding.

That said, I really appreciate the advice. I am seriously networked audio challenged and didn't have a grasp of what is required in terms of ancillary devices needed in addition to my laptop and receiver. I was set for Sonos until I discovered that I'd need a NAS or stand-alone computer to host the files in a way that Sonos supported. I knew then I did not have a handle on this project as it seems (to me) a fairly simple task for a powerful laptop and very under-utilized network.

A single device to provide the glue was what I hoped for and it appears that the Touch and Squeezebox Server would let me do exactly what I want without having to continuously power additional storage. Sweet!

Thanks to you both!

you've gotten a lot of responses from pros. but it sounds to me like you want something that "just works" thats easy, robust, etc...

i would suggest then that this product is not for you.

a lot of people on here might disagree and say they never have issues, blah blah blah. well, just read posts here. this is a complicated product that one could find many nice things to say about it, but robust and reliable don't head the list. or come in the middle.

i think for the user who wants easy, you want something like this:

http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=86052

there are lots of options, many of which are confusing, but i break it down like this:

1. itunes freaks: use an airport express or another airplay device, like apple tv or the pioneer receiver i posted about [elsewhere in this forum] earlier (APX can do analog and toslink)
2. PC avg audio users: use a device which basically acts like a remote audio card, so any app can send sound to it. that way system sounds can stay on the laptop soundcard, while winamp or whatever can be configured to use the remote device, (like in my link above)
3. PC avg A/V user: lots of media adapters out there, that mainly focus on video, but will do audio. tivo, WD, etc... lots of options, tho like #2 you need to research exactly how they transmit the AV. some mimic soundcards (or really are soundcards) and do remote via RF or wifi or bluetooth, while others use a server app to feed the device.
4. finally, SBS, which is currently audio only. to do local music you must install and use SBS, and SBS powers the hardware. this option, is, imo, for people who are fairly technically adept, and willing to put up with MANY headaches and troubleshoot issues, in order to take advantage of some nice features, and HQ hardware. its the HQ hardware that keeps me with them.

but unless i knew someone had skills, and patience, i would NOT recommend this stuff. it just isn't ready yet, again imo, for the avg user who is practically spoiled on todays easy apps and pods.

rayman1701
2011-06-09, 09:03
you've gotten a lot of responses from pros. but it sounds to me like you want something that "just works" thats easy, robust, etc...

i would suggest then that this product is not for you.

a lot of people on here might disagree and say they never have issues, blah blah blah. well, just read posts here. this is a complicated product that one could find many nice things to say about it, but robust and reliable don't head the list. or come in the middle.

I have to chime in here and say that isn't totally true. I knew absolutely nothing about Squeeze anything when I got my Touch a little over a year ago. I have had pretty much 0 problems thus far. And the only problems I have had has been with the SuperDateandTime Plugin and how it will get knocked out when the Weather site it uses changes formats. Otherwise I've been running with very few hiccups.

I know extremely little about networking, other than pluggin things into the router or entering the wi-fi info. I have no idea what exactly SSH is or why I would need to do it, since I've never had to figure it out. Not to mention I have no clue about anything linix, or anything with a command line, or anything about programming of any flavor. I'm self taught on the computer, and when I need to learn something I do all the research I can and try to figure it out. If I can't I get help. But yeah for most things I admit I am completely computer illiterate, but I've had only minor issues with Squeezebox Server and the Touch.

Now, part of that may come down to the fact that I am very anal and particular with my music tagging. I've always used iTunes and use the tags that are of importance to me, but it is consistant. Even when I get something that I didn't rip, via Amazon, HDTracks or whatever, I set the tags to match what I want. Also I had my entire library already ripped to Apple Lossless before I got the Touch and installed Squeezebox Server (granted that was partly due to the Touch's release date being pushed back a bit). When I got the Touch finally, I just had a gut instinct that it might not work quite the way I had optimally hoped for, which was as a stand alone all in one unit. So when I started having problems with a large library of ALAC, some 96/24 files included, using TinySC, I wasn't too surprised. I figured with the way the Touch looked that it probably wasn't as robust as the PR sheet described it, and that it probably was designed to work with a much smaller or mostly MP3 library. So within a few hours of getting the Touch, and messing with TinySC. I had Squeezebox Server installed on my desktop and playing music. My install initally had one wireless jump, and I had 0 issues with networking. Later on I got a laptop for a dedicated server and it's wired, just because it can be, and it's one less signal in our suddenly crowded wireless atmosphere (I can see a lot of neighbors signals, which messes with the wife's laptop at times)

After a little enjoyment I started exploring this board, learning shortcuts, pitfalls, quirks, and all that kind of stuff. So I slowly got a little better grasp on what this whole system is and can do. I really find this site helpful, and lots of answers are here if one has the patience to search.

So no you don't have to be a tweaky inclined person to install and use this stuff. Maybe I'm a fluke, but I doubt it.

pablolie
2011-06-09, 09:18
OK, OK ... that's possibly a broader question in my case, but I mean as regards a Squeezebox-based system. All I really want is 2.1 channel audio through an existing AVR which has both wired and wireless capability by streaming FLAC audio files and internet radio from and/or controlled by my laptop to a single room.

I have been through the FAQs and forum posts and I am still somewhat lost. I don't need or want anything with a speaker and I really think Squeezebox does way more than I need it to do, but ... I had to ask. Is there a Squeezebox solution for this config (or do I need a NAS or some other "appliance")??

Thanks!

The SqueezeBox system is easy:

You need the server SqueezeboxServer software (SBS), which can run on any Windows, Appls or Linux computer; or is embedded in the SB Touch product. The music collection (pretty much any format) is controlled, organized and streamed by the SBS.

Then you have clients. The ones that come probably closest to your requirements are the Touch and the Duet. I own a Duet, but find it the least appealing of all players, especially now that better control interfaces than the controller exist. I find myself using my iPad instead of the Controller all the time.

Buy a Touch. Install SBS on your laptop... or copy your music collection to a drive and connect it to the Touch directly... and off you go.

I started with the Squeeze system in 2005 I think. I still find it the most versatile proposition in this market - from audiophile to utter portability it has covered every need I have ever had.

RockinFX
2011-06-09, 09:48
Great responses, lots of excellent information and (invaluable) hands on experiences - many thanks! I still like the concept and features of the Touch for my purposes since:

a) I have a severe allergy to iTunes. It's genetic and untreatable. I've tried medication - no use. If a solution is predicated on using i* then it isn't in my future.

b) I have no need for video. A want, yes, but no bandwidth to support it out here in the wilds of the Sonoran Desert. Likely to be true in perpetuity.

The one thing that sounds sub-optimal is (if I understand correctly) the rescanning/restructuring of the connection and the library if the server goes down. I run World Community Grid 24/7 so the laptop is almost always on, but there are times when I need an update or (more often) a rare, flightless parrot in New Zealand belches and our "robust" local grid goes down for hours and hours.

Is this (server reboot) much of an issue? I have ~160 GB of audio and I don't relish the idea of having to wait for a scan of it all very often.

Thanks to all once again for the excellent assistance and education!

rayman1701
2011-06-09, 09:56
If your using the laptop/PC for a server, then the reboot is no big deal. It uses your local network for the most part, unless listening to internet radio, so it's based on your in house network. But if you have a power outage, or need to reboot the laptop/server, it just starts and once it is running you just play as normal, no need to re-scan. In fact the inital scan is the one that will take the most time, after you can run a look for new and changed scan for adding new albums, which is much faster of a scan and you can still be listening while it is doing that scan. It's really pretty simple all in all.

JJZolx
2011-06-09, 10:14
The one thing that sounds sub-optimal is (if I understand correctly) the rescanning/restructuring of the connection and the library if the server goes down. I run World Community Grid 24/7 so the laptop is almost always on, but there are times when I need an update or (more often) a rare, flightless parrot in New Zealand belches and our "robust" local grid goes down for hours and hours.

Is this (server reboot) much of an issue? I have ~160 GB of audio and I don't relish the idea of having to wait for a scan of it all very often.

Which post above is that in response to?

Would you be running Squeezebox Server on a computer on your network, or are you thinking of using the server that runs on the Touch?

Rebooting a computer/NAS system running Squeezebox Server is no problem. The library is not rescanned when the system starts. Scanning the library is a manual thing. You launch a rescan when you add new music or make changes to existing files.

However, if you run the internal server on the Touch, this is not the case. It will rescan the attached library when it starts up, and it's best to wait until this scan finishes before using the system, as it swamps the Touch completely while scanning. That's just one of the many negatives about running the internal server, and why I don't recommend using it unless you absolutely have to.

RockinFX
2011-06-09, 10:27
Ahhh, good to know the re-scan is no big deal and that I have control of scan type and frequency running SBS on the laptop. Actually, great to know.

It is looking more and more like the Touch is going to be my choice. I realize every product has a few warts and more of them in some application scenarios, but I have yet to encounter a product that fits my current hardware config and needs quite as well.

I thank you all once again!

MrSinatra
2011-06-09, 13:32
I have to chime in here and say that isn't totally true. <snip> Maybe I'm a fluke, but I doubt it.

all one has to do is look at the posts in these forums.

now, i don't dispute your exp; but its not my exp, and i know a lot more than the avg user.

one could argue the forums will have a lot of wtf posts b/c it inherently attracts people having problems, and thats true. so i don't claim to know what the percentage of avg users is (ie. the mainstream middle marketplace logitech sells to) that run into problems. but its certainly obvious to me, that the percentage is way higher than what it should be for a product like this, thats marketed this way, esp when you compare to things like airplay or tivo.

having said that, (as i acknowledged earlier) the flipside is slim stuff (and the touch ain't slim now) has lots of feature type and hardware type pros that "easier" stuff doesn't have. so its just the pros and cons and what best fits a given users situation.

however, i stand by all that and what i wrote earlier, and consider it all to be true. if this OP gets a touch, and doesn't have problems, i wouldn't be surprised, esp as he is doing research prior. but no one would be surprised, would they, if he did run into some kind of problems? is that not a sad thing to say about a product line? would one say that about airplay or tivo? that was all i was trying to say. i think i was fair in breaking down the 4 options as i saw it.

anyway, i certainly wish the OP good luck and i'm sure many here, including i, will be happy to try to help should he encounter any difficulty.

RockinFX
2011-06-09, 15:56
<snip ...> anyway, i certainly wish the OP good luck and i'm sure many here, including i, will be happy to try to help should he encounter any difficulty.

Thanks! I have read enough in my research around this issue to know that there are indeed problems and am certain all of those points are not only well considered, but true. However, I really cannot find a better match at this point between my wishes and extant products so I probably will get a Touch once I've assembled the requisite coin of the realm. I really am thankful for the kind help I am receiving on this thread and that also makes my decision a bit easier!

dasmueller
2011-06-09, 17:53
Go for it. I think you will be pleased. Many of us run into issues from time to time but at least for me, they are usually a temp frustration and then all is good again. My level of expertise is pretty low when it comes to tech stuff but I am happy w the Touch and the software. Is it perfect, no, but it does work.

There are lots of folks here who will help you if you ask.

pablolie
2011-06-09, 21:15
I think for every SB poweruser that runs a Linux server, owns several clients and what not, there have been moments of frustration. In all fairness, *every* long term user of *every* product has those. I give the SB developers kudos for always coming through in the end. *Always*. The rough patches never seem to last too long, and never ever have prevented me from basic music listening for more than a few minutes (frustrating as that can be). I have been loud with, uhm, candid feedback at times in these forums, but in the end I am still here, I am happy, and I don't see anything more flexible and versatile in the marketplace.

I think the SB concept is also unique in its ability to be extremely configurable to the needs of powerusers (who then are first to discover cornercase issues), and yet again be absolutely able to deliver on a dumbed down, reliable user experience. Heck, I hope my mom isn't reading this, but she uses the heck out of "her" SB Radio when she's here for several months a year. Works like a charm for her.

I think based on the stated requirements of the OP - a Touch will do mighty fine. I wamt a Touch, and yet in all credit to the SB concept my collection of devices delivers on *every* need I have to this day, and I end up canceling the Touch order and buying music or some other non-music gadget instead...

My only fear is that I continue to think Logitech undermarkets the product and I wonder about the long term commitment behind the concept... then again, a unique aspect about the product is its open source nature, and as such I think it's pretty sure it'll never die...

I somehow think we users will keep meeting in these forums for many years to come, which is quite unique for product forums.

Phil Leigh
2011-06-09, 23:13
Just remember that the people posting on these forums with issues/problems are probably < 0.1% (or 1 in 1,000) of the install base.

MrSinatra
2011-06-09, 23:16
the flipside of that is all the people with problems who never post, but just give up, return, whatever...

cunobelinus
2011-06-10, 00:27
I've now been running SBS since 2004. There were some initial problems setting up, but these were solved very rapidly with the very generously given help of members of this forum. There were problems with drop outs of wireless streaming. Again, those were solved rapidly with help from here.

The help is still available here, and the advice needed is generally so very simple that even I would now be able to be among those helping. I have had no problems at all now with SBS for more years than I can remember. Having set up the system, it just works, and I rarely need to think about it. (This is probably tempting fate, but still......)

It is simply not true that this system is too technically complex or sensitive, or only for those with mystical skills and patience. It may, though, require a little initial tinkering and tweaking. Once that is done, it will, in my experience, continue to work as well as any other system without much further attention.

That said, the rest of the summary in this post of what is available is sound. If you are streaming only to one place, then one of those other options might be better for you. (If you were a Mac user I'd suggest Airport Express or Apple TV, being a Mac user myself). If you were prepared to use wired only, you could even use a stand alone soundcard (something like one of the Focusrite or M Audio ranges, perhaps)and an Ethernet cable link from the laptop, or there are very good quality DAC's with Ethernet or USB input which would be well worth investigating.

(see <http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=93581&highlight=young+bake>)

But more expensive by some way than a Squeezebox Touch.

On 9 Jun 2011, at 09:48, MrSinatra wrote:

>
>
> but unless i knew someone had skills, and patience, i would NOT
> recommend this stuff. it just isn't ready yet, again imo, for the avg
> user who is practically spoiled on todays easy apps and pods.
>
>
> --
> MrSinatra
>
> www.lion-radio.org
> using:
> sb2 & droid (my home) / duet & ipeng (parents' home) - sbs 7.5.5b -
> win7 & xp pro sp3 ie9 - p4(ht) 3.2ghz, 2gig ram - 1tb wd usb2 raid1 -
> d-link dir-655 - 49k+ mp3/flac
> ::VOTE FOR 'BUG 15604'
> (http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=15604)!!!::
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MrSinatra's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2336
> View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88215
>
>

RockinFX
2011-06-10, 09:17
I do know that one cannot blindly assume complaints and reports of problems are solid indications of overall product quality. I have seldom (OK, never) taken keyboard in hand to post a "Wow, it's awesome!" report in a support forum unless it was in response to someone evaluating that product with a "I bought it and it ate my cat!" blanket condemnation. People who are struggling with issues and/or questions come to get help and many of them are (often quite justifiably) frustrated.

I still haven't found anything at its price point and feature set that meshes so well with my wants/needs as the Touch. As mentioned previously, anything that forces me to use iTunes is out. Apple makes fine products, but not for me - it's in the genes ... resistance is futile.

Believe it or else, I am quite comfortable with technology and computers ... *except* when it comes to networking! Wired analog by birth and just have a nasty time of it trying to fit the "cloud" into my "forecast". Again, resistance/persistence/desire seems mostly futile which makes me value the help I've gotten here all the more!!

Mnyb
2011-06-10, 11:39
For networking use switches avoid wifi and use ethernet wire when physically possible= " the objekts you want to connect are stationary" ie not moving around like a controller or a phone or a pad etc.

RockinFX
2011-06-10, 12:06
OK, yeah ... not sure how that applies since we're discussing a wireless streaming device, but thanks.

JJZolx
2011-06-10, 12:13
OK, yeah ... not sure how that applies since we're discussing a wireless streaming device, but thanks.

It works both wirelessly or on wired ethernet. If you can connect it over wire it can be a lot more reliable. Many people have very few problems with wireless, but some people have many problems due to all manner of wireless network issues - interference from neighboring networks, interference from appliances, weak signals, etc.

Mnyb
2011-06-10, 12:51
dont forget the server....

it usually works ok with wifi. I had all players on wifi for 3 years at least

And when the squeezeboxes multiply as they do... You get a more complex setup with multiple squeezeboxes.

In my current case server is wired to the network many players are also wired some are not and is using wifi.

But why tempt fate ? With 14 networks around... It was 2 in 2006

what also matters is whats being streamed 128kbs mp3 or 2890kbs 24/96 FLAC

So a preemtive action is to avaoid unecessary wifi, why wait untill you get problems :)

edit: I also got other stuff to run with wifi a netbook and an iPad and friends brings tons of wifi gadgets when visiting...
and i started to bring my work laptop home and use over wifi.

MrSinatra
2011-06-10, 13:06
this is actually a perfect example of what i'm talking about that some people are trying to dismiss. u need to know very little to almost nothing to setup a wifi apple device, and once you do, its basically forever. compare that to the ip3k products, which many people here, some posting how easy this all is, don't even attempt dhcp with anymore. true, the OP is talking touch but i seem to recall a lot of problems with the touch when it rolled out anyway, no?

in addition, airplay has no problems with multiple wifi hops. i was able to stream from a laptop hd via wifi to a router back to a wifi APX. absolutely no drops, no problem, just plug and play. i was even able to have the laptop grab the music off of a NAS, that was wired to the router, but again the laptop was wifi.

compare that to slim stuff, which basically can't do more than one wifi hop period, usually the router to the device.

now, like the OP i hate mac/apple stuff, i get it when he says its in the genes. but a lot of people in my family like the stuff, and it does do some things well, that slim does not match. to all the people saying this stuff is no muss, no fuss, i say take it to someone who is NOT into computers, and watch them try to set it up from scratch, without your help, and then compare that to someone doing the same with apple. it just isn't the same, its silly to try to say it is.

bluegaspode
2011-06-10, 13:13
But honestly:

the original poster said he is using a computer that is on most of the time.
Then he wants to use a single Touch.

That's a dead simple setup.

Neither will he face problems installing the server, nor connecting the Touch via WiFi with the current state of the software.

I'm running two Radios, one Duet and a Boom all wirelessly in different parts of my house with no problems (they don't play at the same time though, never tried it).

Sure when people add boxes one needs to consider going wired, but don't confuse our initial poster with the future, when he starts to add boxes :D

Mnyb
2011-06-10, 13:24
But honestly:

the original poster said he is using a computer that is on most of the time.
Then he wants to use a single Touch.

That's a dead simple setup.

Neither will he face problems installing the server, nor connecting the Touch via WiFi with the current state of the software.

I'm running two Radios, one Duet and a Boom all wirelessly in different parts of my house with no problems (they don't play at the same time though, never tried it).

Sure when people add boxes one needs to consider going wired, but don't confuse our initial poster with the future, when he starts to add boxes :D

Then he just need to be somewhat observant if the serving pc is wireless , you may break things if doing heavy downloads at the same time as listening to music but thats common sense :P

toby10
2011-06-11, 03:28
I also successfully use SBS on a WiFi laptop and Sync lossless (even full WAV's) to three WiFi players over a G router without a hiccup.
A wireless server is not what I'd recommend to others, but it is possible.
Usage, location, environment and other factors have an impact on how successful an all wireless setup will function.

johnas
2011-06-11, 05:25
For Sonos' take on what the OP should do see here: http://forums.sonos.com/showthread.php?t=22705

garym
2011-06-11, 05:38
For Sonos' take on what the OP should do see here: http://forums.sonos.com/showthread.php?t=22705

good advice and a fair comparison of SB vs Sonos products. Logitech could learn a lot from the clear explanations provided on the Sonos website about how their product works, etc. I say this as a major user of SB products. The major downside of Sonos is the lack of 3rd party customization (and I think they are limited to 16/44.1 files). But 99% of customers out there don't care about 3rd party customization or hi-rez files.

johnas
2011-06-11, 09:30
good advice and a fair comparison of SB vs Sonos products. Logitech could learn a lot from the clear explanations provided on the Sonos website about how their product works, etc. I say this as a major user of SB products. The major downside of Sonos is the lack of 3rd party customization (and I think they are limited to 16/44.1 files). But 99% of customers out there don't care about 3rd party customization or hi-rez files.

Yeah I agree, fair comparison and clear explanations.

I think by and large for the average user Sonos is probably a better option if you will primarily use a music service or have a small local library. It seems that Sonos has been developing and marketing their product to be a platform for streaming music services.

But as someone who used to own Sonos products I can say there are other downsides for Sonos besides lack of high rez and 3rd party plugins.

garym
2011-06-11, 12:36
But as someone who used to own Sonos products I can say there are other downsides for Sonos besides lack of high rez and 3rd party plugins.

just curious what you felt they were? I guess I left out a maximum size library (which would be a deal breaker for me). Other issues? I think they do gapless lame mp3 and FLAC files ok, correct?

johnas
2011-06-12, 08:13
just curious what you felt they were? I guess I left out a maximum size library (which would be a deal breaker for me). Other issues? I think they do gapless lame mp3 and FLAC files ok, correct?


just curious what you felt they were? I guess I left out a maximum size library (which would be a deal breaker for me). Other issues? I think they do gapless lame mp3 and FLAC files ok, correct?

Yeah, they do gapless mp3 and flac correct. No issues with playing files or bugs.

- File index is limited. It can serve you artists, albums, genre, composer and file - SB is way better for local library features, i mean like Sonos is pretty feeble in comparison
- File index is slower to scan
- it is not faster to play music, actually takes more presses on the remote than SB smartphone remote apps
- the remote app for iphone is very basic, not as many features as ipeng - in fact squeezecommander and all the other apps are better imo
- no customization on Sonos, you can't hide, reorder items on remote, favourites are limited
- the alarm feature is not useful unless you have a dedicated remote (no snooze buttons or clock on iphone app)
- no kidsplay or kid friendly options
- no native linux controller (also their mac controller is not good)
- no playback on remotes or software playback
- better hardware options with SB (basically for me having kid and wife friendly controls on SB Boom were a big feature for SB and my wife preferred boom over S5 and iPeng over Sonos Iphone remote app)
The boom is tiny compared to S5:
http://i.imgur.com/6ihOBl.jpg (http://imgur.com/6ihOB)

garym
2011-06-12, 08:16
Yeah, they do gapless mp3 and flac correct. No issues with playing files or bugs.

- File index is limited. It can serve you artists, albums, genre, composer and file - SB is way better for local library features, i mean like Sonos is pretty feeble in comparison
- File index is slower to scan
- it is not faster to play music, actually takes more presses on the remote than SB smartphone remote apps
- the remote app for iphone is very basic, not as many features as ipeng - in fact squeezecommander and all the other apps are better imo
- no customization on Sonos, you can't hide, reorder items on remote, favourites are limited
- the alarm feature is not useful unless you have a dedicated remote (no snooze buttons or clock on iphone app)
- no kidsplay or kid friendly options
- no native linux controller (also their mac controller is not good)
- no playback on remotes or software playback
- better hardware options with SB (basically for me having kid and wife friendly controls on SB Boom were a big feature for SB and my wife preferred boom over S5 and iPeng over Sonos Iphone remote app)
The boom is tiny compared to S5:

gotcha. Good info.

oktup
2011-06-13, 04:30
I'd have to agree that the SB ecosystem isn't for *everyone*. But trying to identify that cut-off point is a bit tricky.

One simple test might be if you never have problems attaching a file to an email; ie you understand the concept of directory structures, and how files end up in different places on your computer. If you totally get this, and you're happy to do the occasional bit of googling when computery things go wrong, I'd say a basic SB setup is well within your capabilities.

Given that the OP mentions NASs and FLAC, I think he/she is comfortably in the target demographic ;)

OTOH, mysterious intermittent networking problems could probably break the spirit of Alan Turing himself. But I think it's a bit unfair to single the SB out in this regard; it applies (almost) equally to all home wifi, wireless printing, etc. Some (few?) people just seem to be unlucky and get plagued with networking badness; if you've already decided you want *some* type of streaming audio system, you're going to be in the network lottery regardless, and I don't think the 'SB vs something else' angle is massively relevant to your outcome. It'll probably be fine ;)

garym
2011-06-13, 04:33
OTOH, mysterious intermittent networking problems could probably break the spirit of Alan Turing himself.

;-)

toby10
2011-06-13, 05:26
I'd also add (especially if comparing Sonos to a Boom/Radio) the issue of true portability.

Even though the Sonos S5 has it's own speakers it cannot be used as a truly standalone portable player....
- must be connected to a Sonos ZP or ZB (all SB players will connect directly to any basic network, no "base station" needed)
- cannot communicate with standard WiFi (limited to the proprietary Sonos "mesh" wireless)
- no display on Sonos players (yes there are the fine Apps, web UI, dedicated Sonos Controller, but requiring these for basic functions removes the portability factor, IMO)

Note: I have ZERO experience with Sonos, but I believe this is how they work (and the inherent limitations that accompany them). :)

Mnyb
2011-06-13, 05:30
I'd have to agree that the SB ecosystem isn't for *everyone*. But trying to identify that cut-off point is a bit tricky.

One simple test might be if you never have problems attaching a file to an email; ie you understand the concept of directory structures, and how files end up in different places on your computer. If you totally get this, and you're happy to do the occasional bit of googling when computery things go wrong, I'd say a basic SB setup is well within your capabilities.

Given that the OP mentions NASs and FLAC, I think he/she is comfortably in the target demographic ;)

OTOH, mysterious intermittent networking problems could probably break the spirit of Alan Turing himself. But I think it's a bit unfair to single the SB out in this regard; it applies (almost) equally to all home wifi, wireless printing, etc. Some (few?) people just seem to be unlucky and get plagued with networking badness; if you've already decided you want *some* type of streaming audio system, you're going to be in the network lottery regardless, and I don't think the 'SB vs something else' angle is massively relevant to your outcome. It'll probably be fine ;)

Yea Sonos solution is to use it's own proprietary network, thus freeing themself from user errors in network setup, left "only" with the figth against nature and other radio sources .

Reading this forum makes you wonder , same people always get "network problems" and new server versions always breaks their install ? I'll bet that an upgrade whose only diff where the version numbers would also break their installs, some peoples computer environment seems very fragile like a house of cards ?

MrSinatra
2011-06-13, 11:25
Yea Sonos solution is to use it's own proprietary network, thus freeing themself from user errors in network setup, left "only" with the figth against nature and other radio sources .

Reading this forum makes you wonder , same people always get "network problems" and new server versions always breaks their install ? I'll bet that an upgrade whose only diff where the version numbers would also break their installs, some peoples computer environment seems very fragile like a house of cards ?

if so, then why is it only slim gear that exhibits difficulties?

in other words, in my exp, i have seen the above, but only with slim, not apple, not tivo, not other gear.

the very first problem i had almost instantly with slim, that still isn't fully solved btw, (but after YEARS has improved to some degree, including some bug / code fixes made at my urging) was listening to a shoutcast stream. slim simply couldn't handle it, going into buffering mode and so on. all the pro slimmers, some of which are here in this thread i think (if not literally, than in spirit), wanted to first blame my network, the "environment," etc, and when i made clear it was totally normal, and that i could always ROBUSTLY and RELIABLY stream the same shoutcast on a wifi laptop with winamp, they actually resorted to saying that it "wasn't fair" to compare the dinky ip3k slim solution to that.

not fair? well, i couldn't disagree more. first of all, its sold to people saying you can do that, without even needing a computer! secondly, it IS supposed to be able to do that, anything said to the contrary is nonsense.

my main beef is that in almost all cases when i have problems with slim stuff that i report, even after years of using it, the reaction from other users / devs, is to blame me, my setup, etc... and do everything possible not to blame slim. the problem is that it almost ALWAYS IS slim. and in my case, i feel that an even bigger problem is that none of the devs live in windows, and so you run up against all kinds of issues that seem to come from that. and once you prove it must be slim, you're lucky if the devs actually do anything about it, which granted it may not be easy or possible, but communiction on such issues would be nice. i have real bugs that they know about that they refuse to fix, one i can think of goes back to 2008.

having said all that, i am still using it, for now. but the marketplace seems to be catching up to them. i am hopeful with some things they are doing, like the DLNA, but the lack of resources and so on is problematic, and waiting on 7.6 has become a joke. logitech really needs to step up their game if they expect this stuff to survive.

rayman1701
2011-06-14, 06:41
As speaking as someone who likes and uses iTunes (just not with Squeeze anymore) I haven't been able to get iTunes to install on my Vista machine since 7.5! I have tried all the suggestions about removing every component of iTunes/Quick Time, cleaning out the registry and several other things. Everytime I get the same errors and iTunes won't run and I have to reinstall my last good computer back-up to get back to the state my computer was in with a working iTunes. So no Apple does not magically put out stuff that doesn't "break" machines. Yes Apple does lots of good things and I like their software, but it's gotten to the point it is so bloated with stuff I don't need and no way to get a working version on my machine. Sure if it really becomes an issue I can pay to have someone come out and hopefully fix it, but really should one have to pay to get software to work? Thankfully my Win 7 laptop runs the newer versions fine. But in the year I've had Squeezebox Server, I haven't run into any problems close to what I've had with iTunes, not had to go digging thru the registry to find conflicts or having it install extra stuff that I don't want or need and I like iTunes.

And it seems like most of the posts on the iTunes Forum is the "my iTunes was working, then I installed the lastest update and now it won't run, help!" posts. So really that doesn't seem all that much different than how you say things are here. Except the users here can ususally work with people enough to see what broke the install and fix it, at the iTunes forum it's usually try this and maybe you'll get lucky.

MrSinatra
2011-06-14, 10:20
considering that there's probably 1000 times more itunes installs than SBS ones, i think its safe to say that as a percentage, they exp less issues overall, and actually given how many more there are, thats pretty amazing.

garym
2011-06-14, 10:40
considering that there's probably 1000 times more itunes installs than SBS ones, i think its safe to say that as a percentage, they exp less issues overall, and actually given how many more there are, thats pretty amazing.

my first generation ipod from many years ago is still chugging along and works perfectly. The battery died, but the user (now in a friend's hands) simply uses it connected to their stereo so it is always plugged into power. Then again, my Hallicrafters SX101 MKII from 1957 still works perfectly too... although to be fair, it doesn't require synching with a computer on occasion ;-)

Gerry123
2011-06-14, 12:00
considering that there's probably 1000 times more itunes installs than SBS ones, i think its safe to say that as a percentage, they exp less issues overall, and actually given how many more there are, thats pretty amazing.

Yeah, ain't that a shame!

I have iTunes, I hate iTunes with a vengeance. Why does it have to make a backup of a backup of what's on your iPod/Phone and why does it have to be in the roaming profile of a user!!!! If your 64Gb iPod is full that's a massive 192GB of storage. I know, I can exclude the directory from a roaming profile but really, bloated is an understatement. The only reason I use iTunes is to get music on my iPod and iPeng of course any other stuff they can stick where the sun don't shine.

MrSinatra,

Although I don't always agree with your terminology I would agree with what you are saying. I got so sick of wireless for my Squeezebox XX that I sacked it in favour of cat5e/6 wiring my whole house. Never looked back. The only wireless things I use now is my iPod and android phone both of which work flawlessly controlling my various SB's.

A wireless squeezebox, whatever flavour just isn't up to scratch imho and don't get me going on trying to synch two wireless SB's.

I'm just glad there's an ethernet port on the back. If they ever remove that I'm going back to CDs.

Gerry.

Goodsounds
2011-06-14, 17:18
considering that there's probably 1000 times more itunes installs than SBS ones, i think its safe to say that as a percentage, they exp less ----- overall

Fixed it for you.

Itunes users, those are the people who've been paying $300+ for portable music players for the last umpteen years and who think that 128k mp3 files sound just fine on their home music/stereo systems. They're numerous, but I don't give much weight to what they do or don't experience or think. You shouldn't either.

Itunes has to be the single most annoying piece of software I've encountered. It's inflexible, unconfigurable, and it changes settings on your PC without asking. More than just the obvious ones.

I think people who use Itunes deserve Itunes.

Phil Leigh
2011-06-15, 07:50
iTunes = iVirus. Let's move on.

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 09:06
don't miss the point, i also hate itunes... but the wifi part of that eco-system is much better, its more robust and reliable, works easier, etc...

say what you will about itunes, i'll agree with it most likely, but the "airplay" portion of what they do is very kickass, and its why you now see 3rd party hardware support it.

i wonder if eventually someone will create a SBS/itunes server type hybrid...? some kind of open source server that supports airplay? if they did, it would really solve a lot of issues for most people on both sides of this.

erland
2011-06-15, 09:25
i wonder if eventually someone will create a SBS/itunes server type hybrid...? some kind of open source server that supports airplay? if they did, it would really solve a lot of issues for most people on both sides of this.

You mean like an Vortexbox Appliance (which already exists) ?

It currently run:
- A Squeezebox Server
- A UPnP server
- A DAAP server
- Also works like a player through its "Vortexbox Player"
- Contains web based tagging and automatic ripping software
- Everything pre-installed I believe, more or less you just have to turn on the box, put the music on it and start playing.

And pretty soon unless they are afraid of legal actions from Apple, I bet it will also run a ShairPort server which is the audio portion of AirPort protocol. Since they already include a DAAP server it feels like ShairPort should also be a possibility.

As mentioned elsewhere, including full support for AirPlay gets more complicated unless you have enough margins to pay the license fees to Apple.

Or is VortexBox uninteresting because it's released by a small company and not a big organization like Logitech, Apple or Microsoft ?

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 11:23
i'd say its uninteresting (to the mass market) b/c it doesn't yet support airplay (or the "audio part" of it) and b/c the UI is not one UI for all. if it ever does, it becomes nteresting, and then the Q is the degree to which it does.

i could be mistaken, but my impression is to do all those things it does currently, VB basically runs separate apps to do them. i think a single open source unified UI, that can run slim, apple, or dlna, (and tivo or whatever else etc), equally well is something of a holy grail.

although, my belief is that really a developer would just need to replace itunes with their server and support airplay/dlna with such an open source project to be successful. one imagines such a project could do what itunes does, "better." adding in slim support would be nice, but not needed (to be successful).

erland
2011-06-15, 11:48
i'd say its uninteresting (to the mass market) b/c it doesn't yet support airplay (or the "audio part" of it) and b/c the UI is not one UI for all. if it ever does, it becomes nteresting, and then the Q is the degree to which it does.

I'd argue that the reason the mass market doesn't buy it is because:
1. They don't know it exists
2. They think it's too expensive
3. The applications it bundles is still too geeky for the mass market

AirPlay support would certainly help but to get AirPlay you can just get a $99 AppleTV and you have what you like, as I've understood you don't even have to have it connected to iTunes if you only want to use AirPlay. AppleTV is cheap even if you only use it as a wireless iPad -> TV and iPad -> Amplifier connector.


i could be mistaken, but my impression is to do all those things it does currently, VB basically runs separate apps to do them.

It has a common home page from which you can launch the different apps.



i think a single open source unified UI, that can run slim, apple, or dlna, (and tivo or whatever else etc), equally well is something of a holy grail.

My experience is that community based open source projects with a few exceptions rarely result in unified simple UI's.



although, my belief is that really a developer would just need to replace itunes with their server and support airplay/dlna with such an open source project to be successful. one imagines such a project could do what itunes does, "better." adding in slim support would be nice, but not needed (to be successful).

And how would this developer be economically successful ?
By also producing and selling hardware ?

Honestly, I don't think you will get what you want through the open source community, it's too scattered and geeky to accomplish something unified that's also simple to use and ready for mass market usage. VortexBox is how close it's going to get, it already today solves the complicated ripping, tagging and installation stuff, but I suspect it will never get much further than that. It will focus more on supporting new communication protocols than building a unified UI. However, I think AirPlay (audio) might be a possibility, because that's just about supporting an additional communication protocol. I doubt it will ever support licensed AirPlay through Apple, if supported it will probably used the hacked solution through ShairPort.

MrSinatra
2011-06-15, 21:37
I'd argue that the reason the mass market doesn't buy it is because:
1. They don't know it exists
2. They think it's too expensive
3. The applications it bundles is still too geeky for the mass market

well, they could install it freely on old hardware, so i think 1 and 3 are good reasons, but its a different question. you asked why the VB might be uninteresting. now you are asking why the mass market doesn't buy it. not truly the same thing, at least in so far as the way i was answering it.

the context was me suggesting a SBS-like open source server, that would support airplay, slim, (and DLNA devices, etc). in that context, i was saying VB is not there yet, ie. not interesting to me.


AirPlay support would certainly help but to get AirPlay you can just get a $99 AppleTV and you have what you like, as I've understood you don't even have to have it connected to iTunes if you only want to use AirPlay. AppleTV is cheap even if you only use it as a wireless iPad -> TV and iPad -> Amplifier connector.

again, it becomes interesting, that was the Q. but would it be adopted by the mass market? that depends on how well the implementation was done imo.

a lot of people would like to use the apple gear without the apple software though for local tunes (or vids) that aren't all on smallish pods/pads. software that was capable of running apple gear, slim gear, dlna gear, more or less equally well has a good chance of being widely adopted imo.

imagine using an iphone or ipad or droid or computer or whatever to remote control the server, which in turn can play to just about any gear you've got.

in other words, one ring to rule them all. lots of people have a mix of gear... even apple diehards have game consoles for instance.

think of my suggestion as a universal translator.

don't know if this is legal, but there is this:

http://www.adafruit.com/blog/2011/04/12/apples-airplay-goes-open-source-sorta/

EDIT: http://www.airplaysdk.com/

afaik, slim proto is open source, and DLNA is too, mostly, right?


It has a common home page from which you can launch the different apps.

no good. it has to be unified, and smart enough to know what protocol to use for what device, all under the hood.


My experience is that community based open source projects with a few exceptions rarely result in unified simple UI's.

true, but it could take the SBS route... a company pairs it with its hardware and yet makes it available for other hardware. great way to get adopted. besides, i see this solution as being much less "visible" than the SBS one. more of a handheld remote operated type thing.


And how would this developer be economically successful ?
By also producing and selling hardware ?

it depends how it was developed. lots of community projects have different strategies.

u see slim adding DLNA to their server now already. (i don't know if their DLNA includes a control point or not, but it should). maybe they add airplay too. maybe they have their hardware able to be controlled by other DLNA capable software. suddenly, they are the master of all possibilities, agnostics, and flexible. thats a selling point. and people would buy the hardware knowing that it will be "extra" capable, and knowing that the software will also handle their other non-slim hardware.

my only beef with that scenario, is that i don't like SBS as is. i'd prefer making something cross platform like foobar into this jack of all trades.


Honestly, I don't think you will get what you want through the open source community, it's too scattered and geeky to accomplish something unified that's also simple to use and ready for mass market usage. VortexBox is how close it's going to get, it already today solves the complicated ripping, tagging and installation stuff, but I suspect it will never get much further than that. It will focus more on supporting new communication protocols than building a unified UI. However, I think AirPlay (audio) might be a possibility, because that's just about supporting an additional communication protocol. I doubt it will ever support licensed AirPlay through Apple, if supported it will probably used the hacked solution through ShairPort.

you're probably right, thats why for now i just want the slim hardware to be DLNA capable. if the revue is going to be, i don't see how/why they wouldn't add that ability to the next gen SB hardware. at least that way, i could buy the slim hardware, which is how they make money, and at the same time not have to use SBS, my dream, (and SBS is the big unfunded drain on resources)

erland
2011-06-15, 22:51
a lot of people would like to use the apple gear without the apple software though for local tunes (or vids) that aren't all on smallish pods/pads. software that was capable of running apple gear, slim gear, dlna gear, more or less equally well has a good chance of being widely adopted imo.

I agree if it worked, but it will never work because after a while they'll realize they can't play their DRM protected music purchased via iTunes on it. The only hope in this direction would be if the new iCloud offering by Apple removes the DRM protection on all your old files when streaming from iCloud. Of course, iCloud is never going to support streaming to third party applications, so it wouldn't work anyway.

I'm also not convinced there is a lot of people who want to get away from Apple software, I know there are some geeks and advanced users like you and me that does but probably at least 80% of all Apple users prefer to continue use iTunes for their Apple gear because that's the only thing "that just works".



don't know if this is legal, but there is this:

http://www.adafruit.com/blog/2011/04/12/apples-airplay-goes-open-source-sorta/

That's the "ShairPort" software I suggested in my previous post.
I'm not sure if it's legal but it's definitely not making Apple happy, so it's just a matter of time until they find some way to stop it. Apple wants companies using AirPlay to buy their chips and pay their license fees.



true, but it could take the SBS route... a company pairs it with its hardware and yet makes it available for other hardware. great way to get adopted. besides, i see this solution as being much less "visible" than the SBS one. more of a handheld remote operated type thing.

Yes, the question is just how they would earn more money by developing software which encourage people to buy hardware from other companies than themselves ?

From a customer perspective it would be great but from a commercial perspective it simply won't work. The main reason being that you need to be able to communicate with any players and the other manufacturers aren't going to be that interested to help you do that because some of them are going to want the user to run their hardware and software instead. Try convincing Apple or Microsoft that it would be a good idea if all their hardware could be used together, so users can mix and match exactly how they want. Try to do the same to Sonos, Logitech, Ruku, Sony, Chumby and you will realize the problem.

The only way this is going to happen is if all companies works together and that means they have to standardize the protocols, which currently means DLNA, which is a compromise, which results in poor user experience compared to a setup completely made by a single company.

Just look at Sonos, there is a reason their system is a lot simpler to configure and setup compared to Squeezebox, the main reason being that they have decided to handle a bigger part of the cake themselves. Specifically by use a proprietary wireless network solution, pre-configure everything and not involve third party hardware besides the music file storage into the setup.

Let's face it DLNA is really great if you like to listen to a single song or like to stream video, but it doesn't result in simplicity, it result in complex setups with a lot of troubleshooting. And as pippin has mentioned in another thread it's really not suitable for an always running music listening system.



it depends how it was developed. lots of community projects have different strategies.

Could you mention a few, community driven, which have a unified simple user interface ?
I'm not saying they don't exists but they aren't very common, I've been involved in some both as contributor and user so I think I know what I'm talking about.

To understand the problem you have to understand why people get involved in community based open source projects and what kind of people that get involved, it's usually people who love to develop software and love to add a lot of functionality and a lot of customization possibilities, but it's not that common that people who are good in user interface design and people who have simplicity in their mind get involved.

Company driven open source project is a completely different matter, here there is a possibility to create a unified UI, but the problem here is that all companies are driven by commercial aspects and this often makes it uninteresting to make it easy for other companies to earn money on your effort, so they tend to compete instead of collaborate.



u see slim adding DLNA to their server now already. (i don't know if their DLNA includes a control point or not, but it should).

Not sure, I know it includes a UPnP Media Server and a UPnP Media Renderer. I don't think it's designed to make it possible to control third party players (renderers), but I might be wrong about this.



maybe they add airplay too.

I certainly hope so but any comments from Logitech representatives in this forum hasn't been very optimistic so far.



my only beef with that scenario, is that i don't like SBS as is. i'd prefer making something cross platform like foobar into this jack of all trades.

Not sure I understand what you are saying, foobar isn't cross platform as far as I know and foobar is definitely not for the mass market, it's way too technical and complicated for that. The same thing can also be said for WinAmp by the way.

I do love the WinAmp browsing functionality, not from a mass market perspective but from a music discovery perspective, make it really flexible to quickly find what you like.



you're probably right, thats why for now i just want the slim hardware to be DLNA capable. if the revue is going to be, i don't see how/why they wouldn't add that ability to the next gen SB hardware.

Yes, I realize you think DLNA is here to make everything easier, for me personally someone still has to show me a DLNA based setup that works anywhere close as good as a Squeezebox or Sonos setup before I'm convinced.

Still, I'm not sure why I keep discussing this because I'm pretty sure we have very different goals. You seem to focus on the possibility to combine devices from different companies while I'm focused at getting the best possible music discovery/listening setup even if it means I'll buy everything from a single company.

I don't love everything in SBS but so far I've yet to find a server solution that's better. There are client applications, like for example WinAmp, which offers a better music discovery experience but I don't want to goto the computer when controlling my music and I definitely don't want to be forced to run Windows.

Is there any UPnP/DLNA server that's even close to offer something similar to SBS (excluding those built on top of SBS) ?

RockinFX
2011-06-20, 14:15
OP here:

I cannot thank you all enough for your help in understanding the Squeezebox solution(s) to my audio streaming desires. I just received my new SB Touch today and have been extremely impressed with the audio quality and the ease of setup thus far, but (there's always a "but", yes?) for one knotty (to me) problem. I hate to cross-post, but I don't know if you helpful folks do much browsing in the Server forum so maybe you could look at this(?):

http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=88416

Thanks most sincerely again for helping me with my decision and for any assistance on my next (nth) network conundrum.

=====> EDIT: garym took pity on this poor old sod and enlightened me about connecting the Touch to SBS as opposed to mysqueezebox.com. Good grief, the audio quality is ... *AWESOME*!! OH, HAPPY DAY!!!!