I’m not really sure what I want to ask… I’m at an intersection and not real sure which way to go. I’ll try to explain where am at and what I’d like, sorta.

I have a two channel rig in my home’s great room. There is no TV, and never will be. This area of the house is for entertaining guests and those rare moments in a hectic life when I just want to plop my but down in front of my speakers and relax with stiff drink. I listen to two things – CD music and cable music channels that is ran via coax R/L cables from a different room of the house where a cable box is located. I have a separate HT for movies and TV.

For CD, I use an Integra universal six disk changer and two 400 disk Sony mega changers (455’s). I use the Integra for convenience when I don’t feel like screwing with the changers and / or get a new box of shiny disks from Amazon and want to listen to them for a while before loading them into the mega changers. The Cable music is just for background music when I don’t care much about SQ.

I use a Rotel RB 1070 / 1080 combination. The 1070 pre amp does not have any digital inputs.

Here’s my frustration and reason for posting.

Both mega changers are full and I either need to buy a third mega changer, or go with a media server and copy all the CD’s to a hard drive. It took me ten years to fill up the first two changers, so I think three will serve me well for another few years, maybe. I absolutely hate the user interface of the changers. I either hit all play random, or pick one of the categories I have programmed and walk away. I’d love to control these things with a library interface like Window Media Player or similar. That desire lead me to the use of a laptop and two different private software programs. Neither program worked out very well and I gave up on them with a few more grey hairs. Plus, the laptop wasn’t very convenient either. Waiting for it to boot up whenever I wanted to use it sucked.

I then heard about the Olive Opus and thought that was the perfect solution. I could put all my CD’s onto its hard drive uncompressed or FLAC and it uses some great DACs, and looks good too. Then I found out how much it cost…. Four grand is just more than I can bring myself to spend. Plus, I’m not sure I want to take the time to load 800 + CD’s onto a hard drive to begin with, and then what happens if it crashes…. I think I’d rather give up one of my toes then have to go through all that twice.

A couple days ago, Google lead me to the Escient web sight and at first glance, the DVDM-100 looks as if it just might be the answer for my situation. I’m not real sure what its street price is, but I did find one on-line dealer sells refurbished units for about half of MSRP, or roughly one grand. This is much more palatable than four grand. It looks as if all I’d need is a small monitor and I could use the remote to control the DVDM-100. Or, I could spring for their touch screen monitor for a ‘way cool’ factor.

Before I buy the DVDM-100 and a third mega changer, I figured I’d ask around and see what else may be available to accomplish what I’m looking to do.

I am not interested in wireless gadgets like the Squeeze Box or Sonos. I hate the sound of compressed audio too, so that’s not an option (I realize that both can rip to FLAC).

I do have a hard wired home network throughout the house and can plug whatever I want into the network as needed.

Thanks for reading my ramblings and providing any insight / ideas you wish to share.

……..mike

I am not interested in wireless gadgets like the Squeeze Box or Sonos. I hate the sound of compressed audio too, so that’s not an option (I realize that both can rip to FLAC).


They are hardly gadgets, and both systems can be wired.

There's a severe case of Apples, Oranges, and Plums going on here.

Many of the devices you are describing are media servers - they are a big hard disk with built-in ripping software and audio output. These can be handy if you struggle to turn a PC on, but they ain't that flexible. Squeezbox and Sonos ain't media servers, they are media players.

Squeezebox is a network media player. It normally needs a special server to stream from. I'm pretty certain it won't stream from things like the Escient.

Sonos is a next-gen multi-room system. The difference is it's designed to do all the clever multi-room stuff like perfect sync between any and all rooms. You can stream music from your PC or from a NAS (networked hard drive). The nice thing is you can get one or two rooms and expand it as much as you want in the future, one room at a time for up to 32 rooms.

Neither Sonos or the squeezebox can rip or store your music for you. Both of them will stream from a PC, or a dedicated server. With the Sonos you can also stream from a pure NAS like the Buffalo Linkstation or WD Worldbook. Using a NAS with the squeezebox is possible, but it's not an officially supported option, and there are some gotchas.

A cheap NAS and a Sonos ZP80 plus controller will give you far more capability and music storage for less money than a typical dedicated music server setup, and will give you more flexibility and future-proofing than a CD jukebox. If you ain't that interested in having music around the rest of your home in the future, and you don't mind getting a bit more technical, Squeezebox might be worth a look.

The downside compared to a CD jukebox like the DVDM is you'll need to rip your music, but do it to FLAC or Apple Lossless and your audio quality should be at least as good as a CD jukebox player (probably better), and you'll only need to do it once.

On the other hand, you can also uses services like Rhapsody and Napster to give you instant access to millions of songs.

I use Rhapsody for convienence purposes. I realize, there must be some give and take, but, it is very easy to use with a upnp media server or computer with a decent soundcard.

What's the "official" verdict on the sound quality?
How does the sound quality compare to cd or flac? I think they stream/download at 160 or 192kbs(wma).

I also stream yahoo launchcast plus, which I like because it "knows" what I want to hear. How does yahoo compare to rhapsody, flac, etc.

I guess you could give these a try.

If the drink is stiff enough, I think you'll enjoy it.

Mdrew, IMO, devices like the Olive Opus...which you acknowledge is an expensive boondoggle...and the Escient, to a lesser extent (and expense), are poorly designed products that try to keep one foot in the past and one in the future. The Olive is just ridiculously expensive and aimed at audiophiles with more money than sense and who are scared to death of computers, and the Escient is nothing but a $1,000 management system for your big, clunky, slow CD changers.

Mdrew, if you truly want nearly unlimited music at your fingertips, organized in a clear and easily retrievable way, you gotta go with a streamer. Squeeze or Sonos (or other), it doesn't matter, but these products you're considering are like straddling the fence and they'll be in a museum or trash-heap soon enough. Don't want to rip your 800 CDs? Get a Rhapsody subscription and for $12.95 a month you'll probably find 750-799 of your CDs available, plus like 8,000,000 you don't have. Want background music? How about Jazz from Paris, House from London, Techno from LA? All available by streaming (free) Internet Radio.

Don't wanna pay $12.95 a month and only want to listen to the CDs you already own? You say you have a wired network...learn to rip; it's really easy once you get the hang of it and your FLAC files will sound a touch better than the same thing streamed through Rhapsody.

C'mon on...join us. The music is GREAT out here,

CD

I'm in Mdrew's shoes as well. I'd like to digitize all my music from my current CD player set-up. But what to do?

CD, I see your point that $12.95 for a subscription sounds cheap and is very flexible, but how to get quality sound to my stereo w/o spending a ton of cash?

Wouldn't a SONOS or Squeeze solution still require around $1k since you need place to store and stream your music? Also, I've never heard a SONOS in action. Can a SONUS stream music that would compare to FLAC files played with a solid DAC or a single CD player? I don't know. I've heard the Sqeeze and stayed with my CD player (just my opinion).

I was really looking to set up my own server, which would require an external DAC, apple mini type device, and external HD, but the prices still hit around $1.5K etc.

Additionally, as CDLehner touched upon, other Olive type devices are not cheap. I believe the decent HD size (>250mb) on a Escient would run about $2k, which is in-line with other server type solutions, such as the Yammy.....now that is an overpriced example. The Olive at $1.5k is suddenly looking more attractive.

However, after having said all that and not willing to part with a bundle of cash to get great sound, I'm leaning toward a Yammy CDHD1500.....simple and primitive, but lossless quality and enough size to store my CDs.....but maybe I'll change my mind tomorrow as the thought of individually typing my cd track names sounds dreadful.

Good posts guys.

Also, I've never heard a SONOS in action. Can a SONUS stream music that would compare to FLAC files played with a solid DAC or a single CD player? I don't know. I've heard the Sqeeze and stayed with my CD player (just my opinion).

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, although this seems to come up a lot; Squeeze and Sonos can stream FLAC. In fact, it is really the preferred method, for those seeking the best sq (or other lossless codec).

Listen, I'm an audiophile and a computer guy. These music servers, honestly...I mean it's just my opinion, but about all they really do, in the end, is look like a traditional piece of audio equipment in your rack. They charge way too much in order to be an all-in-one solution for audiophiles who are scared to death of anything pc.

Hard drives are cheap; ripping software is free. If you're not planning on using the thing as a transport after you rip your files, it becomes useless. So what are you paying all that money for? I haven't looked in a while, but it used to be that the internal hard drives on these things were woefully undersized; imo 250 or 500 gb isn't going to get it done for very long. And unlike your good 'ole PC, these units are so proprietary, that it's probably downright impossible to swap out the hard drive should you decide you want (or need) to down the road.

CD

CD,

I understand where you are coming from and agree with your opinion. The Mega changers are painful to use and I find that there are many, many songs and CD’s that I never hear because the stupid things just don’t get around to playing them on random, and, I can’t swear to this, but I believe they start at the beginning order each time I hit random play.

I have two problems though. I can’t use wireless in my home. I have trouble with wireless phones, let alone streaming music. I’ve tried wireless for my laptop and no dice. I need to keep this hard wired. It may be that this house is a rather large log home with many levels….I dunno. Wireless just isn’t reliable. Secondly, I live in rural AK in a mountainous area. I can not get reception for any satellite based music servers or stations such as XM or Sirius. I can’t even get HD channels from Dish without putting up a second, 48” dish.

I do not want to integrate my home office PC with this system, if I go the route of ripping CD’s. I want a simple to use, stand alone system with the ability to back up everything I rip onto separate external hard drives. My budget is about $1500. What would you suggest?

I think it can be done for around $1500.

1) A PC $1000
2) A Router $50
3) An external hard drive $200
4) A squeezebox duet $300

1) Use the PC to rip your music to the internal drive. Most people use EAC (Exact Audio Copy) with the FLAC plugin. It's and easy one step operation. Ripping takes about 15min per CD, so its going to take a while to rip your 800 CDs. When you rip the music they will be tagged automatically, but get a copy of mp3tag to clean up the tags.

You need to get a very quiet PC, since it needs to be running while you are playing music.

2) Back up your music collection to the exernal drive. Most come with backup software.

3) Hook your PC to the Squeezebox Duet through the router.

Search Squeezebox on YouTube you will find some video demos. Its a two part system. The player has a ethernet connection, and hooks to your stereo with the standard RCA jacks or an optical connection. The controller looks like a big iPod, you access your music in the same way with a scroll wheel. Your music is cataloged by artist and album title.

If you can hook the PC up to you internet cannection you can access internet radio stations, and music services such as Rhapsody and Sirius.

Another option is to use a squeezebox without a PC. If you can wire it up to an internet connection, you can store your music on the internet. There is a service called mp3tunes that stores your music on the internet so you can access from the Sqeezebox I think it cost around $50 per year.

Mdrew, if I were you...that is I had a wired network in place, wanted to stream and possibly rip my extensive CD collection, but not store it on my personal PC, and had a budget of like $1500...I would definitely consider a dedicated media server. I have this http://www.shopping.hp.com/product/desktop/desktop_hp/home_servers/1/accessories/GG795AA%2523ABA;HHOJSID=bb26L3YD2rkMFvtTQSzbZ94wmtsSLkmkVzN7 xqRvhTt0t09rVjh0!1254605333; for $550 you get 500GB to start, 3 more internal bays (4x500=2T, 4x750=3T, 4x1000=4T...you get the idea) and the possibility of expanding to 9T. You also get Windows Home Server, which is user friendly and incorporates a kind of "smart" backup, similar to RAID but easier to use, and certain other nice features that I wouldn't buy the box outright for, but are nice (maybe especially for your family) nonetheless. If you don't like this particular flavor, go with another server or even NAS (network attached storage); think of it as off-premises storage for all your media files (music for now, maybe video and pictures later).

Then you get yourself a front-end player, like the Squeeze or Sonos, sit yourself in the most comfortable chair you can find and you'll have access to all the music your heart desires. We can help ya with any technical issues.

I would think you'd be a perfect candidate for a 30-day trial. Before you drop money on a server, NAS, PC, etc., do some research and see which player might suit you best (Squeeze or Sonos). Try it out, along with a Rhapsody trial, and see what you think. The reason I emphasize the Rhapsody trial is, as some of us have mentioned previously, you may very well find that it kind of replaces your CDs, and if that's the case you won't even really have to worry about going through the trouble of ripping them (or buying a device to store them).

CD

Remember again... time.. evolution..

Records > Tapes > DATs > CDs > mp3s > FLAC...

The hardware changes. You think your CDs will last forever and not get scratched by some odd malfunction in the mega changers?

I'd say you can do a reliability analysis using markov models if you want :).

If you want reliability I'd go with some kind of RAID. What the hell... Have 2 RAIDs. One backs up to the other...and add some more backup equipment. It would still be smaller and easier to MANAGE... than Physical CDs. The future is VIRTUAL. Whether its CDs, Documents or Receipts.
I've hated paper management and receipt management.

750GB SATA HDDs are really cheap (90-100$) these days. Set up a RAID based NAS - Off the shelf or with BYOD. If you have more time.. build a DIY NAS or ask a Techie friend / nephew / college kid to do it for you.

Rip using FLAC using a PC or a laptop (You dont necessarily have to buy a separate one - If you want.. thats your choice).

I bet there would be some way to write batch / scripts to AUTOMATE the RIPPING of your CDs into FLAC and organizing them with minimal interaction from your side.

Again, this is ONE TIME EFFORT.

You may not be as computer savvy but mind you .. you live you learn. Its a once in a BLUE MOON thing to do.

For listening to your MUSIC. Pick the streamer you find most appropriate. Maybe you wont like whats out there NOW! But eventually by next year... THIS IS THE WAY TO GO.. THIS IS THE FUTURE. CHANGE IS INEVITABLE...

Dont be so attached to your little silver discs like those Gramaphone and Record addicts.

PS: I have not yet gotten that addicted to FLAC yet, but I'd want
- RELIABLE CENTRAL STORAGE
- EASY ANYWHERE ACCESS - MY CHOICE OF WHERE I WANT MY MEDIA COULD CHANGE.

I realize that digital storage and management is the way to go. I would just like a better way to do it than interfacing with a computer that is tied to the internet, needs time to boot up, has all this F-ing hacker proof software on it…ect. I want to be able to simply pick up a remote and push a button or two and start hearing music. I don’t want to ‘wait’ for the PC to ‘allow’ me to do that. If there is a way to avoid that, whether it’s software or hardware related, please educate me.

I realize that digital storage and management is the way to go. I would just like a better way to do it than interfacing with a computer that is tied to the internet, needs time to boot up, has all this F-ing hacker proof software on it…ect. I want to be able to simply pick up a remote and push a button or two and start hearing music. I don’t want to ‘wait’ for the PC to ‘allow’ me to do that. If there is a way to avoid that, whether it’s software or hardware related, please educate me.

Yeah, Mdrew...it doesn't sound like you're that familiar with these kinds of systems, but that's exactly how it can, and should, work. A Server or NAS, as opposed to a PC, is designed to always be on (so you don't need to boot up), it's not really tied to the Internet (it's connected by your wired, home network), and that's exactly what you would do...grab your remote, push a button and play any song or CD you like. The Server or NAS does not need to be in the same room as the front-end player, and really I wouldn't suggest it.

Have you done any research on the Squeeze or Sonos yet? From what I remember, they have like interactive demos that can demonstrate entirely what is possible. Go here for Squeeze http://www.slimdevices.com/pi_duet.html and click on the 'product tour' (or check out the older, but still good, less-expensive Classic while you're there) and here for Sonos http://www.sonos.com/products/systems/bu130/components.htm and click on 'Sonos demo'.

Check 'em out and then come back here with questions. But please, no "which is better, Squeeze v. Sonos" type debates; we've already got 2 too many threads dedicated to that.

CD

I agree with CDLehner, if it was me, I would go with the NAS, however, you will need a way to control the NAS, which means you are going to have to access it with your Office PC. That was the reason I suggested a PC rather then a server. If you decide to get a squeezebox system, you can buy a NAS with the "squeezecenter" audio streaming software already installed. However a NAS does mean you will have to control it with your office PC. I still think a seperate PC connected to a router may be best for your requirements.

Mdrew (and any others who may be looking to do something similar), my sense is you still may not be exactly sure what is involved in the process we're describing. I've got some time...got the AC on and some Elvis Costello (King of America) on the Squeeze...so let me try and break it down for you in simple terms.

First thing you'll need is digital files to play. You can approach this 2 ways: you can either rip (extracting the files) your own CDs and store them for playback somewhere (more on that in a minute) or you can use a service that already supplies millions of files like Rhapsody or Pandora. The upside of services like Rhapsody and Pandora are simple; as I've said before, you'll probably find 750-799 (if not all 800) of the CDs you have already available for you. So, no need to rip them yourself, and if you go with a service like that exclusively, no need to spend the money for a storage and/or backup device (the Server, NAS, or PC in this equation). The downside? Well, they cost money (I couldn't live without Rhapsody, which is $12.95/month), do require the Internet (I know you have something against that), and, IMO, the streaming quality of their files is not quite as good as my own FLACs (although it should be said that my equipment and standards are very high, and Rhapsody streaming is fine sounding...just not quite as good as my own FLACs, but the convenience really does outweigh what little you trade-off in sq).

Now, that is not to say that ripping your own CDs and services like Rhapsody are mutually exclusively. You can, as I and probably most of us do, have a mix of both. This really gives you the best of both worlds. I, for example, have ripped the CDs Rhapsody does not have (or does not have in their entirety), but it is probably more of an issue for me than most because I have nearly 5000 discs. As has been stated elsewhere, most "average" users will be hard pressed not to find everything they own, and everything they've ever wanted to own, on Rhapsody.

Now, getting back to ripping your own CDs...if you decide you'd want to do this, here's what's involved: you mentioned you didn't want to have to use your personal PC to store any digital music, but would you be OK with ripping from there? Here's what I mean: if you were to go with a Server or NAS, you'd think of them as a big hard-drive, that doesn't interact (or interfere) with your main computer. But they don't have CD drives on them, so...you would install a piece of ripping software on your personal PC (it used to be that EAC...Exact Audio Copy...was the gold standard, but I use dbPowerAmp; I think it's every bit as accurate and much easier to set up), put one of your CDs in the drive, click a button, and the software would extract the file to the off-premise NAS or Server for storage and playback. Now, if you really don't want the ripping software on your PC, or to use its CD drive for ripping, for some reason, then you will have to think about a whole separate PC as malaugh suggests.

OK, so now you've decided to subscribe to Rhapsody and/or rip some of your own CDs to perfect, lossless FLAC. How do you play them? That's where the front-end Squeeze or Sonos comes in. (pause-really, check out Declan's I'll Wear It Proudly...beautiful). Either the Squeeze Duet or Classic, or Sonos ZP80 or ZP100 will stream these files anywhere you have a network connection (I mean, they all absolutely work wirelessly, but you've already said you're not interested in that...and frankly, if you already have the wired network in place, I don't think there's any question it's better for dropouts and transmission anyway). So, you can keep your choice of Server, NAS, or dedicated PC in the office, attic...hell, keep it hidden in a closet if you like...and you put the Squeeze or Sonos unit where you want to listen. You then access the files by remote, but the file structure is not all computery looking; look at those demos I mentioned in my last post, and you'll see the file management and access is quite slick. One of the biggest selling points of units like this is in the way they catalog and access a large number of files.

I hope I haven't dumbed this down too much. Sometimes the guys who have been on the front lines for a while forget what it's like to be starting out. Once you feel like you have an idea what'll work best for you, you can narrow your questions a little and we can then help offer some more specific detail on how to do this, or how to do that.

CD

P.S. Poisoned Rose, great!

Thank you for the great post CD. Yes, I am new to Sonos and Slim Devices, so this is very helpful. I am not new to ripping CD's though. I have about two or three hundred ripped, but I didn't know better at the time and ripped them as WMA. They sound like crap. I am quite picky when it comes to SQ. I'd have to rip everything FLAC or completely lossless. The reason I went with the changers years ago was because I couldn’t tolerate the sound of ripped music, but wanted all my CD’s available to play instead of in binders.

I like your media serer idea. I think that is probably the way to go for me. And if it’s on and ready to go as easily as you say, then I’m sold on the idea. I have looked a bit at both the Sonos and Slim Device web sights, but not in great detail. I’ll spend some more time on both.

Thank you for the great post CD. Yes, I am new to Sonos and Slim Devices, so this is very helpful. I am not new to ripping CD's though. I have about two or three hundred ripped, but I didn't know better at the time and ripped them as WMA. They sound like crap. I am quite picky when it comes to SQ. I'd have to rip everything FLAC or completely lossless. The reason I went with the changers years ago was because I couldn’t tolerate the sound of ripped music, but wanted all my CD’s available to play instead of in binders.

I like your media serer idea. I think that is probably the way to go for me. And if it’s on and ready to go as easily as you say, then I’m sold on the idea. I have looked a bit at both the Sonos and Slim Device web sights, but not in great detail. I’ll spend some more time on both.

mdrew,

Yes, CD's advice is terrific, and he obviously loves music and is very pleased with his set up. I've been following his posts in this forum for months, and mostly on his enthusiasm for the SB3 and/or Duet from Slim Devices, I've decided to get one myself next month.

Anyway, I have ripped most of my hundreds of CDs to FLAC, and I wanted to comment on a throwaway remark you made (and which I bolded). Pardon me if you already know this and my comment seems too pedantic, but FLAC is completely lossless. The only effective difference between it and the WAV files on your CD is that the file itself is compressed (so that it occupies about 58-60% of the storage space on your hard drive that a WAV file of the same song would). There is no dynamic compression or any kind of alteration of the sound quality in FLAC. There are no worries there. In fact, you can easily convert a FLAC file back to WAV with absolutely no loss of sound quality. The sound information in the file will remain completely intact and unchanged from one to the other, and back again if you like. The same is true of other lossless file formats, like Apple's lossless ALAC, for instance.

Sorry to be pedantic, but there is some possibility of confusion and misinformation in reading your post, and I wanted to make that clearer for you and anyone else who might read it.

mdrew,

Yes, CD's advice is terrific, and he obviously loves music and is very pleased with his set up. I've been following his posts in this forum for months, and mostly on his enthusiasm for the SB3 and/or Duet from Slim Devices, I've decided to get one myself next month.

Anyway, I have ripped most of my hundreds of CDs to FLAC, and I wanted to comment on a throwaway remark you made (and which I bolded). Pardon me if you already know this and my comment seems too pedantic, but FLAC is completely lossless. The only effective difference between it and the WAV files on your CD is that the file itself is compressed (so that it occupies about 58-60% of the storage space on your hard drive that a WAV file of the same song would). There is no dynamic compression or any kind of alteration of the sound quality in FLAC. There are no worries there. In fact, you can easily convert a FLAC file back to WAV with absolutely no loss of sound quality. The sound information in the file will remain completely intact and unchanged from one to the other, and back again if you like. The same is true of other lossless file formats, like Apple's lossless ALAC, for instance.

Sorry to be pedantic, but there is some possibility of confusion and misinformation in reading your post, and I wanted to make that clearer for you and anyone else who might read it.

Will, that's a good point and I'm glad you brought it up. I saw it, and thought about commenting, but if you've been following my posts as you say, you know I am sometimes criticized for being arrogant, so I was hesitant to nitpick. Plus I thought maybe Mdrew just made a slip of the keyboard, but you are absolutely right...and with the kind of misinformation out there, regarding digital media and streaming, deliberate or otherwise, it was worth clearing up. Of course FLAC is lossless, in fact it's built right into the name (Free Lossless Audio Codec)

CD

No worries about offending me guys..... I am not bashful in saying I'm not up to speed on all the different means to compress music files. I THOUGHT FLAC was some lossless form, but not positive. So thanks for clarifying that point. I’ve simply been too pre-occupied with HD/BR formats and the whole high def viewing my HT for the past year or so. Now I need to get my music only rig up to speed.

I’ve been salivating over the SD Transporter. It sure sounds like quite the machine, and I love the way it looks. Have either of you actually heard what it can do? Two grand for that sucker….

No worries about offending me guys..... I am not bashful in saying I'm not up to speed on all the different means to compress music files. I THOUGHT FLAC was some lossless form, but not positive. So thanks for clarifying that point. I’ve simply been too pre-occupied with HD/BR formats and the whole high def viewing my HT for the past year or so. Now I need to get my music only rig up to speed.

I’ve been salivating over the SD Transporter. It sure sounds like quite the machine, and I love the way it looks. Have either of you actually heard what it can do? Two grand for that sucker….

Mdrew, I admit I haven't heard it...and I agree, it's a looker. But I actually put it in the "boondoggle" category of machines like the Olive, Escient, etc. For 2 grand you get an upgraded DAC, cool displays, and maybe better parts in the signal path.

Don't get me wrong; I'm an audiophile, so I sometimes subscribe to the fact that better parts make for better sound, and yes, that comes at a price. However, I say maybe, in the case of the Transporter, because SlimDevices is not really in the business of making hi-end audio gear; so I'm not really sure what I'm getting for all that extra money.

Plus, as of now, the Transporter doesn't work with the Duet (LCD) remote, and having been an SB3 user, I can attest to, that for my money, the difference between its IR remote and the Duet's is well worth the price of admission.

If I was really picky about sq (and I am), and had decent dollars invested in my audio rig (which I do)...and had 2 Gs to spend on a digital front-end, I'd buy a Duet, SB Classic, or Sonos ZP80 and run it through an external DAC. I have my Duet running through the excellent PS Audio DLIII, on my top rig, and the SB3 (Classic) running through an MSB Link DAC III (Full Nelson) on my smaller system. I've argued elsewhere about the benefits, IMO, of an external DAC with these units; helps smooth out the digital edge, and firm up the bottom end, especially with the compressed files. The PS Audio unit runs around $900-1k, which, when matched up with any of the 3 streaming players, comes in under the Transporter.

Of course, it does look pretty cool! :D I've seen them for sale, used, for around $1100-1200. If I had that just laying around, it might be worth a try.

CD

I've been reading all of these posts very carefully, as I am in the same situation. I'm looking for a device that will play FLAC files from an external HD, I'm very fussy about sound quality (my main rig is includes Conrad-Johnson pre & power/big B&W speakers, Linn.....) and I have no interest in streaming music to any other part of my house. It appears that the Dvico, TVIX, MVIX boxes are toys and that my best option is to go for a PC back-end with a Squeeze or Sonos as my controller.

Incidentally I have a Sony M555ES 400 CD changer (I think that's the model #) that I can control using my PC & related software. It has been a godsend, however now that /I have a few thousand CDs in my collection, I'd need a 4,000 CD changer in order to keep pace or alternately a couple of cheap TB hard drives.

Roberta

Roberta

I have a Squeeze, and use it in the way you describe. I have my music on an exernal USB drive, which is hooked up to my PC. I run squeezcenter on the PC, and use a wireless connection to my Squeezebox Duet hooked up to my Stereo. I am not an audiopile, but its sounds good to me. As CD says, you can get a transporter if you are an audiophile, but I think accessing a large music collection with the transporter remote would be difficult. I think the best plan for better sound would be to hook the Duet up to an external DAC.

The only thing I would change is to put my music collection on a NAS so I do not need to have my PC turned on while I am listening to music.

Roberta
The only thing I would change is to put my music collection on a NAS so I do not need to have my PC turned on while I am listening to music.

Sounds like a plan! Thanks!

Can I connect with Cat-5/6 as well? I don't trust wireless networking for A/V.

R

Mine has never skipped, although I heard that people with poor signal strength have had problems. You can definitely hardwire it, just plug the ethernet cable in the back.

I've been reading all of these posts very carefully, as I am in the same situation. I'm looking for a device that will play FLAC files from an external HD, I'm very fussy about sound quality (my main rig is includes Conrad-Johnson pre & power/big B&W speakers, Linn.....) and I have no interest in streaming music to any other part of my house. It appears that the Dvico, TVIX, MVIX boxes are toys and that my best option is to go for a PC back-end with a Squeeze or Sonos as my controller.

Incidentally I have a Sony M555ES 400 CD changer (I think that's the model #) that I can control using my PC & related software. It has been a godsend, however now that /I have a few thousand CDs in my collection, I'd need a 4,000 CD changer in order to keep pace or alternately a couple of cheap TB hard drives.

Roberta

Roberta, with your gear I would definitely recommend an external DAC. Here are some to consider: I love the sound I get from my PS Audio DLIII; really tight bottom-end, and crisp highs but not edgy. I auditioned the Benchmark DAC1 in the same price range (~1k) and they were very similar sounding, although obviously I preferred the PSA slightly. If you're more of a tube guy, as your CJ gear suggests you are, I'd consider Musical Fidelity DACs. I had the A3.24 before my PSA and it's a great DAC, just a little warmer than I like. You can pick it up pre-owned at a bargain, ~$500. If you don't mind spending a little more, the Tri-Vista 21 might be to your liking. I listened to a friend's, when I was looking to upgrade from the A3, and it's a beautiful sounding unit; really sweet in the mid, I'm just more of a ss guy (again, the Tri-Vista's are aplenty pre-owned, and would run about ~$1k-1100).

Also, if you've got thousands of CDs, as opposed to hundreds, you might want to consider a server instead of NAS. By my calculations, using 350MB for the average CD ripped to FLAC, you can get nearly 3,000 discs onto a T, but you need to account for the video bug that comes next :D

CD

How do the Squeeze boxes interface with an external DAC? I'm assuming you run the digital output into the DAC? I've never really looked at DAC's, but I'm always open to new toys that make my music sound better.

How do the Squeeze boxes interface with an external DAC? I'm assuming you run the digital output into the DAC?

Yep, that's it.

CD

Also, if you've got thousands of CDs, as opposed to hundreds, you might want to consider a server instead of NAS. By my calculations, using 350MB for the average CD ripped to FLAC, you can get nearly 3,000 discs onto a T, but you need to account for the video bug that comes next :D
CD

Thanks! I appreciate all of your advice. This rig is going to be for my home office (NAD & Advent speakers), so I won't be as fussy as I would be if it was for the C-J combo.

I'm not concerned with video, as I wouldn't get any work done if I had a TV monitor in my office!

Thanks again!

Roberta

mdrew,

As someone who has ripped about 1200 CDs (and about 800 more to go) to FLAC (and now ALAC) and owned both a Squeezebox (not the Duet) and Sonos, I think that I would probably go with the Sonos if I were you. I may get flamed for this, as people tend to get defensive over their choice. However, you are not familiar with this and seem to have some sense of trepidation regarding the technology.

When I owned the Squeezebox, I was tweaking Slimserver all the time, I had to run SlimServer on my ReadyNAS, etc., and my wife didn't use it because it was too "gadgety" or "complex". Sold the Squeezebox (which was fine for me) for the Sonos and my wife uses it all the time. SIMPLE setup. Easy remote to use. I also enjoyed it more - it was simply a more elegant solution top to bottom and the integration of Rhapsody, Sirius and Internet radio was seamless. Never felt the need to tweak or alter. Sync is perfect ALWAYS across multiple zones (important for me) and the wireless mesh didn't interfere with other devices (and I'm in a condo with many networks around). The only time I would get skips was in the kitchen when microwaving. Extra cost was worth it (although I'd wait a month or two for predicted new product).

My two pennies - buy Sonos, a NAS and don't look back. If cost is an issue, give the Duet a try. If you are using several zones, Sonos for sure.

My setup is the Duet (Receiver/Squeezebox Controller), SB2, and the Transporter. For storage, I use the ReadyNAS NV. I happen to use a separate PC for the server software because I have a server in my house already and it's more powerful than the NAS CPU. All my music is FLAC. A previous poster is mistaken, the Squeezebox Controller controls all three just fine.

The combination of SqueezeCenter 7.x and the Squeezebox Controller somewhat levels the issue of usability with Sonos. I've used Slimserver (pre SqueezeCenter 7.x) for several years now and I agree with the other poster that it could need some tweaking at times. SqueezeCenter, on the other hand, is very stable and user friendly. In fact, I use my SB2 as my alarm clock every day without issue. If you want, you can download the SqueezeCenter sw for free and play around with the sw player on your PC. A true try before you buy.

The great thing about the Squeezebox Controller is that it can be 802.11 and therefore work throughout the house. That way the Receiver or SB3 and yes, the Transporter can be in a completely different room. I happen to have 3 SqueezeCenter servers and 3 players in my house. The Controller started up and found all the servers and players and could configure them all right away - that is cool.

On the transporter...if you can afford it, there's no equal in the streamer world (unless you consider the $18K Linn). I've A/Bed all day with an alternate external DAC and I can't tell the difference. The quality and look of the unit is great. I can't vouch for the price in terms of internal components, but it's really not that expensive if you consider most audiophile components (my pre-amp was more than twice the price and does very little IMO). If you have an external DAC already, the SB3 is a fine substitute, but I'd streamline and go with the Transporter (again - sounds like you are an audiophile type).

But the sw is where the real value is in Slimdevices. It's completely open source with plug-ins and is why I use SD products. I have a friend who bought the SONOS and likes it because of the WAF.

I paid to have Cat5e pulled in my house so I wouldn't have to do wireless for the players and don't regret it. It's absolutely amazing how fast music queues up and plays. It's on and playing in less than 1 s.

Good luck!

I have 5 Sonos zones, all Cat5e wired, mostly ZP-80's, 1 ZP-100. I recommend a ZP-80 with a CR-100 controller and a NAS for storage. The ZP-80 will "mount" the music files over the network, and the controller will make it quick and easy to play. It only uses wireless for the controller in my configuration.

I use DbPowerAmp on WinXP for the CD ripping (to FLAC), very satisfied with that. Album art included and very exact ripping.

The fun part is listening/deciding if you need an external DAC. I was using the DAC on my Arcam AVP700 and eventually ended up buying a used external DAC on Audiogon for about $600. I am very happy with the sound produced from that external DAC (Channel Islands VDA-2 and VAC-1 power supply).

Napster/Rhapsody integration is icing on the cake, and great fun at parties.

-MJT

Thanks for the input on the different controllers and such. I must admit htat I like the look of the Sonos controllers more than the Duet pair, but I’ll ultimately go with the device that serves my needs better. Unless I’m missing something, the SD controllers are IR, correct? Why in the world would they go IR instead of RF??

What is a “ReadyNAS NV”?

The original SB controllers are IR, but the Duet remote uses WiFi. The SB's were basically designed as one location solutions, not multiple room audio, so the IR controller served it well. The Duet, while using the basic SB backbone, branches more into multi-room audio, hence the WiFi based remote. The Sonos was designed as multi-room whole house audio from the start.

A "ReadyNAS NV" is just a particular model of NAS (Network Attached Storage) made by Netgear. An NAS is a hard disk (or disks) that does not need to be attached to a computer in order to operate. Instead, you attach it to your network. It is then available to any and all computers/devices on your network, at any time. The benefit in this scenario is you can migrate your music files from a dedicated computer to a NAS, and then you would not need any computers turned on to access your music. Saves power and is immune to crashes and/or reboots.

Note that the Sonos can access an NAS without any other software running, whereas the Duet often requires running separate software on the NAS. This is because Sonos requires no server (it holds an index of your music internally), whereas the Duet requires a separate server to do the indexing. When moving to this type of install, the Duet tends to be more complicated to set up and/or maintain, especially for the uninitiated user; the more expensive Sonos is pretty much plug-and-play.

I am I a similar situation. I don't need a multiroom device. Yesterady I called olive to place a order for their new n4 and because it is not ready to ship yet (they said 2-3 weeks, same answer I got three month ago) I didn't commit to it. So I found this thread and I learned a lot by reading it. I am tempted by the NAS solution, also because my preamp can steam music directly from them and maybe there would be no need of a front end device like sonos. But what concernes me is the noise generated by these NAS. It would be sitting in the bedroom. Also, do they have to be running 24/7? That's a lot of energy wasted there. Is there a cleaner solution? Less importantly, can these nas and sonos stream hi-def formats(24bit/96hz..etc..)? Thank you for your posts.

Ok. Now I'm really farklemped! :confused: Everyone seems to really like what they're using (big surprise!).

As I mentioned, I don't want/need wireless (we've bought a new home and I plan on having CAT6, phone and satellite wiring installed in virtually every room). That said, I will use the player in my home office 99.9% of the time, so I probably don't even need the networking capabilities. Since that isn't an option with all players, it's not a problem. Secondly, I don't need video.

The player will be in my office connected to a stereo receiver playing FLAC files. Ideally, I'd like something with similar capabilities of my current setup: my PC is connected to my Sony 400 disc changer and I can select music by artist, genre, CD title, song title, etc.. If I must use a 3rd party remote, I envision that it will provide me with the same capabilities.

I'm going to print out most of the responses, curl up in bed with them and have a glass of wine.

R

Robert,

one of the nice things about Sonos in a home office is that you can forgo the cost of the controller and use the PC/Mac Software on your computer to control the ZP-80 that will be connected to your stereo.

Then as you add zones you may later opt for a wireless controller, but it is not required if you have a PC or Mac available to queue up the music/radio/Rhapsody/Napster streaming.

Mjt

Robert,

one of the nice things about Sonos in a home office is that you can forgo the cost of the controller and use the PC/Mac Software on your computer to control the ZP-80 that will be connected to your stereo.
Mjt


Excellent! Thanks.

...and it's "Roberta", not "Robert".

I am I a similar situation. I don't need a multiroom device. Yesterady I called olive to place a order for their new n4 and because it is not ready to ship yet (they said 2-3 weeks, same answer I got three month ago) I didn't commit to it. So I found this thread and I learned a lot by reading it. I am tempted by the NAS solution, also because my preamp can steam music directly from them and maybe there would be no need of a front end device like sonos. But what concernes me is the noise generated by these NAS. It would be sitting in the bedroom. Also, do they have to be running 24/7? That's a lot of energy wasted there. Is there a cleaner solution? Less importantly, can these nas and sonos stream hi-def formats(24bit/96hz..etc..)? Thank you for your posts.

My NAS (Maxtor/Seagate Shared Storage II) pulls about 40 watts and spins down to standby after a set time at idle (around 10 seconds to spool back up). Compare to a dedicated computer, which will pull about 200 watts. Some are noisier than others, mine is in my bedroom and doesn't bother me. At this time, Sonos doesn't do 24bit/96Hz, only up to 16 bit/48 Hz. I don't know about the Duet.

Robert,

one of the nice things about Sonos in a home office is that you can forgo the cost of the controller and use the PC/Mac Software on your computer to control the ZP-80 that will be connected to your stereo.

Then as you add zones you may later opt for a wireless controller, but it is not required if you have a PC or Mac available to queue up the music/radio/Rhapsody/Napster streaming.

Mjt

Not trying to start the war again, but of course the exact same thing is true of the Squeezebox (either Classic or Duet).

CD

I realize that digital storage and management is the way to go. I would just like a better way to do it than interfacing with a computer that is tied to the internet, needs time to boot up, has all this F-ing hacker proof software on it…ect. I want to be able to simply pick up a remote and push a button or two and start hearing music. I don’t want to ‘wait’ for the PC to ‘allow’ me to do that. If there is a way to avoid that, whether it’s software or hardware related, please educate me.

Let me break it down. Each of these stages require effort

- Whether you are using your old school.. Go to Shop, Buy CD, Unwrap, Throw wrapper in garbage, Open MegaChanger, Find appropriate Slot, Insert CD, Mark Slot into the database, Save / Store the CD Cover into bookshelf.

If you find the above more convenient that using a computer. Maybe you should do your taxes & accounting on PAPER v/s using Excel or Accounting Software :D.

CONTENT STORAGE:
When I say CONTENT ... I mean the following things:
The actual MEDIA
The MEDIA "MetaData" (The data that helps you organize, classify, search, index, retrieve the right information)
etc.

Digital Physical = Mega Changers
Digital Virtual = Hard Drive / NAS / Storage

CONTENT ACQUISITION:
From your CDs, Online Services, etc.

CDs TRANSITION -

I'd say you could get a PC / Laptop running LEAN with Close to Automated CD > FLAC ripping & Tagging into Right Folders.

I believe some new Media Players / Home Media Servers might even support automatic CD to FLAC copy. But how well they organize things for you might be subjective.

CONTENT MANAGEMENT:

I am wondering how you got things organized on your Mega Changers? It would take EFFORT. Physical (yourself) and Virtual (Your equipment: Changers, Catalog Tools, PC Software.)

How do you find where the particular CD is stored?

So you'd have to do the same but instead of using a changer and PC Software. You use a PC / Storage instead of Mega Changer.

We are not asking you to use the PC / bootup times etc for PLAYING the media. But, content organization effort will alleviate your content retrieval / search effort.

Want low bootup times. Use a Media based lean Linux or Slim version of XP / Windows 2000 with nothing else on it / in the startup.

CONTENT TRANSMISSION, BROADCAST & DELIVERY:

Local USB / eSATA connection, Cross Over Cable, Wired Network, Wireless Network. UPnP, DLNA etc.

CONTENT PLAY:

This is the KEY item in your picture. You need to find a media player that works best with how you find convenient.

In fact you could Mix tracks from multiple cd onto a single Playlist. Something your Mega Changer is going to MAKE YOU WAIT FOR.

Bottomline, you are afraid of CHANGE... and LEARNING. :D. Get over that anxiety and thats half the battle won.

You can take the following info from CDLehner and break it down into above SECTIONS. Look at each of the options in each SECTION and figure out what works out as most convenient for you.

Mdrew (and any others who may be looking to do something similar), my sense is you still may not be exactly sure what is involved in the process we're describing. I've got some time...got the AC on and some Elvis Costello (King of America) on the Squeeze...so let me try and break it down for you in simple terms.

First thing you'll need is digital files to play. You can approach this 2 ways: you can either rip (extracting the files) your own CDs and store them for playback somewhere (more on that in a minute) or you can use a service that already supplies millions of files like Rhapsody or Pandora. The upside of services like Rhapsody and Pandora are simple; as I've said before, you'll probably find 750-799 (if not all 800) of the CDs you have already available for you. So, no need to rip them yourself, and if you go with a service like that exclusively, no need to spend the money for a storage and/or backup device (the Server, NAS, or PC in this equation). The downside? Well, they cost money (I couldn't live without Rhapsody, which is $12.95/month), do require the Internet (I know you have something against that), and, IMO, the streaming quality of their files is not quite as good as my own FLACs (although it should be said that my equipment and standards are very high, and Rhapsody streaming is fine sounding...just not quite as good as my own FLACs, but the convenience really does outweigh what little you trade-off in sq).

Now, that is not to say that ripping your own CDs and services like Rhapsody are mutually exclusively. You can, as I and probably most of us do, have a mix of both. This really gives you the best of both worlds. I, for example, have ripped the CDs Rhapsody does not have (or does not have in their entirety), but it is probably more of an issue for me than most because I have nearly 5000 discs. As has been stated elsewhere, most "average" users will be hard pressed not to find everything they own, and everything they've ever wanted to own, on Rhapsody.

Now, getting back to ripping your own CDs...if you decide you'd want to do this, here's what's involved: you mentioned you didn't want to have to use your personal PC to store any digital music, but would you be OK with ripping from there? Here's what I mean: if you were to go with a Server or NAS, you'd think of them as a big hard-drive, that doesn't interact (or interfere) with your main computer. But they don't have CD drives on them, so...you would install a piece of ripping software on your personal PC (it used to be that EAC...Exact Audio Copy...was the gold standard, but I use dbPowerAmp; I think it's every bit as accurate and much easier to set up), put one of your CDs in the drive, click a button, and the software would extract the file to the off-premise NAS or Server for storage and playback. Now, if you really don't want the ripping software on your PC, or to use its CD drive for ripping, for some reason, then you will have to think about a whole separate PC as malaugh suggests.

OK, so now you've decided to subscribe to Rhapsody and/or rip some of your own CDs to perfect, lossless FLAC. How do you play them? That's where the front-end Squeeze or Sonos comes in. (pause-really, check out Declan's I'll Wear It Proudly...beautiful). Either the Squeeze Duet or Classic, or Sonos ZP80 or ZP100 will stream these files anywhere you have a network connection (I mean, they all absolutely work wirelessly, but you've already said you're not interested in that...and frankly, if you already have the wired network in place, I don't think there's any question it's better for dropouts and transmission anyway). So, you can keep your choice of Server, NAS, or dedicated PC in the office, attic...hell, keep it hidden in a closet if you like...and you put the Squeeze or Sonos unit where you want to listen. You then access the files by remote, but the file structure is not all computery looking; look at those demos I mentioned in my last post, and you'll see the file management and access is quite slick. One of the biggest selling points of units like this is in the way they catalog and access a large number of files.

I hope I haven't dumbed this down too much. Sometimes the guys who have been on the front lines for a while forget what it's like to be starting out. Once you feel like you have an idea what'll work best for you, you can narrow your questions a little and we can then help offer some more specific detail on how to do this, or how to do that.

CD

P.S. Poisoned Rose, great!

Let me make one thing clear before I continue. I'm squarely in the Slimdevices camp, but that is because it suits my needs better than Sonos...not because it's a better product. So, let me sort of lay out how I see it...

Both Sonos and slimdevices require a server function. The difference is that the Sonos hides this from you in one of their boxes and therefore it appears as if it doesn't and all you need is the system. I know that may sound picky, but it's important to understand for my next point because the server is the brains of the system. This does represent an ease of use advantage for Sonos. It also presents the potential downside of having to use your NAS or separate PC to run the SqueezeCenter sw.

The area where I'm not as knowledgable about Sonos is in how open it is. SB SqueezeCenter is open source and the interface to the server is published. So, it is very customizable by the community. A standard web browser controls it and the skins are customizable with a number of them to chose from. This allows pretty much any network connected device to control it (i.e., PC, tablet/touchscreen PC, iPhone, etc.) with only choosing the appropriate "skin" needed. It can also be local, or remote across the internet. This is true of playing music as well (I've listened to my music from home at the office and at the beach). Slimserver can transcode on the fly (change large FLAC into much smaller MP3 for skinny Internet links). I don't mean to say this is simple. It does require someone a little comfortable with computers to accomplish some of these things, but it is a standard part of the server software. With the new "Jive" interface, they have opened up more avenues for communication with the server which should produce even more options for customers.

The open source server allows the community to dream up whatever plug-in they want and add it to SqueezeCenter. Slimdevices controls the release so that users get a stable base build, then list the plug-ins available that you can use at your own risk (kind of like browsers).

I don't know what Sonos does on this front, but I suspect it is a little more closed in nature. This is good and bad. With flexibility and capability always comes complexity. It's a trade-off. No one would ever buy a PC if ease of use was their primary criterion. They do it because all of the powerful capabilities it brings outweigh the complexity they have to endure.

As best I can tell, all the source integration (Rhapsody, Sirius, etc.) is a wash between the two.

One other thing to note...Slimdevices is now owned by Logitech and it appears they've been left alone to continue on their path. If executed properly, this is a good thing because it makes you more secure in your investment. I thought about this when I bought the Transporter, which would become a brick if SD went away. I have no idea about Sonos, but it does appear to be standalone. With a CE device this usually doesn't matter, but for something you rely on sw updates for, it's important.

At the end of the day, I can't stress enough that you can download and try SqueezeCenter for free. Just install it, point it to your music, and run SoftSqueeze and decide for yourself. The hardware units are simply real versions of SoftSqueeze. There's a java version and a web browser version of the player to try out. If you don't like it, then by all means, buy the Sonos. If you do, you don't have to change anything...buy a SB and it will come up find your server and you are off to some music listening!

The other suggestion is to spend some time looking through both forums.

Both Sonos and slimdevices require a server function. The difference is that the Sonos hides this from you in one of their boxes and therefore it appears as if it doesn't and all you need is the system. I know that may sound picky, but it's important to understand for my next point because the server is the brains of the system. This does represent an ease of use advantage for Sonos. It also presents the potential downside of having to use your NAS or separate PC to run the SqueezeCenter sw.


This is completely wrong. The Sonos system uses a local index, not a server. A "server" is defined as:

a computer that provides client stations with access to files and printers as shared resources to a computer network

Spelled out for the layman, the SB uses a centrally located server application running on a central computer/NAS to process access requests to the filesystem (in this case, music files). This server application can run on a computer or a NAS, but it has to be running somewhere. It's job is to reply to a client device/computer when a request for a particular music file takes place. Since it holds all mapping and/or logic needed for finding the files, only the server can find them and issue the reply to the request. The client computer/device is completely ignorant of the file's location.

Sonos, on the other hand, uses an indexing program to periodically (scheduled or manuallly) scan the music files and build an exact index of those files. The index is then transferred to each ZonePlayer. This allows each ZP to access a file's location directly, without requesting the server to go fetch it.

Now this may seem like a small difference, but not if you look at this as a library analogy. The server is the librarian. If you want a book and don't know where it is, you ask the librarian to go find it and she'll bring it back for you. The more requests for books she gets, the slower she responds to your request. You also need the librarian on duty at all times or you'll be completely lost when searching for a book.

But, imagine you enter the library and you have an exact map of the library which tells you exactly where every book is. Now you can just get it yourself and not have to rely on the librarian at all. This obviously means you have to do periodic work on your map to keep it up to date, and thus new books won't show up on your map without physically updating (i.e. re-indexing), but at least you don't have to look for the librarian every time you need a song . . . errm . . . book.

It's the difference between direct access and client-server access, and there's a big difference between the two designs (with each having flaws/benefits depending on the deployment).

In the interest of full disclosure, I'd like to add to my post above. There are at least two detriments to local index access that apply to this conversation. One was mentioned - The need to periodically update the local index in order to see new files.

The other is the need for more memory and processing power on each individual client (ZonePlayer). Unlike the SB offerings, each ZP has to be able to store the index and properly access files. This requires more memory and processing power be built into each unit, which raises the price (hence the higher priced ZP compared to the offerings from Slim). It also imposes a physical limit on how big the index can be, since the index must be stored on every ZP, not on a central computer (right now it's around 50,000 tracks).

For some, the convenience/reliability/speed of the no server model is worth the extra expense, for others it is not. Pick your poison and pays your money . . .

Ok. I think I understand the differences between the two.

Please correct me if I'm wrong: if I don't mind accessing the music through my computer, but don't want the computer playing the music, then I can go either route. If I don't want to be required to use my PC, I need to go the Sonos route.

Is this correct?

Roberta

No. The Sonos is better capable of the second scenario without any extra fiddling, but the Duet is able to run a server application without your computer being turned on. It requires you to set the server up on your NAS or to access it via the internet, which is technically more difficult (and possibly less reliable in the case of the internet), but it works.

Just to clarify the last post. Squeezecenter, the program that runs on your computer network, streams the music to your squeezebox, the unit that connects to your stereo. Squeezecenter will run on a PC connected to your network, or on your NAS. Installing and Running Squeezecenter on a PC is easy, just download the program and run it, but installing squeezecenter on a NAS requires more technical knowldege. The selection of which tracks the squeezecenter streams (i.e which tracks your squeezebox plays) is normally done through the squeezebox controller (remote), but can also be done though any web browser.

Let me start off by saying I love my escient gear. It just works...

That being said, the single biggest PITA of ripping a few thousand CDs is that you have to load a few thousand CDs. Since you have a jukebox, which the fireball can control, go buy a used E40/E100 or E2 series fireball. Have it rip all the content from the jukebox to the internal HD in FLAC. It will be done in REAL TIME, so expect to wait a while...( like a month per 1000 cds per fileball) Copy the files off the fireball and then sell it back on ebay. I keep 2 around just for that purpose.

When you consider that most ripping services charge close to a buck a disk, this is a no brainer.

The only problem with the fireballs is that if you have tracks with very long names ( ie classical music ), windoze has problems dealing with the long file names...

One other thing to consider is that if you listen to SACDs, then the fireball / changer is the only game in town...

I asked a local distributor about the Slim Devices and here's the response:

"Greetings

None of the Logitech (formerly sold under the name Slim devices)
support the ability to play music from a NAS (Network attached storage
"Ethernet"), USB or Firewire drives.

There is a new product the Drobo + Droboshare that may be able to
provide this service in the future. You can find more information at: http://www.drobo.com/Products/droboshare.html

There is one product that can play music off of a NAS, the Sonos. We
will be carrying the Sonos in 2-3 weeks. "

Now, I'm really confused (I think I said that previously).

Roberta

I asked a local distributor about the Slim Devices and here's the response:

"Greetings

None of the Logitech (formerly sold under the name Slim devices)
support the ability to play music from a NAS (Network attached storage
"Ethernet"), USB or Firewire drives.

There is a new product the Drobo + Droboshare that may be able to
provide this service in the future. You can find more information at: http://www.drobo.com/Products/droboshare.html

There is one product that can play music off of a NAS, the Sonos. We
will be carrying the Sonos in 2-3 weeks. "

Now, I'm really confused!!!!

Roberta

They are wrong. Especially about the USB/Firewire drives, which are just external drives on a computer which can run the server fine. But, the number of NAS models supported and the technical difficulty of the installation vary according to what type NAS drive you have.

The Sonos certainly does it easier and has broader NAS drive compatibility.

....At this time, Sonos doesn't do 24bit/96Hz, only up to 16 bit/48 Hz. I don't know about the Duet.

Transporter does, receiver and SB3 do not (Duet refers to the combined remote/player product...the audio portion is the Receiver).

The Sonos certainly does it easier and has broader NAS drive compatibility.

This statement could be confusing to some people. SqueezeCenter can play music off of any NAS just like Sonos (i.e., straight file access), that's not the compatibility point. The only compatibility question is whether it can run the SqueezeCenter server software on the NAS or not. Many NAS units do not support that, or have limited support. Since Sonos is totally self contained and is simply doing file access on the NAS, it pretty much works with all of them.

This statement could be confusing to some people. SqueezeCenter can play music off of any NAS just like Sonos (i.e., straight file access), that's not the compatibility point. The only compatibility question is whether it can run the SqueezeCenter server software on the NAS or not. Many NAS units do not support that, or have limited support. Since Sonos is totally self contained and is simply doing file access on the NAS, it pretty much works with all of them.

I thought my long post on the difference between direct access and client-server models on this very page already covered that. But thanks for the clarification. :confused:

This is completely wrong. The Sonos system uses a local index, not a server. A "server" is defined as:

Your response language is pretty strong...I actually said "server function" to avoid someone giving your answer about a box in the network. It doesn't matter if it's totally centralized or fully distributed (Audiotron) or somewhere in the middle which is what Sonos sounds like (something manages the indexes and distributes them to zone players). If we discuss architectures, the only relevance to this crowd is how it's of value to them. In my view the SD server is value because it can do all sorts of extra services, which I tried to provide examples of (i.e., transcoding on the fly).

What value does the architecture that Sonos chose provide someone vs. the one SD provides. I talked about open source and extensibility, etc. Those may or may not matter to a potential buyer, but I wanted to point them out as characteristics of the product so folks could include that in their analysis.

The Sonos certainly does it easier and has broader NAS drive compatibility.

I thought my long post on the difference between direct access and client-server models on this very page already covered that. But thanks for the clarification. :confused:

The top statement is what I replied to. Sonos does not in any way have broader NAS drive compatibility than SqueezeCenter. They both rely on file access to the NAS, which I'm willing to bet they are equally compatible across the board with. My explanation includes the compatibility point, which is whether Squeezecenter can run on the NAS CPU. Since Sonos has no equivalent, your point about "broader NAS drive compatiblity" actually makes no sense. Sonos has no NAS compatibility in that context as far as I know, because it doesn't need it.

I know you understand all of this, I was just clarifying for the rest in case they read that statement in isolation and thought for some reason you couldn't store your music on just about any NAS available.

Your response language is pretty strong...I actually said "server function" to avoid someone giving your answer about a box in the network. It doesn't matter if it's totally centralized or fully distributed (Audiotron) or somewhere in the middle which is what Sonos sounds like (something manages the indexes and distributes them to zone players). If we discuss architectures, the only relevance to this crowd is how it's of value to them. In my view the SD server is value because it can do all sorts of extra services, which I tried to provide examples of (i.e., transcoding on the fly).

What value does the architecture that Sonos chose provide someone vs. the one SD provides. I talked about open source and extensibility, etc. Those may or may not matter to a potential buyer, but I wanted to point them out as characteristics of the product so folks could include that in their analysis.

My strong reaction was to this:
The difference is that the Sonos hides this from you in one of their boxes and therefore it appears as if it doesn't and all you need is the system.

(Bold added by me) Sonos does not "hide" the "server function" on "one" box. It has no "server function". Each component is capable of direct access to the filesystem and there is no need to run a dedicated server anywhere. Similar to the mesh network, there is no central location that Sonos must utilize in order to play music. It only needs an access point to the network. Your language made it seem as if one box is doing the work of the server and all other boxes have to utilize that box in a client-server manner, and that is completely incorrect (as I stated).

The benefits of this direct access design are reliability (no single failure of a ZP can bring down the whole network), ease of install (no need to setup, run and/or maintain a server) and compatibility with more NAS devices (no need for a server to run on dozens of types/models of NAS).

The top statement is what I replied to. Sonos does not in any way have broader NAS drive compatibility than SqueezeCenter. They both rely on file access to the NAS, which I'm willing to bet they are equally compatible across the board with. My explanation includes the compatibility point, which is whether Squeezecenter can run on the NAS CPU. Since Sonos has no equivalent, your point about "broader NAS drive compatiblity" actually makes no sense. Sonos has no NAS compatibility in that context as far as I know, because it doesn't need it.

I know you understand all of this, I was just clarifying for the rest in case they read that statement in isolation and thought for some reason you couldn't store your music on just about any NAS available.

The reason to purchase an NAS is to have network access to your music even if all your PC's are off. Given this, it really doesn't matter if Squeezecenter can access an NAS from a PC, it really only matters if it can run on the NAS. That is what I was speaking to. After all, if the NAS is nothing but a mapped drive on the server PC, it's really nothing more than an expensive external USB drive.

I'm not here to argue or nit-pick. I feel I've been more than fair to the Slimdevices and nothing I've said is incorrect. I know these things get a little fervent, but could you please take a step back and read the entire post?

My strong reaction was to this:


(Bold added by me) Sonos does not "hide" the "server function" on "one" box. It has no "server function". Each component is capable of direct access to the filesystem and there is no need to run a dedicated server anywhere. Similar to the mesh network, there is no central location that Sonos must utilize in order to play music. It only needs an access point to the network. Your language made it seem as if one box is doing the work of the server and all other boxes have to utilize that box in a client-server manner, and that is completely incorrect (as I stated).

I won't spend time on this since no one reading the thread actually cares.

The benefits of this direct access design are reliability (no single failure of a ZP can bring down the whole network), ease of install (no need to setup, run and/or maintain a server) and compatibility with more NAS devices (no need for a server to run on dozens of types/models of NAS).

I use my SB2 for an alarm clock which, in my view, is mission critical. I've never had it go down. You are right in theory, but in practice, I'd argue that you still have the single points of failure in your network switches and/or APs, NAS, etc., so in the end, I'm not really sure that point matters much. IMO, the relevant point to take away from the architectural discussion is that you need a server and if it isn't on your NAS, then you need another box up and running to listen to music, which the Sonos does not require. That is the potential downside of SqueezeCenter...not reliability.

Now, is the Sonos sw open or does all development and innovation come from Sonos?

The reason to purchase an NAS is to have network access to your music even if all your PC's are off. Given this, it really doesn't matter if Squeezecenter can access an NAS from a PC, it really only matters if it can run on the NAS. That is what I was speaking to. After all, if the NAS is nothing but a mapped drive on the server PC, it's really nothing more than an expensive external USB drive.

I'm not here to argue or nit-pick. I feel I've been more than fair to the Slimdevices and nothing I've said is incorrect. I know these things get a little fervent, but could you please take a step back and read the entire post?

I have read all of your posts and I've put myself in the place of someone trying to learn and realizing that everyone's situation is different. Your first paragraph may be true to you, but it's not the reason I bought the NAS. I actually bought it more to decouple CPU upgrades from disk upgrades (i.e., the standard PC model) and to add some backup capability to my home network. And SqueezeCenter is not the reason I have a permanent server on my network. I happen to have both, so I use it the way that suits me the best. For some reason you say:

Given this, it really doesn't matter if Squeezecenter can access an NAS from a PC

It obviously matters to me because that's how I use it. How can you make a significantly limiting assumption like that for everyone without stating it? SqueezeCenter only recently started running on NAS devices, so your assumption is really a big leap.

BTW, I really don't care what product they buy. I'm just trying to add perspective on something I've had a lot of experience with. That's why I stay away from too much detail on Sonos. And to be honest, prior to 7.x, I didn't recommend SB to anyone but my geek friends. With 7.x, I'm comfortable recommending it.

I won't spend time on this since no one reading the thread actually cares.



I use my SB2 for an alarm clock which, in my view, is mission critical. I've never had it go down. You are right in theory, but in practice, I'd argue that you still have the single points of failure in your network switches and/or APs, NAS, etc., so in the end, I'm not really sure that point matters much. IMO, the relevant point to take away from the architectural discussion is that you need a server and if it isn't on your NAS, then you need another box up and running to listen to music, which the Sonos does not require. That is the potential downside of SqueezeCenter...not reliability.

Now, is the Sonos sw open or does all development and innovation come from Sonos?

It is open, not as much as Squeeze and certainly doesn't have the same amount of attention paid to it. In general, Sonos is not a geeks toy. From reading over at the Sonos forums, it appeals more to the person who wants whole house audio and doesn't care about the technical stuff.

I have read all of your posts and I've put myself in the place of someone trying to learn and realizing that everyone's situation is different. Your first paragraph may be true to you, but it's not the reason I bought the NAS. I actually bought it more to decouple CPU upgrades from disk upgrades (i.e., the standard PC model) and to add some backup capability to my home network. And SqueezeCenter is not the reason I have a permanent server on my network. I happen to have both, so I use it the way that suits me the best. For some reason you say:



It obviously matters to me because that's how I use it. How can you make a significantly limiting assumption like that for everyone without stating it? SqueezeCenter only recently started running on NAS devices, so your assumption is really a big leap.


I made the leap because that's what was asked:


Please correct me if I'm wrong: if I don't mind accessing the music through my computer, but don't want the computer playing the music, then I can go either route. If I don't want to be required to use my PC, I need to go the Sonos route.

and I actually answered in favor of Squeeze, if you'd notice.;)

Thanks to everyone for their feedback. Most of this is way over my head, but I have time to digest it and learn. I do not plan on ripping my collection till sometime this winter when my ‘nice weather’ summer activity season is over.

So getting back to the basics, it sounds as if the NAS, like the HP model CD recommended earlier and either a Sonos or SD compelled to an external DAC is the way to go.

I do have a couple more questions…..

Can I incorporate a monitor into this at the location where my two channel is located with having to use a PC? I think this would be nice for guests to scroll through the collection and build playlists. I suspect this is not possible, but figured I’d ask anyway.

What other DAC’s should I be looking at? I was recently told that the Benchmark USB DAC is the way to go. Are there others? If it matters, I do not like the ‘tube sound’. I prefer solid state and no coloration.

From my viewpoint, this isn't a competition about which product is better (at least to us consumers). It's the appropriateness to each individual's application. If I had to generalize, I would agree that Sonos is targeted at out of the box up and running with an easy to use interface, while SD is more focused on platform extensibility while trying to catch up on user friendliness.

I would not recommend SD before 7.x to non-technical folks. After 7.x, I feel comfortable that it's very usable by anyone who can rip and manage ripped music. How much you extend it with plug-ins and code modification is totally your call depending on how much you want to turn it into a geek toy.

Thanks to everyone for their feedback. Most of this is way over my head, but I have time to digest it and learn. I do not plan on ripping my collection till sometime this winter when my ‘nice weather’ summer activity season is over.

So getting back to the basics, it sounds as if the NAS, like the HP model CD recommended earlier and either a Sonos or SD compelled to an external DAC is the way to go.

I do have a couple more questions…..

Can I incorporate a monitor into this at the location where my two channel is located with having to use a PC? I think this would be nice for guests to scroll through the collection and build playlists. I suspect this is not possible, but figured I’d ask anyway.

What other DAC’s should I be looking at? I was recently told that the Benchmark USB DAC is the way to go. Are there others? If it matters, I do not like the ‘tube sound’. I prefer solid state and no coloration.

Man have things gotten off-track in here. As if it weren't confusing enough, there's a lot of word-twisting, and semantics going around.

Mdrew, it's important to note the HP unit I recommended is a Server, not an NAS. As for DACs, the ones I would recommend, for use with these devices, are the PS Audio DLIII (which I can vouch for), the Benchmark you mentioned, or a used Musical Fidelity (A3.24, X-Dac, Tri-Vista...well, that's tubey).

Not sure I understand the monitor question, as you may have made a typo: did you mean is it possible to have a monitor, at the 2-channel location, without a PC?

CD

mdrew

If you plan on having a screen at the same location as your stereo, why go the Squeeze/Sonos route? Just buy a small PC or a laptop, and use a music manager like MediaMonkey?

You could still use a squeeze, and use a laptop for you guests to make playlists, the laptop just needs a browser interface to access the PC with squeezecenter and make plyalists.

Oh yeah….NAS – Network Attached Storage UGGGG!!! My head’s swimming now.

But now that I’m thinking about the two methods for storage (Server / NAS), are there advantages of using one over the other?

In regards to my monitor question, yes, I meant a monitor at the two channel rig location without the need for a PC or laptop. Is that possible? As I think about it, I realize it’s as stupid question and not possible (at least I don’t know how it could be possible).

I do have a laptop that I use strictly for firmware downloads and my display calibration software. I reckon I could always use that for this purpose.

I’ve been salivating over the SD Transporter. It sure sounds like quite the machine, and I love the way it looks. Have either of you actually heard what it can do? Two grand for that sucker….

I have the SD transporter feeding a 2 channel Linn Artikulat system for an audio only application just like you described. I will never buy a real CD player. 2 audio dealers have been by to hear it and both were convinced that digital streaming was here to stay after an audition. One was an old school analog turntable guy and the other was a audiophile store owner that doesn't sell this type of stuff. Neither had reason to like it, but both admitted it sounded good enough to change their attitude about it.

My best advice is to obviously go the streaming approach, but don't pay too much for ripping and hard drives as everyone else has pointed out. The player should be ethernet in, audio jacks out.

Edit: I bought the Duet so I could put the receiver player in my HT and use the Squeezebox Controller throughout the home. The real purpose for the remote was so that I could hide my entire 2 channel audio rig in a closed cabinet while still having a graphical remote that showed me everything. I sometimes use my laptop too, but it makes noise which of course is a no no in the listening room.

Good luck!

Oh yeah….NAS – Network Attached Storage UGGGG!!! My head’s swimming now.

But now that I’m thinking about the two methods for storage (Server / NAS), are there advantages of using one over the other?

In regards to my monitor question, yes, I meant a monitor at the two channel rig location without the need for a PC or laptop. Is that possible? As I think about it, I realize it’s as stupid question and not possible (at least I don’t know how it could be possible).

I do have a laptop that I use strictly for firmware downloads and my display calibration software. I reckon I could always use that for this purpose.

Well, without getting into real technical details (because I don't think that's what you're really looking for), think of the NAS as a hard drive, or collection of multiple drives, that acts only to store (and back-up) files...and then is attached to your network, so you can access the files; network attached storage. I previously used the ReadyNAS NV+ (previously made by Infrant, now by Netgear) and while it's a great product, and about as user-friendly as an NAS is likely to get, I prefer the HP Server I moved to.

A Server does the same as an NAS, but also runs an OS (I guess some NAS run, or can run Linux, but to my knowledge nothing the common man can make use of); in the case of the HP MSS (MediaSmart Server) the new Windows Home Server. I like WHS because it has the familiar Windows GUI (keep in mind, noobies...you don't hook a monitor or a keyboard and mouse up to it...you connect to it remotely, from your main pc, if you need to...but you usually just access it through built-in shares, or folders that hold your files) and HP has some nice, "family" features, like PhotoShare hosting, for pics, and a smart back-up system that is friendlier, and more useful, in some ways, than a standard RAID config.

CD

P.S. Btw, you can do a monitor in a location without the pc...but you'd need a really long VGA (monitor) cable. I have clients that need to do it, but I doubt it's what you have in mind.

I have the SD transporter feeding a 2 channel Linn Artikulat system for an audio only application just like you described. I will never buy a real CD player. 2 audio dealers have been by to hear it and both were convinced that digital streaming was here to stay after an audition. One was an old school analog turntable guy and the other was a audiophile store owner that doesn't sell this type of stuff. Neither had reason to like it, but both admitted it sounded good enough to change their attitude about it.

My best advice is to obviously go the streaming approach, but don't pay too much for ripping and hard drives as everyone else has pointed out. The player should be ethernet in, audio jacks out.

Edit: I bought the Duet so I could put the receiver player in my HT and use the Squeezebox Controller throughout the home. The real purpose for the remote was so that I could hide my entire 2 channel audio rig in a closed cabinet while still having a graphical remote that showed me everything. I sometimes use my laptop too, but it makes noise which of course is a no no in the listening room.

Good luck!

Thomsens, thanks for sharing your thoughts about the Transporter. I am not trying to deter anyone who thinks it is worth the price of admission. I just think it's worth pointing out, for anyone in this thread who might be considering it and not familiar with the extraordinary Linn line, that your Artikulat system is likely a high 5-figure rig ($30k?).

I guess my point is, those with more modest systems might not hear the differences between a Transporter and the less-expensive front-ends, like the SBC and Duet Receiver, especially when paired with a decent external DAC.

I'm am curious: have you been able to do any A/B between the Transporter and any of the other Squeeze devices?

Thanks,
CD

Oh yeah….NAS – Network Attached Storage UGGGG!!! My head’s swimming now.

But now that I’m thinking about the two methods for storage (Server / NAS), are there advantages of using one over the other?

In regards to my monitor question, yes, I meant a monitor at the two channel rig location without the need for a PC or laptop. Is that possible? As I think about it, I realize it’s as stupid question and not possible (at least I don’t know how it could be possible).

I do have a laptop that I use strictly for firmware downloads and my display calibration software. I reckon I could always use that for this purpose.

If you'd like to use the computer as a dedicated music PC, that is definitely an option (and one that doesn't involve buying Sonos or SB.

Again, I'm not sure about the Duet, as I owned a Squeezebox, but the Sonos system has a decent screen and I've had many a guest add songs to the queue. You should go to www.sonos.com and use their "how it works" or onscreen demo thingy - it is pretty much dead on accurate and let's you navigate around on screen just as you would on the controller (same size too, I think...).

I think the Duet has a nice screen and is easy to navigate as well, but I don't know what internet based demo they have, etc.

Again, the Squeezebox line is great, and I think you'll be happy with either one. The reason I lean towards Sonos for you is ease of setup. I think of Sonos as a mac (closed system, intuitive, more plug-n-play, more expensive, multi-zone is fantastic) and Squeezebox as Linux (open source, more individually customizable, requires a little more setup, less expensive, multi-zone available but not as easily varied in zone selection/combination). Each has their place and each is a strong value, but you need to know yourself and what you want out of it to maximize it's value to you.

Again, I owned both and the SB was very fun for me, but I am happier with Sonos because my wife loves it too.

Thomsens, thanks for sharing your thoughts about the Transporter. I am not trying to deter anyone who thinks it is worth the price of admission. I just think it's worth pointing out, for anyone in this thread who might be considering it and not familiar with the extraordinary Linn line, that your Artikulat system is likely a high 5-figure rig ($30k?).

I guess my point is, those with more modest systems might not hear the differences between a Transporter and the less-expensive front-ends, like the SBC and Duet Receiver, especially when paired with a decent external DAC.

I'm am curious: have you been able to do any A/B between the Transporter and any of the other Squeeze devices?

Thanks,
CD

Totally agree with your points - it's a revealing system. My point in mentioning that was merely to point out that the transporter can hang in a good system using it's own DAC, not to suggest anything else. I'm actually quite skeptical of the audiophile game personally. I believe that the SB3 with a good DAC will be indistinguishable from the Transporter or even a good CD player for that matter. I have a crappy Samsung DVD player feeding the DAC in my Bryston pre-amp and I can't really tell the difference from that vs. the Transporter either.

I did get a chance to A/B the Linn Sondek CD (reference CD player) vs. the Linn Klimax DS ($18K) streaming device and I think I could hear a slight difference there. While I might hear a difference between the Transporter and the Klimax, I doubt I'd think it was worth it (9x). Especially given how powerful the SqueezeCenter sw is (DLNA for Linn is a whole other subject).

Just to keep the barbs from coming in...I've never had a completely controlled A/B test, so my results aren't really valid to scientists or audiophiles. But, since I can't tell the difference under normal conditions that's valid enough for me. The transporter looks cool. That's why I bought it. And it would be odd to splurge for the speakers and then get an SB3 for my source. For those who don't know, the transporter does allow you to use it's DAC for another external device as well. So, you could hook your cheap CD player up to it via SPIDF and avoid buying any extra DAC or a fancy CD player.

mdrew

If you plan on having a screen at the same location as your stereo, why go the Squeeze/Sonos route? Just buy a small PC or a laptop, and use a music manager like MediaMonkey?

Well....I did just that. I found an old Toshiba 460CDT (Pentium 1; 64MB RAM; 2 GB hard drive!!) sitting in my closet. I loaded Windows 2000 and Media Monkey on it, plugged an external drive into a USB 2.0 Cardbus card that I had lying around and attached the whole mess to my office stereo. The software took a while to load, the screen was slow to resolve, but once the music started, it sounded pretty good. Would I be safe to assume that running a music player on an ancient PC doesn't use too much of the PC's resources? The only "moving parts" would be the FLAC files on the external hard drive.

This will do until I decide between the Sonos and the Logitech........

Paul

The OP raises a good topic - the lack of an off-the-shelf easy to use digital audio server. I find it hard to believe that none of the major CE companies have gotten very far into this, or done it right. Harman Kardon has announced a new media server, the DMC-1000, but even with their mass production capability it still lists for $3,000, has a relatively small HDD, and lacks the convenient user interface I would want. It also plays video, which like the OP I am not interested in. Why is it so hard for someone to make a good reliable digital audio server that does not require all the gimmickry of the DIY approach. Just give me something that stores my CDs in lossless format and plays them back whenever I make a selection from a digital display. Sounds pretty simple but no seems to get it right. The problem (IMO) is that most of what is out there now was created by computer geeks, not audio engineers, and they naturally tend to think in terms of computers systems, routers, wireless, internet access, downloads, and so on, most of which is not important or even desirable for many audiophiles. If computer geeks designed our TVs we would have a separate display screen connected by a router to a network PC processor that digitized everything, receiving signals downloaded from the internet. And they would crash constantly.

There is something I would like that seems near perfect discussed in the current issue of The Absolute Sound - but I forget the name (sorry, getting too old). It uses a 15 or 17 inch LCD to display and access all your musical/video files. Unfortunately it costs about $6 grand, but many audiophiles pay that much or more for a CD player, DAC, or preamp.

....Why is it so hard for someone to make a good reliable digital audio server that does not require all the gimmickry of the DIY approach. Just give me something that stores my CDs in lossless format and plays them back whenever I make a selection from a digital display. Sounds pretty simple but no seems to get it right.

I couldn't agree more!

R

I hear what you are saying, but I think most people would miss the internet radio feature. Its great to have thousanda of radio stations from all over the world to choose from. It does take a bit of reading to get a syastem together.

If you want simple, get a Sonos and a NAS. You just have to plug the NAS and the Sonos box into your computer network and you are done.

The OP raises a good topic - the lack of an off-the-shelf easy to use digital audio server. I find it hard to believe that none of the major CE companies have gotten very far into this, or done it right. Harman Kardon has announced a new media server, the DMC-1000, but even with their mass production capability it still lists for $3,000, has a relatively small HDD, and lacks the convenient user interface I would want. It also plays video, which like the OP I am not interested in. Why is it so hard for someone to make a good reliable digital audio server that does not require all the gimmickry of the DIY approach. Just give me something that stores my CDs in lossless format and plays them back whenever I make a selection from a digital display. Sounds pretty simple but no seems to get it right. The problem (IMO) is that most of what is out there now was created by computer geeks, not audio engineers, and they naturally tend to think in terms of computers systems, routers, wireless, internet access, downloads, and so on, most of which is not important or even desirable for many audiophiles. If computer geeks designed our TVs we would have a separate display screen connected by a router to a network PC processor that digitized everything, receiving signals downloaded from the internet. And they would crash constantly.

There is something I would like that seems near perfect discussed in the current issue of The Absolute Sound - but I forget the name (sorry, getting too old). It uses a 15 or 17 inch LCD to display and access all your musical/video files. Unfortunately it costs about $6 grand, but many audiophiles pay that much or more for a CD player, DAC, or preamp.

It is an interesting question, and trust me...I'm in your camp and feel your pain. But if you really think about it...and I have...it isn't as simple as it might seem. Let's take a look at the components of a perfect audio streamer and the challenges they present:

OK, if it's me, and I'll only speak for myself as an avid audiophile and digital streaming enthusiast, we don't want to have to rip the CDs from a PC, so our unit needs a transport. Ok, no problem there, but to rip you'll need a processor and board, and some software for ripping. OK, can do, but what format do you want to store in? MP2, MP3, Lame, Musepack, Ogg Vorbis, AAC, FLAC, WAV? I would think it would be hard to build a unit that would give you as much flexibility as we are used to with independant, PC-based software. OK, I hear ya...we make a compromise and pick a couple that'll get ya by. Like Olive looks like it's chosen a range of MP3s, FLAC, and WAV. OK, I see the reasoning: good but lossy, lossless and compressed, or the whole shebang, but how do you think AAC users feel about that?

OK, so you've got a transport, the hardware and software to rip locally to the unit, and a small selection of formats to rip to...how are you going to store them? OK, we need an on-board hdd. How much space do you need? 250, 500, 750, 1T? Most of these machines will only accomodate a single drive, so how big can we go? 1Ts can still be a little risky, hot, noisy, etc. Even at 750 or 1T, I'm going to run out of space. OK, so now you need to find a way for the unit to accept additional drives.

OK, I'll spare you, as I think you see where I'm going with this; I haven't even talked about tagging, retrieval, organization, dac, or backup yet. It really does need to be part audio cd player, part pc; we don't want to have to have a TV or monitor on to use it, so it needs an LCD remote and/or LCD built into the unit itself. I think most of us will want it to have an ethernet port, and allow for streaming from a network or the Internet; I mean there really is a lot involved, and none of the major CEs are tooled-up for mass production of such a unit. And frankly, the market is still probably minusculey small; sure, the percentage of posters in the Digital Media Servers & Content Streamers who want this product is probably 95%, but of the general populas?

So we have small interests, building these machines, probably largely by hand for now, and that means outrageous costs. And it also means, as someone pointed out, that most of them either have a computer bent, and aren't particularly audiophile friendly, or are built by audio companies that don't know jack$hit about building a computer for under $3,000.

FWIW, in my opinion, the 2 machines that are probably the closest right now, to the perfect all-in-one-magic-box are the game consoles, PS3 and XBox (w/XBMC). I know, I know...no one wants this sitting in their rack with the other 5-figure equipment, but that isn't stopping videophiles from accepting the fact that the PS3 is the best BD player on the market right now.

I love my Squeezebox devices for music...for now...but it does mean audio and video on different systems. If I was deadset on a one-box solution, and the PS3 had a Duet-style remote, it would sleigh the dragon (through an external DAC of course :D)

CD

I hear what you are saying, but I think most people would miss the internet radio feature. Its great to have thousanda of radio stations from all over the world to choose from. It does take a bit of reading to get a syastem together.

If you want simple, get a Sonos and a NAS. You just have to plug the NAS and the Sonos box into your computer network and you are done.

I'll probably go the Sonos and NAS route, as I don't care about Internet radio.

Roberta

I'll probably go the Sonos and NAS route, as I don't care about Internet radio.

Roberta

Don't know about others, but Internet radio works quite nicely on my Sonos, as do Internet based services such as Rhapsody, Sirius, Napster, Pandora, etc.

Agree that Sonos/NAS combo is the closest thing to plug-n-play in this space as you're going to get.

Agree that Sonos/NAS combo is the closest thing to plug-n-play in this space as you're going to get.

I'm virtually convinced that the Sono/NAS route is the one for me.

I really appreciate all of the help that everyone has provided!

Roberta

It is an interesting question, and trust me...I'm in your camp and feel your pain. But if you really think about it...and I have...
It's a wonder that so many more aren't in the same situation that we are...I've got upwards of 1200 discs, I'm an audio fanatic more than anything else, and I'd love to invest in a system that is capable of storing and distributing high-quality audio in a user-friendly context. I don't necessarily want to have to fire up a PC or laptop or turn on a display to navigate through menus. We've got Cat-5e and wireless throughout our house, but I'd love to have the capability of accessing our collection in various locations.

I'm really surprised that more mfr's haven't addressed/jumped-on this...

Jason.

CDLehner...as an aside, it's obvious that you're fairly well versed in the options out there and the hardware/software end of said options. Would you consider helping us put together a reasonable system/setup in trade for some other valuable commodity (ie-beer, oatmeal, Doritos, etc...)? I'd happily compensate you for your efforts if you could aide me in assembling such a rig...

Jason

I was in the same boat with the mega-changers. I had 2 Sony 400 disc changers which were controlled via a PC with a device called a Slink-E. It was a sweet setup, as the PC allowed easy setup of playlists and scrolling through the music. The Slink-E had the capability of controlling 16 mega-changers.
But - I had to have the PC turned on whenever I wanted to run the mega-changers, and the wife wasn't too keen on the setup. Now I have all of the CDs ripped to FLAC and the wife is happier.

I was in the same boat with the mega-changers. I had 2 Sony 400 disc changers which were controlled via a PC with a device called a Slink-E. It was a sweet setup, as the PC allowed easy setup of playlists and scrolling through the music. The Slink-E had the capability of controlling 16 mega-changers.

I'm in the same boat....I have two Sony 400 CD changers and am using the SAVR3 with a PC. Great for controlling music when sitting in my home office, but not too convenient when in the basement or family room and I want to listen to music.

The idea of converting hundreds or thousands of CDs to FLAC files makes me woozy....

Roberta

CDLehner...as an aside, it's obvious that you're fairly well versed in the options out there and the hardware/software end of said options. Would you consider helping us put together a reasonable system/setup in trade for some other valuable commodity (ie-beer, oatmeal, Doritos, etc...)? I'd happily compensate you for your efforts if you could aide me in assembling such a rig...

Jason

Jason, I do have a good bit of experience (v2.0 on my network, wired and wireless, and I have successfully streamed audio and video using a variety of products, including SB3, Duet, MG-35, PS3, and XBMC) and strong opinions about what does and doesn't work for me. And also, I think I could put myself in someone else's shoes and suggest a system that might work nicely for them. However, there are lots of options out there, and I haven't tried them all.

I'd be happy to walk you, step-by-step, through setting up a system...and would require no beer, oatmeal, nor Dorito for such a thing (if you can put your hands on a real Cohiba, we might talk :D But you might want to post the project to the group, so as to elicit several opinions and make the best choice from among them. If not, feel free to PM me and I'll do what I can.

CD

The OP raises a good topic - the lack of an off-the-shelf easy to use digital audio server. I find it hard to believe that none of the major CE companies have gotten very far into this, or done it right. Harman Kardon has announced a new media server, the DMC-1000, but even with their mass production capability it still lists for $3,000, has a relatively small HDD, and lacks the convenient user interface I would want. It also plays video, which like the OP I am not interested in. Why is it so hard for someone to make a good reliable digital audio server that does not require all the gimmickry of the DIY approach. Just give me something that stores my CDs in lossless format and plays them back whenever I make a selection from a digital display. Sounds pretty simple but no seems to get it right. The problem (IMO) is that most of what is out there now was created by computer geeks, not audio engineers, and they naturally tend to think in terms of computers systems, routers, wireless, internet access, downloads, and so on, most of which is not important or even desirable for many audiophiles. If computer geeks designed our TVs we would have a separate display screen connected by a router to a network PC processor that digitized everything, receiving signals downloaded from the internet. And they would crash constantly.

There is something I would like that seems near perfect discussed in the current issue of The Absolute Sound - but I forget the name (sorry, getting too old). It uses a 15 or 17 inch LCD to display and access all your musical/video files. Unfortunately it costs about $6 grand, but many audiophiles pay that much or more for a CD player, DAC, or preamp.

How larges is the target market? If your CD-Megachangers can be accessed / read via the PC, it should be a matter of simple automated scripting the FLAC conversion of all the stored CDs.

http://www.mpcclub.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=600

Check out the iTab3gHD

http://www.mpcclub.com/banner_log.php?id=5095

It might be the automater you were looking for..

http://www.mpcclub.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=600

Check out the iTab3gHD

http://www.mpcclub.com/banner_log.php?id=5095

It might be the automater you were looking for..

Well, this thread has sort of split in two: the OPs post about his current mega-changers and what comes next, and others talking about the alternative of digital streaming. Going back and looking at the OP, the reason for the decision is his 2 400-disc changers are full and he's trying to decide on yet a 3rd changer, or the switch to streaming.

Even with a slick tag and access system, there's the cost of continuing to invest in old and s--l--o--w technology. I understand the merits of trying to work with what you already have (after all, you paid for them), but if ever the time was right for the switch it's now. I've personally never worked off of a megachanger, precisely because I had universally heard they were clanky and slow, but I have a feeling that if you had access to any track in your 1200-CD catalog at the mere press of a button, as opposed to what you experience now (and is likely to get even slower by adding a 3rd needed changer into the mix) you'd never look back with any regret on the change.

CD

CD,

Instead of buying the HP server, I am playing with the idea of building one. This may sound silly, but I’d like the server to be on EQ rack and I’d like it to blend in with the other components to some degree. I’d slide one of the changers off the shelf it resides on now and slide the server onto that shelf. What all is in one of these servers?

CD,

Instead of buying the HP server, I am playing with the idea of building one. This may sound silly, but I’d like the server to be on EQ rack and I’d like it to blend in with the other components to some degree. I’d slide one of the changers off the shelf it resides on now and slide the server onto that shelf. What all is in one of these servers?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_server

As for ideas about cases, drives, and other components, etc., I suggest you check out the HTPC forum here. There are lots of discussions and ideas there.

CD,

Instead of buying the HP server, I am playing with the idea of building one. This may sound silly, but I’d like the server to be on EQ rack and I’d like it to blend in with the other components to some degree. I’d slide one of the changers off the shelf it resides on now and slide the server onto that shelf. What all is in one of these servers?

Mdrew, I'm not sure I totally understand your question. A rack server just has a different case, but the same functionality as any server; it'll have a certain number of hdd drive bays, some kind of server OS, probably some kind of RAID structure for back-up. Um, my experience, is since rack and blade servers are usually hidden away and for commercial use, they have stout power supplies and noisy, but effective fans, etc.

Again, I'm not sure what you mean by EQ rack (equipment?), but if the rack is in the room you'll have to look for a particularly quiet rack server (see above).

CD

CDLehner...as an aside, it's obvious that you're fairly well versed in the options out there and the hardware/software end of said options. Would you consider helping us put together a reasonable system/setup in trade for some other valuable commodity (ie-beer, oatmeal, Doritos, etc...)? I'd happily compensate you for your efforts if you could aide me in assembling such a rig...

Jason

Jason, what did you decide to do?

CD

CD,

Instead of buying the HP server, I am playing with the idea of building one. This may sound silly, but I’d like the server to be on EQ rack and I’d like it to blend in with the other components to some degree. I’d slide one of the changers off the shelf it resides on now and slide the server onto that shelf. What all is in one of these servers?

Maybe something like this is what you're looking for
http://www.netgear.com/Products/Storage/ReadyNAS1100.aspx

CD

Maybe something like this is what you're looking for
http://www.netgear.com/Products/Storage/ReadyNAS1100.aspx

CD

the Infrant stuff is great, I have 2 of the NV+ boxes for DVD's, works well, uses less electricity then a real server (important to me)... but they are kind of pricey...

for my music/sonos setup I just use this D-link (http://www.dlink.com/products/?sec=0&pid=509) with 2 320Gb drives (they where the best $/size at the time) in raid 1... you don't need much in the way of a nas... just needs to hold one or more drives.... I like raid 1, since if one drive dies, I should be able to recover my music without re-ripping... but I also back my NAS up every now and then too... I really don't want to need to re-rip ever...
my 300 or so CD's only equal a little less then 100Gb when flac'ed even those with huge music collections would probably never need more then 1T.... but I could be wrong...

Well maybe, but I was leaning toward just buying a case building my own server. The HP servers are vertical and will not fit on me equipment rack. The rack is nothing too fancy, just some open glass shelves, but it is out in the open.

I was just looking for advice on case selection, the operating system and the other components required to build a server.

Sorry for the confusion.

I was just looking for advice on case selection, the operating system and the other components required to build a server.
I haven't followed the whole thread, what exactly do you want to run on this server?

anyway as far as components, a server is just a pc, nothing special... and not even a special PC, buy a cheap/reliable motherboard (I have always liked abit, and gigabyte seems good too), get a cheap processor and memory that fit the motherboard, and get a good power supply,good doesn't mean 100000W, just get twice what you think you'll need (I like to be conservative...)
as far as OS, that depends on what you want to do:
sonos needs nothing, so just get a cheap DLINK or some such nas, toss it in the basement/out of sight and be done...
squeezbox needs windows (or linux? I believe), any version will work well, i would go with XP pro, but that's just because i have a spare license for it... and it has more RDP options then xp home... not that it matters much...

as for cases, just search newegg (or equivalent) for 1U (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Description=1u+case&x=0&y=0), 2U (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Description=2u+case&x=0&y=0), or 4U (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Description=4u+case&x=0&y=0)etc... as for which one to get, just look for the one that looks the nicest to you... for that horrible stressful environment:p you plan on putting it in, any case will be more then adequate... as you already have a rack, I will assume you know what a U is...
edit: i just thought of one minor issue, 1U cases are extremely noisy... might make a difference on where you want it located/etc...


anyway, this is all very simple stuff, if you need help with anything, just post over in the HTPC forum here... there is a dude there with like a 40 (48?) Tb server with like 40-50 hard drives, who is always helping people... if you want to go really overboard, he is the one to ask...

this isn't the one i was thinking about, but its a good thread if you want to go wild.... BUILD LOG: 48 Terabyte Media Server (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1045086)

the Infrant stuff is great, I have 2 of the NV+ boxes for DVD's, works well, uses less electricity then a real server (important to me)... but they are kind of pricey...

for my music/sonos setup I just use this D-link (http://www.dlink.com/products/?sec=0&pid=509) with 2 320Gb drives (they where the best $/size at the time) in raid 1... you don't need much in the way of a nas... just needs to hold one or more drives.... I like raid 1, since if one drive dies, I should be able to recover my music without re-ripping... but I also back my NAS up every now and then too... I really don't want to need to re-rip ever...
my 300 or so CD's only equal a little less then 100Gb when flac'ed even those with huge music collections would probably never need more then 1T.... but I could be wrong...

SWL, the poster I was responding to was looking for a rack-mount server. That's why I pointed towards the Infrant; I had NV+s before I switched to HP MSS, and I agree the units are reliable and user-freindly...plus, most rack-mounts units are made for commercial application, so they're noisy, expensive, tech-y. I thought this unit was more consumer-based.

I don't know why the poster wants to go rack-mounted, but I figured this would be a good choice for him.

CD

SWL, the poster I was responding to was looking for a rack-mount server. That's why I pointed towards the Infrant; I had NV+s before I switched to HP MSS, and I agree the units are reliable and user-freindly...plus, most rack-mounts units are made for commercial application, so they're noisy, expensive, tech-y. I thought this unit was more consumer-based.

I don't know why the poster wants to go rack-mounted, but I figured this would be a good choice for him.

CD

actually I was agreeing with you... but they are pricey...

yea, I am not sure on the rack mount thing... if something is rack mount, that means it should be out of sight, but if its out of sight, does it really matter that it is rack mount?
they great thing about any of the music streamers is that the mass storage (the loud, hot, fans blazing away at full speed mass storage) can be located anywhere... most preferably out of sight and hearing range...
although I have come across a few "old Timers" who think that the storage is "equipment" therefore it should be proudly displayed in their equipment rack, in their listening room... wonder if that is the case here?

but then, I haven't followed the whole thread, it bounced around too much and I got dizzy from it all...

and of course there is always the sound advice in my sig...

Jason, what did you decide to do?

CD

CD...Thanks so much for the offer. I'm still very much a noob when it comes to this stuff and the more I read the more options I realize there are. I will do as you suggested and start a new thread in hopes of gathering some consensus about the best way to approach our situation and handle our needs.

Thanks again!

Jason

I am somewhat in the same boat as the OP, and have just read this entire thread. Is there a reason that nobody has mentioned an Apple solution: iTunes software, Airport Express as the receiver attached to the stereo, and iTouch as the remote?

It seems everyone who posted here assumes SD or Sonos are the only real-world ways to go. Is there something fundamentally wrong with an Apple setup?

My situation is that I have about 1200 CD's and 600 LP's I would like to put in one place. Listening will be through one of 3 stereos in the house (two of them quite revealing of garbage in). I'm in Canada, so no Rhapsody here :( But I love the idea and may go with the local Napster service.

We have ripped a few hundred individual songs to iTunes that my wife and I put on our IPod Shuffles, so the Apple route appeals to me because we are both already familiar with the software interface a little bit. Also, my kids would love to have an iTouch around to play with, so it would easily be the most versatile (and bang for the buck) controller - as long as it would actually work for the intended music purpose.

Thoughts?

It seems everyone who posted here assumes SD or Sonos are the only real-world ways to go. Is there something fundamentally wrong with an Apple setup?

I have never used a airport express, but doesn't that need a PC to send the music to?

NAS + Sonos/SD = not having to have your pc on all day (and NAS consume less power).

I am somewhat in the same boat as the OP, and have just read this entire thread. Is there a reason that nobody has mentioned an Apple solution: iTunes software, Airport Express as the receiver attached to the stereo, and iTouch as the remote?

It seems everyone who posted here assumes SD or Sonos are the only real-world ways to go. Is there something fundamentally wrong with an Apple setup?

My situation is that I have about 1200 CD's and 600 LP's I would like to put in one place. Listening will be through one of 3 stereos in the house (two of them quite revealing of garbage in). I'm in Canada, so no Rhapsody here :( But I love the idea and may go with the local Napster service.

We have ripped a few hundred individual songs to iTunes that my wife and I put on our IPod Shuffles, so the Apple route appeals to me because we are both already familiar with the software interface a little bit. Also, my kids would love to have an iTouch around to play with, so it would easily be the most versatile (and bang for the buck) controller - as long as it would actually work for the intended music purpose.

Thoughts?

The title of the thread is Music only - Mega Changer Control/FLAC options. iTunes doesn't support FLAC. When people ask me about digital media players, the first question I ask is are they starting from scratch or do they already have some files ripped. For someone starting from scratch, or already iTunes friendly, Apple is a possible way to go. But for those of us who started ripping and streaming long before iPods took hold, it's not likely to support our codecs.

CD

Ahhh, thank you. I hadn't clued in to the FLAC in the title, since the OP's current solution is a rack of CD changers, and they didn't appear restricted to any solution.

Looking around further, it is not clear to me if an Apple solution will support Napster/Rhapsody, so maybe the Apple route can not work for me. It seems I can use a software product called AirFoil to stream radio to an Airport Express, but it doesn't appear that I could control it with an iTouch, and would have to be at a PC to control iRadio's.

I need to delve further into all of this. This forum looks like a superb place to find informed people. Thanks again.

Long time no posts.....

Has anyone seen the Western Digital WD TV HD Media Player? It supports a stunning selection of codecs, including FLAC!

R

For anyone looking for a Music Server which makes ripping CDs easy for ya, check out the Ripstation http://www.ripfactory.com/ripserver.html . It works with either Sonos or Squeezebox.

Hi…..me again. Here to solicit more free advice and irritate the PC proficient individuals.

I am a computer idiot. Please feel free to talk down to me if you feel so inclined to assist me. Believe me, you will not be talking down to me and I encourage you to try. Computers and I have a mutual understanding; we detest each other.

After realizing I just can’t fight the digital music age anymore, I decided to bite the bullet and rip all my CD’s. A friend of mine told I should download EAC and rip them all to FLAC. Several months ago I started that incredibly painful venture. My last CD, number 945 was ejected with a very long sigh of relief two weeks ago. Well that’s all MY CD’s, not my girlfriend’s 300 or so soundtracks that I refuse to rip….. Oh, I also bought a 500 Gig external hard drive to store all the FLAC files on (where they currently reside).

I took the advice of many folks who offered suggestions on this thread and ordered a 1T HP media smart server, a Squeeze box Duet and for my rig, a 120 gig iPod classic and adapter that will let me use my steering wheel controls to access the iPod. The stork dropped off all this stuff yesterday.

Next week I will have a couple days to configure all this stuff. I thought this was going to be a real quick, plug the stuff in, load a disk and let Vista do its thing process, but I’ve since found out it’s not that simple. (remember, computer idiot here). Another friend told me I will have to use “remote desktop”. Uh…..I know nothing about this remote desktop thing…

Another possible snag is that I do not have a wireless network. I have a Cat5 wired network. The advanced user guide for the Duet says that I will have to run a bridged set up, but also mentions that this is not the preferred method….dangit.

If it wouldn’t be asking too much, can someone really patient walk me through the process of configuring all this? And should I change out my router (a Linksys four port hard wired router) with a wireless router? The router I’m using is probably four or five years old. I don’t know off hand what model it is. I also have an 8 port switch plugged into the router for the home network. Don’t ask me how I managed to get the network to work….. I don’t remember exactly, but it did involve a lot of cussing and plugging cables into different ports till it worked, well it mostly works anyway.

Seeing how I’m starting from scratch, I think this is good opportunity to set it all up correctly from the get go. If I try to muddle through it all, I’m bound to hose it up. Considering the pain ripping all those CD's caused me, I REALLY don't wont to mess this up...... Yes, I am scared and I'm not afraid of anythig with hair on (as my dad used to say).

You do not need any more equipment. In fact I would say your have the perfect setup. The Duet controller will talk to your squeezbox wirelessly, without needing a wireless network. This link http://www.wegotserved.co.uk/2008/04/21/review-logitech-squeezebox-duet-and-squeezeserver/ should help you, they explain the setup for a system just like yours. Start setting up the server, and making sure you can access the files form you PC, then move on to setting up the squeezebox.

Thanks, but the link doesn't work.

I just tried it, it works for me. Did you click on it? Here it is again

"http://www.wegotserved.co.uk/2008/04/21/review-logitech-squeezebox-duet-and-squeezeserver/"

malaugh, Thanks site was helpful was on last night about midnight.
was a great help Thanks again Silver-Fox

Hello. I want to begin to play lossless audio music from CD rips and Music Giants downloads to my home theater but I'm new to the computer part of things. I have a Sony Vaio VGN-FW235J notebook that uses Windows Media Player and I will purchase a Squeezebox Duet. I don't know all the compatibility problems I may be facing, nor do I know how to achieve Lossless. Can you guys turn me in the right direction to begin this process?

The title of the thread is Music only - Mega Changer Control/FLAC options. iTunes doesn't support FLAC.

Not out of the box, but it can be enabled with relative ease. See:

http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=5126901#5126901

Hi…..me again. Here to solicit more free advice and irritate the PC proficient individuals.

I am a computer idiot. Please feel free to talk down to me if you feel so inclined to assist me. Believe me, you will not be talking down to me and I encourage you to try. Computers and I have a mutual understanding; we detest each other.

After realizing I just can’t fight the digital music age anymore, I decided to bite the bullet and rip all my CD’s. A friend of mine told I should download EAC and rip them all to FLAC. Several months ago I started that incredibly painful venture. My last CD, number 945 was ejected with a very long sigh of relief two weeks ago. Well that’s all MY CD’s, not my girlfriend’s 300 or so soundtracks that I refuse to rip….. Oh, I also bought a 500 Gig external hard drive to store all the FLAC files on (where they currently reside).

I took the advice of many folks who offered suggestions on this thread and ordered a 1T HP media smart server, a Squeeze box Duet and for my rig, a 120 gig iPod classic and adapter that will let me use my steering wheel controls to access the iPod. The stork dropped off all this stuff yesterday.

Next week I will have a couple days to configure all this stuff. I thought this was going to be a real quick, plug the stuff in, load a disk and let Vista do its thing process, but I’ve since found out it’s not that simple. (remember, computer idiot here). Another friend told me I will have to use “remote desktop”. Uh…..I know nothing about this remote desktop thing…

Another possible snag is that I do not have a wireless network. I have a Cat5 wired network. The advanced user guide for the Duet says that I will have to run a bridged set up, but also mentions that this is not the preferred method….dangit.

If it wouldn’t be asking too much, can someone really patient walk me through the process of configuring all this? And should I change out my router (a Linksys four port hard wired router) with a wireless router? The router I’m using is probably four or five years old. I don’t know off hand what model it is. I also have an 8 port switch plugged into the router for the home network. Don’t ask me how I managed to get the network to work….. I don’t remember exactly, but it did involve a lot of cussing and plugging cables into different ports till it worked, well it mostly works anyway.

Seeing how I’m starting from scratch, I think this is good opportunity to set it all up correctly from the get go. If I try to muddle through it all, I’m bound to hose it up. Considering the pain ripping all those CD's caused me, I REALLY don't wont to mess this up...... Yes, I am scared and I'm not afraid of anythig with hair on (as my dad used to say).

MDrew, why don't you PM me. If you don't mind taking things one step at a time, while we e-mail back and forth, I can most likely get you up and going. I have an MSS, and several Squeezeboxes (as well as other devices) and I've helped other members on here with their set-up.

If you want to go the group route, that's cool too. I would just suggest one or the other; you get too many cooks stirring that pot, and it makes things more difficult.

CD

Hello. I want to begin to play lossless audio music from CD rips and Music Giants downloads to my home theater but I'm new to the computer part of things. I have a Sony Vaio VGN-FW235J notebook that uses Windows Media Player and I will purchase a Squeezebox Duet. I don't know all the compatibility problems I may be facing, nor do I know how to achieve Lossless. Can you guys turn me in the right direction to begin this process?

Lossless simply refers to the format you rip your CDs to. For example, MP3 is one format...it is loss-y, meaning it compresses information when you rip it, then uncompresses it during playback, but the uncompressed information isn't exactly the same as the original. The advantage of such a file is it is compatiable with many devices, and has a small file size for storage, but many believe the sound to be inferior.

Lossless files on the other hand either offer no compression, or compression in a way that keeps the exact information intact on playback. FLAC, WMA, and Apple (among others) offer lossless formats. Do you know what software you plan on ripping with? Your ripping software will offer you a choice of formats you want to rip to...and that's how you achieve lossless.

CD

Is there a reason that nobody has mentioned an Apple solution: iTunes software, Airport Express as the receiver attached to the stereo, and iTouch as the remote?

I'm about to pull the trigger on the following:

Apple TV (about $230) - which will then get xbmc installed on it (see here for more details - http://xbmc.org/wiki/?title=XBMC_for_Mac_on_Apple_TV)

From there you can add any sources that exist on your network, or the internet. XBMC can play literally any codec (FLAC included), and has a slicker interface than most commercial solutions on the market today.

Add to that the HDMI/optical audio out on the Apple TV and you're golden.

The trick is to make sure you divorce your storage from your decoder.

I'm about to pull the trigger on the following:

Apple TV (about $230) - which will then get xbmc installed on it (see here for more details - http://xbmc.org/wiki/?title=XBMC_for_Mac_on_Apple_TV)

From there you can add any sources that exist on your network, or the internet. XBMC can play literally any codec (FLAC included), and has a slicker interface than most commercial solutions on the market today.

Add to that the HDMI/optical audio out on the Apple TV and you're golden.

The trick is to make sure you divorce your storage from your decoder.

That's an intriguing combo. ATV gets some really good feedback, and when I found out it could run XBMC, that was very interesting. XBMC rocks! I mean, I just use it for SD streaming in a bedroom system, and I wayyy underutilize it, but for what it does it does so intuitively and easily...it's great. I bet you'll have a lot of luck with that.

CD

MDrew, why don't you PM me. If you don't mind taking things one step at a time, while we e-mail back and forth, I can most likely get you up and going. I have an MSS, and several Squeezeboxes (as well as other devices) and I've helped other members on here with their set-up.

If you want to go the group route, that's cool too. I would just suggest one or the other; you get too many cooks stirring that pot, and it makes things more difficult.

CD

CD, thanks for the offer. I ended up getting it all to work. I'm dealing with messed up tags right now, but other than that, all's good.

Lossless simply refers to the format you rip your CDs to. For example, MP3 is one format...it is loss-y, meaning it compresses information when you rip it, then uncompresses it during playback, but the uncompressed information isn't exactly the same as the original. The advantage of such a file is it is compatiable with many devices, and has a small file size for storage, but many believe the sound to be inferior.

Lossless files on the other hand either offer no compression, or compression in a way that keeps the exact information intact on playback. FLAC, WMA, and Apple (among others) offer lossless formats. Do you know what software you plan on ripping with? Your ripping software will offer you a choice of formats you want to rip to...and that's how you achieve lossless.

CD
Thanks CD. I downloaded Exact Auto Copy. I'm still a week or two at the most till I get the Duet, so I have some time for studying and researching to try to better grasp how this all works. For example, since I downloaded EAC, I don't really know what to do with it in the meantime :o.

Thanks CD. I downloaded Exact Auto Copy. I'm still a week or two at the most till I get the Duet, so I have some time for studying and researching to try to better grasp how this all works. For example, since I downloaded EAC, I don't really know what to do with it in the meantime :o.

Lose it; eac used to be the gold standard...now it's dbpoweramp. Same result...much easier to use.

CD

I keep hearing about this dbpoweramp. I used EAC for ripping all my CD’s. It was a very, very painful process. It took no less than ten minutes per CD. Now I’m going back through everything with Foobar to fix screwed up tags and to re-rip the FLAC files to MP3 for use in my iPod.

I am hopeful that dbpoweramp will have support for adding album art and fix tagging errors automatically in the future.

I keep hearing about this dbpoweramp. I used EAC for ripping all my CD’s. It was a very, very painful process. It took no less than ten minutes per CD. Now I’m going back through everything with Foobar to fix screwed up tags and to re-rip the FLAC files to MP3 for use in my iPod.

I am hopeful that dbpoweramp will have support for adding album art and fix tagging errors automatically in the future.

It does.

CD

Lose it; eac used to be the gold standard...now it's dbpoweramp. Same result...much easier to use.

CD
I would, but according to my experience that... wait a minute... I don't have any experience. So that won't be a problem. I'll dump EAC and load up your advice. Let me ask, I'll be able to rip some of my CDs, store them in my laptop, and even play them on some headphones while I wait to get a Duet or is there other things I can do in the meantime?

It does.

CD

Oh? Cool. I thought it was being talked about, but not available yet. How about doing batch conversion and album art?

I would, but according to my experience that... wait a minute... I don't have any experience. So that won't be a problem. I'll dump EAC and load up your advice. Let me ask, I'll be able to rip some of my CDs, store them in my laptop, and even play them on some headphones while I wait to get a Duet or is there other things I can do in the meantime?

Download SqueezeCenter ahead of time, rip a few CDs to practice and get tagging straight, etc...and yes, if you want to play them back through SC and listen on headphones...feel free.

CD

Download SqueezeCenter ahead of time, rip a few CDs to practice and get tagging straight, etc...and yes, if you want to play them back through SC and listen on headphones...feel free.

CD

I like that idea. I didn't realize that option was available. After I play around with it, maybe I can put together an intelligent (at least relevant) question about tagging :confused:. Thanks.

I'm finding your comments extremely helpful as I'm going through some of the same considerations as to how to best buy a system. I had been thinking of Olive but am now looking more at SD and Sonos.

My hope is that I will be able to rip both FLAC and MP3 simultaneously, so I can use FLAC in the home system and MP3 on a portable device. Is that feasible? Will it be straightforward to access the "right" version for each use?

Thanks,

I'm finding your comments extremely helpful as I'm going through some of the same considerations as to how to best buy a system. I had been thinking of Olive but am now looking more at SD and Sonos.

My hope is that I will be able to rip both FLAC and MP3 simultaneously, so I can use FLAC in the home system and MP3 on a portable device. Is that feasible? Will it be straightforward to access the "right" version for each use?

Thanks,

David, IMO...and humbly, I have been streaming audio for many years now, and have been around the block...a device like the Olive is a complete waste. You won't have a problem keeping your FLACs and MP3s straight, just different folders for different files; and for devices like the SD and Sonos you point them at your music folder, so you would just point them where the FLACs lie and never worry about them playing an MP3.

I can't say if there is a product that will do simultaneous rips (I wouldn't think so, but couldn't swear), but I know a product like the dbpoweramp does not; you'd have to do 2 rips if you wanted an FLAC and MP3 version. Again, IMHO, the dbpoweramp is now the new gold standard of rippers (replacing the somewhat complicated EAC); if you did find another ripper that did 2 rips at once, I would still consider the slower method with the dbpoweramp; the trade-off in quality of your rips might be well worth the time.

PM me if you have some basic questions on getting started; I'd be happy to help, but we don't want to bore everyone else :D

CD

Many thanks to everyone that helped in this discussion. I've been at the same crossroads as the OP and the first piece of my Sonos system will be delivered to me tommorow. I bought a ZP90 and have Cat5e right by my rack so I'll wire it in to my network and make the digital connection to my AVR. I have my zones set up with my AVR so I'll just be using the Sonos as a front end to the flac files I recently ripped using dbpoweramp. We'll be initially using an iPod Touch as our controller and if I can listen to my cd collection without actually using the discs and maintain the sq I'll be tickled pink. This thread has been a tremendous help to me and dbpoweramp is about as easy to use as anyone could ask for.

My hope is that I will be able to rip both FLAC and MP3 simultaneously, so I can use FLAC in the home system and MP3 on a portable device. Is that feasible?
check out Ripfactory (http://www.ripfactory.com) they claim it can do the lossy & lossless at the same time...
or maybe MyMovies for WHS (if you have a WHS box), it at least does easy auto rips....

check out Ripfactory (http://www.ripfactory.com) they claim it can do the lossy & lossless at the same time...
or maybe MyMovies for WHS (if you have a WHS box), it at least does easy auto rips....

I saw the website and the product. Has anyone had experience with Ripstation? It looks interesting but is from the UK, and the website is oriented towards selling to dealers, not individuals.

My hope is that I will be able to rip both FLAC and MP3 simultaneously, so I can use FLAC in the home system and MP3 on a portable device. Is that feasible? Will it be straightforward to access the "right" version for each use?

Thanks,

I am doing the same thing. I was wondering if DBPoweramp would rip simultaneously. CD clarified that……..bummer.

However, it’s not really all that painful to rip CD’s twice. I do as CD mentions; put the MP3’s in their own folder for iTunes and the FLAC rips in their own folder for Squeeze Center.

One thing I would like to figure out, but haven’t had the time to do, is figure out how to use iTunes to generate play lists, and then import them into Squeeze Center. I use the Genius function and love it. But as I stated, I use MP3’s for my iPod, so all the play lists I build for it are in my MP3 folder.

Some misinformation on dbpoweramp in this thread, it will multi encode just fine, you just have to install the multi encoder plug in.

Some misinformation on dbpoweramp in this thread, it will multi encode just fine, you just have to install the multi encoder plug in.

Good lookin' out JF!

CD

hmm... the more I look at the dbpowreamp stuff, the more I feel silly clinging to EAC just cause I am used to it...

anyway, anyone seen RipNAS (http://www.ripnas.com/)? it comes as either a complete (although kind of, but not horribly $$) NAS, or a supply your own hardware version...

looks cool and it can do the simultaneous rips...

hmm... the more I look at the dbpowreamp stuff, the more I feel silly clinging to EAC just cause I am used to it...

Nah, don't feel silly SWL. My understanding is once EAC is dialed-in just right, it's simple enough and can't be beat. It's just that dbpoweramp is much easier to get started with, and just as good. So for people starting out, or using anything other than EAC, sure, it's a good move. But if you've got EAC set-up just right, and you're used to it like you say, no need to feel silly.

CD

well, with eac I never could get the convert to FLAC part to work 100%, so I rip to wav then use dbconverter to convert to FLAC, and I need to manually get cover art... and then manually update the tags...

the dbripper (or at least their ripNAS) looks like it does all that for you

well, with eac I never could get the convert to FLAC part to work 100%, so I rip to wav then use dbconverter to convert to FLAC, and I need to manually get cover art... and then manually update the tags...

the dbripper (or at least their ripNAS) looks like it does all that for you

Oh...well then yeah...that sounds a little busy :D; maybe dbpoweramp is worth a try for you.

CD