Announce: piCorePlayer 8.0.0

[slartibartfast]

Here’s an excerpt from Klaus’ (Soundcheck) blog,

“ Keeping the server separate from my experience is a good idea for several reasons.
To list a few:


You can keep the server close to the router, especially if you don't have
ethernet cable wiring in your home.
Do not use Wifi to attach a server to a network!
You keep that server away from the actual audio room and audio system
You don't have to sit in the audio room (living room in my case) to do all kind of config and maintenance work
Running CPU hungry DSP work, such as resampling or convolution, working with large collections and handling several clients will put high demands on a server.
You don't want to have all that running on your highly efficient playback client.
sharing USB for storage and DAC would not be such a good idea
your streaming client can become/remain really slim and highly efficient as discussed in the other articles


That's why I recommend to put the server part on an external server and let the clients
run as separate highly efficient streaming clients.”

“ The RPIs major weakness used to be their joint USB2.0 Ethernet infrastructure.


That dramatically changed with the introduction of the RPI4.



I consider the PI4 USB performance that good, that I switched back from I2S-HAT audio to USB DACs after running I2S-HAT DACs for several years .


Advise: Running USB storage and audio devices side by side on a RPI4 is still not such a good idea. ”

Well I am pretty sure lots of users here use piCoreplayer as both server and player on the same Pi, some even connecting the server over WiFi. If you don't try it yourself you will never know if any of that stuff you quoted is important.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[Narcos]

Well I am pretty sure lots of users here use piCoreplayer as both server and player on the same Pi, some even connecting the server over WiFi. If you don't try it yourself you will never know if any of that stuff you quoted is important.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

Agreed, which is why im gonna try and experience it firsthand, Different strokes for different folks eh

[Narcos]

As I intend on running 2 RPI4’ (server+client configuration) do I have to give both RPI’s a seperate Static IP address? The existing Pi has 192.168.1.6. ?

[slartibartfast]

As I intend on running 2 RPI4’ (server+client configuration) do I have to give both RPI’s a seperate Static IP address? The existing Pi has 192.168.1.6. ?

Yes, I just reserve IP addresses on the router. It's easier than using static IP addresses.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[jd68]

As I intend on running 2 RPI4’ (server+client configuration) do I have to give both RPI’s a seperate Static IP address? The existing Pi has 192.168.1.6. ?

If possible I would use DHCP but define in the router to assign always the same IP address to these RPi's.

[Man in a van]

As I intend on running 2 RPI4’ (server+client configuration) do I have to give both RPI’s a seperate Static IP address? The existing Pi has 192.168.1.6. ?

Also assign each client squeezelite 127.0.0.1 IP to stop it going AWOL

ronnie

[P Nelson]

As I intend on running 2 RPI4’ (server+client configuration) do I have to give both RPI’s a seperate Static IP address? The existing Pi has 192.168.1.6. ?

If I understand correctly, you want to run LMS (server) on both of the RPis? For most people, one server can be used to serve one or multiple clients. If you have two stereo setups I can see using two RPis, one running LMS and squeezelite and the other just running squeezelite.

I saw the discussion about keeping the server and clients separate, but that still would not require two LMS (servers) running. Maybe I misunderstood.

I have noticed that some routers assign the same IP to a device, but to ensure it does not change go into router settings and reserve an IP address for each RPi’s MAC address. I found that easier to implement than using the static ip configuration in pCp.

[Pommes]

Here’s an excerpt from Klaus’ (Soundcheck) blog,

“ Keeping the server separate from my experience is a good idea for several reasons.
To list a few:


You can keep the server close to the router, especially if you don't have
ethernet cable wiring in your home.
Do not use Wifi to attach a server to a network!
You keep that server away from the actual audio room and audio system
You don't have to sit in the audio room (living room in my case) to do all kind of config and maintenance work
Running CPU hungry DSP work, such as resampling or convolution, working with large collections and handling several clients will put high demands on a server.
You don't want to have all that running on your highly efficient playback client.
sharing USB for storage and DAC would not be such a good idea
your streaming client can become/remain really slim and highly efficient as discussed in the other articles


That's why I recommend to put the server part on an external server and let the clients
run as separate highly efficient streaming clients.”

“ The RPIs major weakness used to be their joint USB2.0 Ethernet infrastructure.


That dramatically changed with the introduction of the RPI4.



I consider the PI4 USB performance that good, that I switched back from I2S-HAT audio to USB DACs after running I2S-HAT DACs for several years .


Advise: Running USB storage and audio devices side by side on a RPI4 is still not such a good idea. ”

If I were you, I would just cancel the order of the second raspberry.
You can run hundreds of audio streams via Wi-Fi. And usually there is no maintenance to do, once your set up is finished, or maintenance is done via the web interface. If you worry about degrading of sounds, because of your external hard drive, just use a longer USB cable for your DAC, so that the DAC is not sitting next to the drive.
I am very sure, that in a blind test you would not hear any difference between one or two raspberries.

[Narcos]

Gents, Thank you for your replies

Yes, I just reserve IP addresses on the router. It's easier than using static IP addresses.

If possible I would use DHCP but define in the router to assign always the same IP address to these RPi's.

@slartibarfast, @jd68 That's exactly what I've done, I have reserved an IP address for the Pi on the router.

If I understand correctly, you want to run LMS (server) on both of the RPis? For most people, one server can be used to serve one or multiple clients. If you have two stereo setups I can see using two RPis, one running LMS and squeezelite and the other just running squeezelite.

I saw the discussion about keeping the server and clients separate, but that still would not require two LMS (servers) running. Maybe I misunderstood.

I have noticed that some routers assign the same IP to a device, but to ensure it does not change go into router settings and reserve an IP address for each RPi’s MAC address. I found that easier to implement than using the static ip configuration in pCp.

@P Nelson, You have misunderstood, I want to run LMS (server) on just 1 of the Pi & the 2nd Pi as "Client" I have one stereo setup & I definitely don't wanna run two LMS (servers) hope that helps.

Yes, I will be reserving an IP address for each Rpi's MAC address.

[Narcos]

Also assign each client squeezelite 127.0.0.1 IP to stop it going AWOL

ronnie

I will be assigning an IP address for each Rpi's MAC address. Would I still need to do this 👆🏻

[w3wilkes]

Just a side note. I only do a reserved IP address for my server so that I can have the URL on any of my browsers around the house saved in "favorites". On the rare occasion I want to access my rpi client I can get its current IP address from the LMS server Information tab.

At the cabin I run my server on WiFi since it is not conveniently located for ethernet. The server runs on the 5Ghz radio and clients run on 2.4Ghz. This has been rock solid for years.

[Narcos]

If I were you, I would just cancel the order of the second raspberry.
You can run hundreds of audio streams via Wi-Fi. And usually there is no maintenance to do, once your set up is finished, or maintenance is done via the web interface. If you worry about degrading of sounds, because of your external hard drive, just use a longer USB cable for your DAC, so that the DAC is not sitting next to the drive.
I am very sure, that in a blind test you would not hear any difference between one or two raspberries.

Pommes, thanks for the concern but I'd like to experience this drill firsthand. Pi's are not expensive and I can always use it someplace else if it doesn't work out as intended.

I'll be adding a 2 TB SSD drive to the USB 3.0 port on the Pi server via usb 3.0 to Sata adapter, once I complete this whole jig.

[Man in a van]

I'll be adding a 2 TB SSD drive to the USB 3.0 port on the Pi server via usb 3.0 to Sata adapter, once I complete this whole jig.

I would do some research on this, if I were you.

Not all adapters are equal with regard to the rpi

Not so much in this, your specific user case, but if you want to (maybe) expand the use of the rpi in the future.

Have a search on the rpi forum for more info

ronnie

[coyrls]

FYI this one works well for me: https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/...?ie=UTF8&psc=1

[carsten_h]

Hello and a great new year!

After updating to 8.1.0 a few weeks ago I didn't used my bluetooth headphones, but only used direct output via Hifiberry.
Today I tried the headphones, they conected without any problem, but the headphone functions for play/pause/next/previous are not longer working. This was working without any problem in 8.0.0 before.

Is this a known problem or is this new?