Now that I'm using one as an alarm clock radio I'm inclined to agree! Just something simple. A small class D amp chip like the Tripath TAA2009 - nice-sounding but cheap, 9W/ch at 89% efficiency, good for battery power consumption and average output power for a "boombox". Good (but inexpensive) speakers in the 4" range, with possibly small tweeters. Simple but classy aesthetics like a Tivoli radio. A remote wouldn't be required but there would need to be some sort of control buttons.
For this use, I wouldn't be interested in portability/battery power so much as built-in/included speakers and an amp. And yes, there's no need for digital or analog outs. As you indicate, we have the full-blown SB3 for "critical" listening. So Slim can do away with the S/PDIF circuitry, quartz timers and high-end DAC. BRB wrote: > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > A poll associated with this post was created, to vote and see the > results, please visit http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=17185 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Question: Who wants a Squeezebox Boombox? > > - I'm interested. > - No, thanks. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Just to add my voice to the forum: I would definitely buy a squeezebox > with integrated amp and speakers. I have a SB3 connected to my stereo, > but, as many have said in this forum, I don't want to have to get > speakers + amp + power supplies for every room. > > I'll use EnochLight's post as a start for mine (sorry about that 8-). > > EnochLight Wrote: >> [...] runs on batteries (optionally). >> > > I haven't made my mind about that completely... But given that the main > goal of the boombox would be portability, well, yes, I'd vote on that > too. By the way, how about rechargeable batteries? Like a laptop, kind > of. I haven't seen that in any other similar product (say, the Roku > radio). > > One keeps it in the kitchen most of the time, or at least "docks" it > there (every night or some such thing), but takes it out to the garden > occasionally. No need to worry about batteries running out all the > time, stocking extras of the right type, etc. > > I wonder what's the feasibility (power consumption) of powering a > squeezebox on batteries. > > EnochLight Wrote: >> No CAT5 port needed; just make it 802.11 G and all will be good >> > > Agreed. > > For a device that would be producing sound in my kitchen, I'd also > leave out the high quality sound outputs. Of course it has to sound > decent, but that's about it. > > EnochLight Wrote: >> It could be more expensive, but not by much. Since many users might >> jump ship to such a device if it possesses the same features as the >> standard SB3, there'd have to be a happy medium. >> > > Frankly, I wouldn't want it to be more expensive. And that might be > possible without the sound outputs. And I wouldn't either want a > boombox with the same features as the SB3. I don't think I'd ever put a > significantly larger device on top of or beside my stereo... and then > proceed to use the stereo's speakers instead of the built-in ones. For > that we already have the SB3. > > > Bernardo > > -- ___________________________________ Mark Lanctot ___________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Find your next car at http://autos.yahoo.ca _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
