PDA

View Full Version : BUG 360: SqueezeBox should support FLAC directly



Michael Brouwer
2004-06-08, 17:15
I opened a bug against the SqueezeBox firmware in bugtrack earlier
today:

http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=360

To quote (with the typo corrected):

It would be awesome if the SqueezeBox could decode FLAC (or some other
open lossless format) on the fly in addition to or instead of MP3 (I
could care less if I can stream MP3 to a SqueezeBox since even 320kbps
MP3 sounds like crap on a High-End system). This would cut the amount
of data required to be streamed to the SqueezeBox in half compared to
streaming raw PCM (which would benefit wireless users). You could even
transcode MP3/AAC/OGG/ etc. to FLAC on the fly instead of transcoding
to 320kbps MP3, so as to avoid having stuff go though multiple codecs,
thus improving the playback quality of those.

What are the chances of something like this happening? Is the hardware
in the SqueezeBox powerful enough to do something like this? FLAC
seems to have be designed with streaming in mind, and having support to
send FLAC compressed data to the SqueezeBox would reduce the network
load by almost 50% at the cost of some CPU time on the SqueezeBox. Of
course if you keep your music collection compressed in FLAC this would
lower the CPU usage on the machine running the slimserver to almost
zero.

Michael

Brooks Davis
2004-06-08, 17:26
This is a dup of 260 which I understand is on the todo list. Typing
"flac" in the search box finds this.

-- Brooks

On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 05:15:33PM -0700, Michael Brouwer wrote:
> I opened a bug against the SqueezeBox firmware in bugtrack earlier
> today:
>
> http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=360
>
> To quote (with the typo corrected):
>
> It would be awesome if the SqueezeBox could decode FLAC (or some other
> open lossless format) on the fly in addition to or instead of MP3 (I
> could care less if I can stream MP3 to a SqueezeBox since even 320kbps
> MP3 sounds like crap on a High-End system). This would cut the amount
> of data required to be streamed to the SqueezeBox in half compared to
> streaming raw PCM (which would benefit wireless users). You could even
> transcode MP3/AAC/OGG/ etc. to FLAC on the fly instead of transcoding
> to 320kbps MP3, so as to avoid having stuff go though multiple codecs,
> thus improving the playback quality of those.
>
> What are the chances of something like this happening? Is the hardware
> in the SqueezeBox powerful enough to do something like this? FLAC
> seems to have be designed with streaming in mind, and having support to
> send FLAC compressed data to the SqueezeBox would reduce the network
> load by almost 50% at the cost of some CPU time on the SqueezeBox. Of
> course if you keep your music collection compressed in FLAC this would
> lower the CPU usage on the machine running the slimserver to almost
> zero.
>
> Michael
>

Michael Brouwer
2004-06-08, 22:08
Thanks, sorry about that I'll try to be more diligent about searching
for dupes next time. I closed 360 as a dupe of 230.

Michael

On Jun 8, 2004, at 5:26 PM, Brooks Davis wrote:

> This is a dup of 260 which I understand is on the todo list. Typing
> "flac" in the search box finds this.
>
> -- Brooks
>
> On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 05:15:33PM -0700, Michael Brouwer wrote:
>> I opened a bug against the SqueezeBox firmware in bugtrack earlier
>> today:
>>
>> http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=360
>>
>> To quote (with the typo corrected):
>>
>> It would be awesome if the SqueezeBox could decode FLAC (or some other
>> open lossless format) on the fly in addition to or instead of MP3 (I
>> could care less if I can stream MP3 to a SqueezeBox since even 320kbps
>> MP3 sounds like crap on a High-End system). This would cut the amount
>> of data required to be streamed to the SqueezeBox in half compared to
>> streaming raw PCM (which would benefit wireless users). You could even
>> transcode MP3/AAC/OGG/ etc. to FLAC on the fly instead of transcoding
>> to 320kbps MP3, so as to avoid having stuff go though multiple codecs,
>> thus improving the playback quality of those.
>>
>> What are the chances of something like this happening? Is the
>> hardware
>> in the SqueezeBox powerful enough to do something like this? FLAC
>> seems to have be designed with streaming in mind, and having support
>> to
>> send FLAC compressed data to the SqueezeBox would reduce the network
>> load by almost 50% at the cost of some CPU time on the SqueezeBox. Of
>> course if you keep your music collection compressed in FLAC this would
>> lower the CPU usage on the machine running the slimserver to almost
>> zero.
>>
>> Michael
>>

kdf
2004-06-09, 02:26
The official word has been that it is under investigation. There has also been
brief mention of other plans for a reduced-bitrate-but-lossless transmission of
audio data by other means if FLAC proves too much for the squeezebox CPU.
-kdf

Quoting Brooks Davis <brooks (AT) one-eyed-alien (DOT) net>:

> This is a dup of 260 which I understand is on the todo list. Typing
> "flac" in the search box finds this.
>
> -- Brooks
>
> On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 05:15:33PM -0700, Michael Brouwer wrote:
> > I opened a bug against the SqueezeBox firmware in bugtrack earlier
> > today:
> >
> > http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=360
> >
> > To quote (with the typo corrected):
> >
> > It would be awesome if the SqueezeBox could decode FLAC (or some other
> > open lossless format) on the fly in addition to or instead of MP3 (I
> > could care less if I can stream MP3 to a SqueezeBox since even 320kbps
> > MP3 sounds like crap on a High-End system). This would cut the amount
> > of data required to be streamed to the SqueezeBox in half compared to
> > streaming raw PCM (which would benefit wireless users). You could even
> > transcode MP3/AAC/OGG/ etc. to FLAC on the fly instead of transcoding
> > to 320kbps MP3, so as to avoid having stuff go though multiple codecs,
> > thus improving the playback quality of those.
> >
> > What are the chances of something like this happening? Is the hardware
> > in the SqueezeBox powerful enough to do something like this? FLAC
> > seems to have be designed with streaming in mind, and having support to
> > send FLAC compressed data to the SqueezeBox would reduce the network
> > load by almost 50% at the cost of some CPU time on the SqueezeBox. Of
> > course if you keep your music collection compressed in FLAC this would
> > lower the CPU usage on the machine running the slimserver to almost
> > zero.
> >
> > Michael
> >