On 4/3/06, rock wrote:
>
> funkstar Wrote:
> > I think your first two have been sugested before. Personaly i can't see
> > them happening. I would guess that two of the bigest cost componets are
> > the processor/decoder module and the wirless interface, both of which
> > you would need for either a headless or head only device.
> >
>
> Now a headless device I'd think you could forgo the wireless, the
> application would be a centralized amp system. If someone took the
> trouble to run speaker wires to remote locations it would seem pretty
> easy to pull Cat-5 over. But we're only talking the difference of the
> cost of the display so you are probably right about the cost
> efffectiveness. Now if there could be a headless system that could do
> four different streams, to four different amps that might be more
> effective.

Isn't a headless system that can do four different streams to four
different amps just the same as a PC with four good-quality
sound-cards, running four copies of either SoftSqueeze or
SqueezeSlave, running to four remote sets of speakers?

Cheers
Geoff
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss

Reply via email to