Re: [slim] New Squeezebox? Wireless - Wired
Chris, The Ethernet port is fully functional on both wired and wireless models. On the wireless squeezebox there is an additional menu in setup to choose which interface you want. Our main processor has ethernet built-in so there was no reason not to include it in both models. Sean On Mar 1, 2005, at 11:17 PM, Chris O'Shannassy wrote: Hi; I thought that the wireless squeezebox was wireless only? I know it's got a network plug on the back, but I always assumed it was just a dummy so that slimdevices only needed to make one case I'm happy with my wireless connection (though it'd be nicer if it was 802.11G) for now, but how do you disable the radio and turn it into a wired squeezebox? Does it just switch automatically if plugged in? Chris PAUL WILLIAMSON wrote: Buy a wired one and a wireless g adapter. Much better and more reliable. I have a wireless squeezebox, yet I still use a separate adapter because I like having everything running at full G speeds. Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/28/05 7:57 PM Hi, I am thinking of purchasing a wireless squeezebox but have found that they are quite difficult to get hold of in the UK. When I look at the slimdevices website I see there is a 6-8 week wait for the wireless version. This suggests to be that there a new version to soon be released. A retailer in the UK also said he suspected this assumption was also true. Slim devices won't tell me either way for sure. Does anyone know what the plan is for the new squeezebox? Will it look massively different? Will it be much MUCH better? I want one now but don't know if I should wait for the new version to be released after all it is a lot of money that I'll be spending. Would be great if someone could shed some light on this matterany ideas?? Tom ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] iTunes Downloaded Music Questions (related to Slimp3)
Christian Pernegger wrote: Question...I download a .99 song the other day. It plays fine in Itunes. But slim wont play it. Its the AAC protected format? Yes. I tried to convert to mp3 but it wouldnt let me. Anyway to play downloaded/purchased songs from Itunes store? You can burn via iTunes, and rerip from CD (which should not violate any laws - you're just using iTunes functionality). Encoding the file a second time would probably degrade quality immensly. You can use Hymn to just strip the restriction management out, but you'd still have to reencode. If you don't like iTunes, foobar2000 + foo_pod plugin can copy files to and from iPods, for free and without it being tethered to just one machine. Personally I don't buy anything DRMed, be it downloaded or one of those copy protected' un-CDs. I don't use Windows Medi Player or iTunes and I don't have a regular CD player anymore. Even principles aside - what would I do with the stuff? C. Are there any similar softwares to rip the DRM off WMA:s bought via onlineservices? /Johan -- Johan Hbner --!!johan at hubner.se!!-- Mob: + 46 709 50 72 92 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] Announce: SlimServer 6.0a2
This is the second alpha release of SlimServer 6.0 - Lol... I'd just now upgraded my 6.x nightly on a whim and the directory listing seemed strangely underpopulated... the .tar.gz wer already there though, so I'm good. Keep up the awesome work! C. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] Modifying squeezebox clock
Hi, This is the stuff I found on audio synthesis' website... Following input selection two PLLs are used to extract and purify the word clock. An electrically and mechanically isolated crystal oscillator forms part of a sophisticated second order PLL, tightly bandpass filtering the recovered clock before applying it to the digital filter and DACs. A third digital loop is used to isolate jitter generated in the digital filter - all DAC loading and sample hold timing is derived from this third digital PLL. Inputs are reclocked on multiple occasions before reaching the DAC itself. Low frequency jitter is the most difficult to eliminate so the three PLLs have been carefully optimised to boast a sub 1Hz jitter cut off frequency With the aid of multiple PLLs and intelligent muting we have made locking to jitter-ridden or off frequency transports routine, whilst maintaining automatic silent crystal locking for higher quality sources. From here: http://www.audiosynthesis.co.uk/dax_decade.htm So much phlogiston to me though. I've actually upgraded recently to the decade from a dax-2 from the same company - this previous dac also exhibited similar behaviour with mp3 / pcm/flacs. I take on board the buffer stuff phil mentioned but I don't get stuttering and can't see how an intermittent buffer underrun would cause the dac to fail to xlock (crystal lock from above). Cheers Julian. -Original Message- From: Sean Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 March 2005 05:09 To: Slim Devices Discussion Subject: Re: [slim] Modifying squeezebox clock On Mar 1, 2005, at 8:08 PM, Phil Karn wrote: Julian Alden-Salter wrote: 1) The fact that my dac locks on with different qualities of lock when mp3 and flacs are played back. Suggesting that there is indeed some difference in the spdif data stream between the two formats. There is a just for your information bit for clock precision in the s/pdif channel status data - that may be what it is. If so, it has nothing to do with actual clock precision, it's just a bit that says I think I'm a high precision clock or not. I'm not sure what we send for this bit but I could check it on my analyzer - at any rate, it does not affect functionality/performance in any way. Does your receiver (maybe in the instruction manual) say exactly what it's reporting? ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] New Squeezebox?
Phil Karn wrote: Perhaps the new Squeezebox model being hypothesized here will support G? That would be good, expecially if it included an extra RJ45 and a small Ethernet switch to allow another host to share it. And a pony. The new squeezebox should definitely include a pony. :) - Marc ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] New Squeezebox?
Please don't use this list as a chat client, take all off-subject conversation off-list. The list is flooded already. Thanks! On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:31:51 -0500, Marc Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Phil Karn wrote: Perhaps the new Squeezebox model being hypothesized here will support G? That would be good, expecially if it included an extra RJ45 and a small Ethernet switch to allow another host to share it. And a pony. The new squeezebox should definitely include a pony. :) - Marc ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss -- Jonas Nordström ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] Modifying squeezebox clock
Hi All, I have some further information regarding this problem. Late last year I was trying to get a freinds MK1 Audio Synthesis DAX to lock to my Squeezebox. We saw the same problem, A good lock with MP3 streams, no lock at all with FLAC. The Mk1 DAX has a very narrow PLL clock capture window specified as +/- 200ppm. (Verified by the designer of the DAX). Subsequent revisions of the DAX product line have multiple capture windows to allow locking to a wider range of transports, albeit at a lower quality. The DAX2 has a dual stage lock window at +/- 200pmm and +/- 1000 (ppm). The wider lock windows have been reported as working. With help from Triode I tried tweeking the programmed crystal value to try and find a suitable lock (basically a modification to the pitch function) with no luck. It is unclear to me why there should be a data dependent difference in SPDIF clock accuracy. (In fact activating a DSP to perform MP3 decoding would seem to be far more likely to increase jitter due to noise injection). The Micronas data sheet offers no insight that I can find. Recently another friend reported the same lock issue with the latest model Cyrus DAC-X. So it appears that this is not an issue confined to a single high-end manufacturer. I can guarantee the sale of another squeezebox if this issue can be resolved !! Neil From: Julian Alden-Salter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Slim Devices Discussion discuss@lists.slimdevices.com To: 'Slim Devices Discussion' discuss@lists.slimdevices.com Subject: RE: [slim] Modifying squeezebox clock Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 11:11:31 - Hi, This is the stuff I found on audio synthesis' website... Following input selection two PLLs are used to extract and purify the word clock. An electrically and mechanically isolated crystal oscillator forms part of a sophisticated second order PLL, tightly bandpass filtering the recovered clock before applying it to the digital filter and DACs. A third digital loop is used to isolate jitter generated in the digital filter - all DAC loading and sample hold timing is derived from this third digital PLL. Inputs are reclocked on multiple occasions before reaching the DAC itself. Low frequency jitter is the most difficult to eliminate so the three PLLs have been carefully optimised to boast a sub 1Hz jitter cut off frequency With the aid of multiple PLLs and intelligent muting we have made locking to jitter-ridden or off frequency transports routine, whilst maintaining automatic silent crystal locking for higher quality sources. From here: http://www.audiosynthesis.co.uk/dax_decade.htm So much phlogiston to me though. I've actually upgraded recently to the decade from a dax-2 from the same company - this previous dac also exhibited similar behaviour with mp3 / pcm/flacs. I take on board the buffer stuff phil mentioned but I don't get stuttering and can't see how an intermittent buffer underrun would cause the dac to fail to xlock (crystal lock from above). Cheers Julian. -Original Message- From: Sean Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 March 2005 05:09 To: Slim Devices Discussion Subject: Re: [slim] Modifying squeezebox clock On Mar 1, 2005, at 8:08 PM, Phil Karn wrote: Julian Alden-Salter wrote: 1) The fact that my dac locks on with different qualities of lock when mp3 and flacs are played back. Suggesting that there is indeed some difference in the spdif data stream between the two formats. There is a just for your information bit for clock precision in the s/pdif channel status data - that may be what it is. If so, it has nothing to do with actual clock precision, it's just a bit that says I think I'm a high precision clock or not. I'm not sure what we send for this bit but I could check it on my analyzer - at any rate, it does not affect functionality/performance in any way. Does your receiver (maybe in the instruction manual) say exactly what it's reporting? ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] New Squeezebox?
Who died and made you boss? Whoops, I just contributed to the chatty chat chat. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonas Nordström Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 8:03 AM To: Slim Devices Discussion Subject: Re: [slim] New Squeezebox? Please don't use this list as a chat client, take all off-subject conversation off-list. The list is flooded already. Thanks! On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:31:51 -0500, Marc Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Phil Karn wrote: Perhaps the new Squeezebox model being hypothesized here will support G? That would be good, expecially if it included an extra RJ45 and a small Ethernet switch to allow another host to share it. And a pony. The new squeezebox should definitely include a pony. :) - Marc ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss -- Jonas Nordström ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] New Squeezebox?
Are you kidding me??? Dude, get a life. ~c -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:discuss- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonas Nordström Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:03 AM To: Slim Devices Discussion Subject: Re: [slim] New Squeezebox? Please don't use this list as a chat client, take all off-subject conversation off-list. The list is flooded already. Thanks! On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:31:51 -0500, Marc Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Phil Karn wrote: Perhaps the new Squeezebox model being hypothesized here will support G? That would be good, expecially if it included an extra RJ45 and a small Ethernet switch to allow another host to share it. And a pony. The new squeezebox should definitely include a pony. :) - Marc ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss -- Jonas Nordström ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
=?iso-8859-1?Q?RE:_[slim]_New_Squeezebox??=
Do I spy some flames on the horizon? Christopher Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 02.03.2005, 17:02:57: Are you kidding me??? Dude, get a life. ~c -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:discuss- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonas Nordström Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:03 AM To: Slim Devices Discussion Subject: Re: [slim] New Squeezebox? Please don't use this list as a chat client, take all off-subject conversation off-list. The list is flooded already. Thanks! On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:31:51 -0500, Marc Sherman wrote: Phil Karn wrote: Perhaps the new Squeezebox model being hypothesized here will support G? That would be good, expecially if it included an extra RJ45 and a small Ethernet switch to allow another host to share it. And a pony. The new squeezebox should definitely include a pony. :) - Marc ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss -- Jonas Nordström ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] New Squeezebox?
I want a pony. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 March 2005 16:14 To: Slim Devices Discussion Subject: RE: [slim] New Squeezebox? Do I spy some flames on the horizon? Christopher Jacob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 02.03.2005, 17:02:57: Are you kidding me??? Dude, get a life. ~c -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:discuss- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonas Nordström Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:03 AM To: Slim Devices Discussion Subject: Re: [slim] New Squeezebox? Please don't use this list as a chat client, take all off-subject conversation off-list. The list is flooded already. Thanks! On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:31:51 -0500, Marc Sherman wrote: Phil Karn wrote: Perhaps the new Squeezebox model being hypothesized here will support G? That would be good, expecially if it included an extra RJ45 and a small Ethernet switch to allow another host to share it. And a pony. The new squeezebox should definitely include a pony. :) - Marc ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss -- Jonas Nordström ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Itunes running on a server
Randall Reed wrote: Need help! I am running all of my itunes music and the xml library from a server - ex. S:\Music (network map). All of the paths in the xml file point to the s:\ drive which is cool. However, slimserver doesn't like mapped drives - it seems. Can a fix be considered? or is there already one out there on the latest version? thanks! Randall It does handle mapped drives now... by the S: nomenclature I assume you're running on some form of Windows. Are you running Slimserver as a service? If so, go to the services applet and choose Slimserver Properties. It's running as LocalSystem, which doesn't have rights to your network. Change it to a real user who does have rights. -- Jack at Monkeynoodle dot Org: It's a Scientific Venture... Riding the Emergency Third Rail Power Trip since 1996! ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Bit-correct digital output
Steinar Bjaerum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi. I investigated the bit-correctness of the digital output of Squeezebox using the DTS encoded as WAV method: I downloaded a DTS sample file encoded as a 44.1kHz WAV file. I made a second version of the file where the sign was inverted for all samples. I connected the digital out of my Squeezebox to my hometheater receiver. Results when playing the WAVs on Squeezebox: File with original sign results in only noise being played. File with inverted sign is identified as DTS by my receiver and plays correctly. Conclusion: Squeezebox has bit-correct output except for inverted sign (inverted phase). This was not what I experienced, unless for some reason the entire DTS CD that I had was phase-inverted and I didn't know it, either originally or by Exact Audio Copy. Or my preamp just accepts it anyway? I haven't played it in a couple of months, so I'll check it again. I'm using 5.4.0 now on Win XP. How did you invert the sign to create the second version of the file? Ed ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] New Squeezebox?
On Mar 2, 2005, at 8:23 AM, Dan Goodinson wrote: I want a pony. Please file a feature request on http://bugs.slimdevices.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] New Squeezebox?
lol, I guess I was wrong ... On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:45:41 -0800, Jack Coates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: dean blackketter wrote: On Mar 2, 2005, at 8:23 AM, Dan Goodinson wrote: I want a pony. Please file a feature request on http://bugs.slimdevices.com http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=918 -- Jack at Monkeynoodle dot Org: It's a Scientific Venture... Riding the Emergency Third Rail Power Trip since 1996! ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss -- Jonas Nordström ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] New Squeezebox?
Wouldn't that be an enhancement request? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of dean blackketter Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 9:32 AM To: Slim Devices Discussion Subject: Re: [slim] New Squeezebox? On Mar 2, 2005, at 8:23 AM, Dan Goodinson wrote: I want a pony. Please file a feature request on http://bugs.slimdevices.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] New Squeezebox?
Jason wrote: Wouldn't that be an enhancement request? I did it as an enhancement request -- like all other tracking systems I've used, bugzilla records ERs and bugs in the same database. Call it what you will... I like to think of it as meaning that every enhancement request will eventually produce a related bug. You'll note that this ER is now assigned, so we all may get lucky when that next Squeezebox comes out. -- Jack at Monkeynoodle dot Org: It's a PONY-RIDING Adventure... Riding the Emergency Third Rail PONY Trip since 1996! ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] New Squeezebox?
Fantastic - you actually raised it as an enhancement request? :D And I was only _half_ serious :D :D -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Coates Sent: 02 March 2005 17:00 To: Slim Devices Discussion Subject: Re: [slim] New Squeezebox? Jason wrote: Wouldn't that be an enhancement request? I did it as an enhancement request -- like all other tracking systems I've used, bugzilla records ERs and bugs in the same database. Call it what you will... I like to think of it as meaning that every enhancement request will eventually produce a related bug. You'll note that this ER is now assigned, so we all may get lucky when that next Squeezebox comes out. -- Jack at Monkeynoodle dot Org: It's a PONY-RIDING Adventure... Riding the Emergency Third Rail PONY Trip since 1996! ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
[slim] WikiSlim? SlimWiki? SlimWikiCity?
Hi, everyone. I've enjoyed being a part of this mailing list and plan to continue with it. I do find it easier to stay on top of things when the messages land in my 'slim' inbox. BUT... There is a project called WikiCities that the creator of the Wikipedia has begun. How much interest is there in starting a WikiCity to compile and refine what we know about the Squeezebox, slimp3, slimserver, softsqueeze other related topics? A WikiSlim could be like an FAQ on steroids. There would be no one maintainer-- we could all add our two cents without waiting for the FAQ owner to get around to making updates. Yes, there are ups and downs to this, but what is there to lose, really? WikiCities lets us use their software servers to run the wiki and they get to place ads on the site. The content is free to anyone. To see what's starting, you can look at WikiMac: http://mac.wikicities.com/wiki/Main_Page If you're not familiar with the Wikipedia concept, you could look in the March issue of Wired where there is a decent article. An excerpt is here: http://www.wikicities.com/wiki/Wikicities_in_the_news -- Damon ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
[slim] Re: WikiSlim? SlimWiki? SlimWikiCity?
* Damon Riley shaped the electrons to say... Yes, there are ups and downs to this, but what is there to lose, really? WikiCities lets us use their software servers to run the wiki and they get to place ads on the site. The content is free to anyone. Damon - we already have a wiki at: http://wiki.slimdevices.com/ It's just waiting for some loving. :) -D -- Adobe Photoshop - When you want the truth. Real bad. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] WikiSlim? SlimWiki? SlimWikiCity?
For the record it is located at: http://wiki.slimdevices.com/tiki-index.php Craig, James (IT) wrote: There is already a Wiki on SlimDevices web site. Not much on it though... James -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Damon Riley Sent: 02 March 2005 17:26 To: discuss@lists.slimdevices.com Subject: [slim] WikiSlim? SlimWiki? SlimWikiCity? Hi, everyone. I've enjoyed being a part of this mailing list and plan to continue with it. I do find it easier to stay on top of things when the messages land in my 'slim' inbox. BUT... There is a project called WikiCities that the creator of the Wikipedia has begun. How much interest is there in starting a WikiCity to compile and refine what we know about the Squeezebox, slimp3, slimserver, softsqueeze other related topics? A WikiSlim could be like an FAQ on steroids. There would be no one maintainer-- we could all add our two cents without waiting for the FAQ owner to get around to making updates. Yes, there are ups and downs to this, but what is there to lose, really? WikiCities lets us use their software servers to run the wiki and they get to place ads on the site. The content is free to anyone. To see what's starting, you can look at WikiMac: http://mac.wikicities.com/wiki/Main_Page If you're not familiar with the Wikipedia concept, you could look in the March issue of Wired where there is a decent article. An excerpt is here: http://www.wikicities.com/wiki/Wikicities_in_the_news -- Damon ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
[slim] Re: Announce: SlimServer 6.0a2
* Jason shaped the electrons to say... This might be a stupid question, but is there a readme, etc, that explains what all has to be installed to make this work? I'm guessing I will have to load SQL of some flavor and possibly a new Perl version on my Linux machine to have a go at this new version. Jason - we include SQLite, which is an embedded database for the following systems: Windows 2000, XP OS X 10.2, 10.3 RedHat 9 (8 may work too) Fedora Core Debian stable, unstable SuSE 9 NetBSD i386 Buffalo Linkstation/Kurobox (ppc-linux 5.6) What OS and perl version are you running? -D -- noah I'm partial to lipstick lesbians, I guess, but I suppose that's a little like saying you're partial to blue when you're blind. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] Re: Announce: SlimServer 6.0a2
(ppc-linux 5.6) What OS and perl version are you running? -D -- Fedora Core 2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# uname -a Linux jaberwock 2.6.5-1.358 #1 Sat May 8 09:04:50 EDT 2004 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# perl -v This is perl, v5.8.3 built for i386-linux-thread-multi Copyright 1987-2003, Larry Wall Perl may be copied only under the terms of either the Artistic License or the GNU General Public License, which may be found in the Perl 5 source kit. Complete documentation for Perl, including FAQ lists, should be found on this system using `man perl' or `perldoc perl'. If you have access to the Internet, point your browser at http://www.perl.com/, the Perl Home Page. [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] New Squeezebox?
Jack Coates wrote: dean blackketter wrote: On Mar 2, 2005, at 8:23 AM, Dan Goodinson wrote: I want a pony. Please file a feature request on http://bugs.slimdevices.com http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=918 Just voted for this. :) R. -- http://robinbowes.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] Re: Announce: SlimServer 6.0a2
Also, is it recommended to uninstall the previous version or will this successfully install over the top via RPM? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Sully Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:37 AM To: Slim Devices Discussion Subject: [slim] Re: Announce: SlimServer 6.0a2 * Jason shaped the electrons to say... This might be a stupid question, but is there a readme, etc, that explains what all has to be installed to make this work? I'm guessing I will have to load SQL of some flavor and possibly a new Perl version on my Linux machine to have a go at this new version. Jason - we include SQLite, which is an embedded database for the following systems: Windows 2000, XP OS X 10.2, 10.3 RedHat 9 (8 may work too) Fedora Core Debian stable, unstable SuSE 9 NetBSD i386 Buffalo Linkstation/Kurobox (ppc-linux 5.6) What OS and perl version are you running? -D -- noah I'm partial to lipstick lesbians, I guess, but I suppose that's a little like saying you're partial to blue when you're blind. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] New Squeezebox?
on 2/3/05 1:31 pm, Marc Sherman wrote And a pony. The new squeezebox should definitely include a pony. Doesn't seem unreasonable, given that there are other MP3 playing devices that include a cat: http://www.techjapan.com/Article903.html http://www.doraemonsbell.com/goods/ipodmini_doraset/ (I'm told the thing on the second link is a cat, though I can't see it myself.) Ben Rubinstein | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cognitive Applications Ltd | Phone: +44 (0)1273-821600 http://www.cogapp.com| Fax : +44 (0)1273-728866 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] New Squeezebox?
About using the list as a chat client? Not necessarily. I have 13534 unread messages here that say you might be right. OTOH, if by wrong you mean making a request guaranteed to provoke snotty answers, then yes. BTW, you are top-posting. Phil Nelson Jonas Nordström wrote: lol, I guess I was wrong ... On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 08:45:41 -0800, Jack Coates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: dean blackketter wrote: On Mar 2, 2005, at 8:23 AM, Dan Goodinson wrote: I want a pony. Please file a feature request on http://bugs.slimdevices.com http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=918 -- Jack at Monkeynoodle dot Org: It's a Scientific Venture... Riding the Emergency Third Rail Power Trip since 1996! ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] WikiSlim? SlimWiki? SlimWikiCity?
I think the reason no-one adds to the Wiki is it's a bit too um... offputting? at the moment. If the Slim staff were to add some hints as to where contributions are wanted I'm sure people would pitch in. At the moment it just looks like the website content to me. James -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thomas B. Malsbury Sent: 02 March 2005 17:36 To: Slim Devices Discussion Subject: Re: [slim] WikiSlim? SlimWiki? SlimWikiCity? For the record it is located at: http://wiki.slimdevices.com/tiki-index.php Craig, James (IT) wrote: There is already a Wiki on SlimDevices web site. Not much on it though... James -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Damon Riley Sent: 02 March 2005 17:26 To: discuss@lists.slimdevices.com Subject: [slim] WikiSlim? SlimWiki? SlimWikiCity? Hi, everyone. I've enjoyed being a part of this mailing list and plan to continue with it. I do find it easier to stay on top of things when the messages land in my 'slim' inbox. BUT... There is a project called WikiCities that the creator of the Wikipedia has begun. How much interest is there in starting a WikiCity to compile and refine what we know about the Squeezebox, slimp3, slimserver, softsqueeze other related topics? A WikiSlim could be like an FAQ on steroids. There would be no one maintainer-- we could all add our two cents without waiting for the FAQ owner to get around to making updates. Yes, there are ups and downs to this, but what is there to lose, really? WikiCities lets us use their software servers to run the wiki and they get to place ads on the site. The content is free to anyone. To see what's starting, you can look at WikiMac: http://mac.wikicities.com/wiki/Main_Page If you're not familiar with the Wikipedia concept, you could look in the March issue of Wired where there is a decent article. An excerpt is here: http://www.wikicities.com/wiki/Wikicities_in_the_news -- Damon ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss NOTICE: If received in error, please destroy and notify sender. Sender does not waive confidentiality or privilege, and use is prohibited. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
[slim] SlimServer 6.0a2 scan problems
Hello. I've been trying to get the 6.0 nightlies to work on a Centos (RH Enterprise) server. The software installs fine, but crashes silently part way through scanning my library. The crash occurs about 10 minutes into the scan. 5.4.X works fine on the same system and library. If I remove the 6.0 version (rpm -e) and install 5.4.x, it takes about 40 minutes to complete the initial scan, and then plays just fine. My questions: 1. What has changed in the parsing of tags between versions that would cause this? 2. Can I start the server with different options to change this behavior? 3. What can I do to figure out what files in the library are causing this crash? I tried the options suggested in the Installation doc included with the download, but still get no message at all when the crash occurs. I have around 23,000 songs, so I really don't relish the idea of manually moving files around to figure it out. Thanks, Kirk ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
SV: [slim] SlimServer 6.0a2 scan problems
Since you removed 6.0 and installed 5.4xx, could you please tell me if you had to do something special with the firmware or did you get the firmware back which belong to 5.4x. I believe that the firmware is updated in 6.0 from the firmware version in 5.4x. Is this right? Kind Regards Tore -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Kirk Ferguson Skickat: den 2 mars 2005 19:21 Till: Slim Devices Discussion Ämne: [slim] SlimServer 6.0a2 scan problems Hello. I've been trying to get the 6.0 nightlies to work on a Centos (RH Enterprise) server. The software installs fine, but crashes silently part way through scanning my library. The crash occurs about 10 minutes into the scan. 5.4.X works fine on the same system and library. If I remove the 6.0 version (rpm -e) and install 5.4.x, it takes about 40 minutes to complete the initial scan, and then plays just fine. My questions: 1. What has changed in the parsing of tags between versions that would cause this? 2. Can I start the server with different options to change this behavior? 3. What can I do to figure out what files in the library are causing this crash? I tried the options suggested in the Installation doc included with the download, but still get no message at all when the crash occurs. I have around 23,000 songs, so I really don't relish the idea of manually moving files around to figure it out. Thanks, Kirk ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
SV: SV: [slim] SlimServer 6.0a2 scan problems
Thanks kdf Tore -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För kdf Skickat: den 2 mars 2005 19:29 Till: Slim Devices Discussion Ämne: Re: SV: [slim] SlimServer 6.0a2 scan problems Quoting Tore Johnsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Since you removed 6.0 and installed 5.4xx, could you please tell me if you had to do something special with the firmware or did you get the firmware back which belong to 5.4x. I believe that the firmware is updated in 6.0 from the firmware version in 5.4x. Is this right? it should still be FW v40 for both. -kdf ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] New Squeezebox?
I don't care... I'm not buying another SB until they get the Pony enhancement worked out... 802.11g Larger buffer New processor with native FLAC decoding bit-accurate stream with no phase-inversion And last but not least - a new form factor, possibly a standard component size with a larger display screen. and a hard drive and a keyboard and a mouse All for $399 / $299 wired -- ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: SV: [slim] SlimServer 6.0a2 scan problems
Quoting kdf [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Quoting Tore Johnsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Since you removed 6.0 and installed 5.4xx, could you please tell me if you had to do something special with the firmware or did you get the firmware back which belong to 5.4x. I believe that the firmware is updated in 6.0 from the firmware version in 5.4x. Is this right? it should still be FW v40 for both. -kdf ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss Actually, I'm using 3 boxes with softsqueeze on this Slimserver, so I didn't have to change anything... Kirk ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Squeezebox installation creates IP address conflict
I have two computers on my network, both connected to a router, itself connected to a cable modem (all wired). This morning I turned on the server computer (Windows XP), connected the Squeezebox to the router and installed it. But I omitted to turn on the second computer (Windows 98) before doing so. The Squeezebox is working fine, but I think it usurped the IP address of the computer that was not turned on, because with this computer I now get the message: The system has detected a conflict for IP address 192.168.0.3 with the system having hardware address 00:0B:DB:BF:44:!E How can I resolve this mess? Either disable DHCP on your router and configure all your devices manually, or change the W98's configuration to use DHCP. Or configure your DHCP server to attribute always the same IP address to your devices. -- Michael --- Help translate SlimServer by using the SlimString Translation Helper (http://www.herger.net/slim/) ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] New Squeezebox?
Christopher Jacob wrote: and a hard drive and a keyboard and a mouse Then build yourself a mini-ATX PC, or buy a Mac mini and run Softsqueeze. The whole point of a Squeezebox is to have a small, light, low-power, and **fanless** box that just plays music and plays it well. I think the current design is just fine, though it took me a while to get used to the complete lack of local controls on the box. I soon realized I'd probably never use them anyway. Heck I hardly even use the IR remote, as a web browser on a wireless laptop is usually much faster. The key to a successful product like this is keeping it simple! ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Magnatunes vs. slimserver
Chip Hart wrote: ...after hearing a few references to Magnatunes here, I decided to check it out. Cool idea, surprisingly good music. I was about to work on parsing their WWW pages to extra playlists when I realized _they'd already done the hard work_ and supply xml/csv lists of all their music. Wow. Yup, Magnatune is run by one remarkably enlightened dude, John Buckman. As far as I can tell, it's a one-man operation. He participates in the Magnatune forums quite regularly, if you're interested. Parsing these lists and creating groups of related playlists is fairly easy (I just did it for a much grosser radio1234 file), but I figured I'd see if anyone else has already tried this. So - anyone played with Magnatunes and automatic playlist generation? I just grabbed his .m3u playlists, massaged them a bit with Perl and stuffed them into my playlist directory. I also grabbed his Shoutcast streams; he currently has 6 of them for different genres. I actually find myself listening mostly to these streams, and then going on his site when I hear something I like. His ultimate goal *is* to get you to buy an occasional album, to help cover his streaming costs. One thing that seems to be missing from m3u and pls formats is the ability to have comments or information about the tracks. Sure, I can crank out 100s of playlists, even sort them by genre, but that's not as handy is understanding that Phebe Craig and Katherine Westine feature harpsichord duets and not the Ukranian Children's Choir. Try fitting that on the slim display...I just wonder if anyone has come up with a smart(er) way to do this. I don't think so. I did notice that his playlist entries are URLs with file names that just give the track #, artist and song, no album, year or comment. But if you suck them into iTunes and quickly click on each one, iTunes will grab the MP3 tags from the stream and display them in the library window. I haven't run Slimserver on the machine with iTunes, so I don't know if Slimserver can pick this data out of the iTunes database and display it on the Squeezebox. But even if it doesn't, the Slimserver ought to extract and display the MP3 tags when you actually play the track. Phil ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Magnatunes vs. slimserver
Phil Karn wrote: I don't think so. I did notice that his playlist entries are URLs with file names that just give the track #, artist and song, no album, year or comment. Oh, unless I am misunderstanding you, check this out: http://magnatune.com/info/api Look at the XML and csv files - tons of data. I've got it parsed and all, what I really struggle with is a cool way to organized it. Yes, I'll spend most of the time with the randomized streams (great idea), but it may be nice to point at some of these Thanks! -- Chip Hart - Marketing* Physician's Computer Company chip @ pcc.com * 1 Main St. #7, Winooski, VT 05404 800-722-7708 * http://www.pcc.com/~chip f.802-846-8178 * Pediatric Software Just Got Smarter Your Practice Just Got Healthier ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Magnatunes vs. slimserver
Chip Hart wrote: Oh, unless I am misunderstanding you, check this out: http://magnatune.com/info/api Look at the XML and csv files - tons of data. I've got it parsed and all, what I really struggle with is a cool way to I guess I wasn't aware of all that stuff. Cool! Now to see if I can do anything with it myself... ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
cRE: [slim] New Squeezebox?
Then build yourself a mini-ATX PC, or buy a Mac mini and run Softsqueeze. The whole point of a Squeezebox is to have a small, light, low-power, and **fanless** box that just plays music and plays it well. I think the current design is just fine, though it took me a while to get used to the complete lack of local controls on the box. I soon realized I'd probably never use them anyway. Heck I hardly even use the IR remote, as a web browser on a wireless laptop is usually much faster. The key to a successful product like this is keeping it simple! Not to beat a dead horse joke... :P but I was being sarcastic. ~c ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] WikiSlim? SlimWiki? SlimWikiCity?
It appears that you have to create a login password to add to it. It's not as free-wheeling as the site I had in mind. Craig, James (IT) wrote: There is already a Wiki on SlimDevices web site. Not much on it though... James -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Damon Riley Sent: 02 March 2005 17:26 To: discuss@lists.slimdevices.com Subject: [slim] WikiSlim? SlimWiki? SlimWikiCity? Hi, everyone. I've enjoyed being a part of this mailing list and plan to continue with it. I do find it easier to stay on top of things when the messages land in my 'slim' inbox. BUT... There is a project called WikiCities that the creator of the Wikipedia has begun. How much interest is there in starting a WikiCity to compile and refine what we know about the Squeezebox, slimp3, slimserver, softsqueeze other related topics? A WikiSlim could be like an FAQ on steroids. There would be no one maintainer-- we could all add our two cents without waiting for the FAQ owner to get around to making updates. Yes, there are ups and downs to this, but what is there to lose, really? WikiCities lets us use their software servers to run the wiki and they get to place ads on the site. The content is free to anyone. To see what's starting, you can look at WikiMac: http://mac.wikicities.com/wiki/Main_Page If you're not familiar with the Wikipedia concept, you could look in the March issue of Wired where there is a decent article. An excerpt is here: http://www.wikicities.com/wiki/Wikicities_in_the_news -- Damon ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss NOTICE: If received in error, please destroy and notify sender. Sender does not waive confidentiality or privilege, and use is prohibited. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Modifying squeezebox clock
Phil Karn wrote: The big flaw with this particular measurement (other than the horizontal sweep has been blown up to greatly exaggerate the problem) What makes you think that? Because I can read a scope legend. The scope has been blown up in the horizontal direction to exaggerate the jitter You're seeing only a tiny fraction of a bit time. What information on that image tells you that? It seems to me you're not understanding what you're seeing. Not only that, but it's showing us the raw signal jitter, before the bit clock has been reconstructed by the receiver's PLL and divided down to the sample rate, which decreases the jitter accordingly. And furthermore, there's no indication of the exposure time, so we don't know anything about the frequency spectrum of the jitter. That's important too. It's the same for both cases. Level playing field, anybody? can't do this perfectly. Not true. The jitter is clearly the result of constraining the bandwidth of the cable so that intersymbol interference is introduced. With a good cable, there wouldn't be any intersymbol interference. But you don't believe in all this audiophile mumbo jumbo about good cables and bad cables, do you? And even if what you said is true, so what? It doesn't *have* to do a perfect job. Nothing can. It only has to do it well enough so that you can't hear a degradation. You're general POV seems to be that if *you* can't hear a difference then no-one else should either. Triode posted a link to a paper published by the AES that discussed the problem of jitter concludes: It can be shown that, compared to low oversampling multi-bit designs, pulse density modulation converters are much more sensitive to jitter when producing low frequency audio signals. This phenomena may explain certain subjective characteristics of PDM DACs which cannot otherwise be rationalised. A simple model of jitter error audibility has shown that white jitter noise of up to 180 ps can be tolerated in a DAC, but that even lower levels of sinusoidal jitter may be audible. I'm not up on *all* the various DAC topologies, but I still can't understand why this should be such a problem. If anything, I'd expect a given amount of jitter to have *less* effect on a low frequency signal than on a high frequency one. That's because jitter is really just undesired phase modulation by a noise process, and a variation by a given amount of time represents a much smaller number of degrees in a cycle of a low frequency waveform than a high frequency waveform. This is analogous to the fact that phase modulation and frequency modulation are closely related, but with a 6 dB/octave pre-emphasis or de-emphasis because of the fact that frequency is the derivative of phase, and phase is the integral of frequency. Have you ever heard the effect of phase modulation on an audio signal? The sort of improvements audio enthusiasts wax lyrical about can often be attributed to phase. Soundstage, depth, clarity, all that sort of stuff. Even a small phase error can radically smear the sound. Note that the paper analyzed the effect of jitter on full amplitude 20 KHz sine waves. That's about as worst-case as you can possibly get. Can you still even hear 20 KHz? I know I can't. I don't hear discrete sounds or tones, no, but I do hear relationships between sounds and positional information that is encoded in the HF band. If you lose that you lose clarity and detail in the sound. The discussion was originally about the possibility for improving the performance of the SB by adding a more accurate clock/crystal oscillator. As you rightly say, with no external DAC there is no SPDIF link but there is still the possiblity that the internal clock can be improved upon. Yet according to that same AES paper, internal clock phase noise is utterly negligible compared to the jitter source he was investigating, namely data-dependent jitter introduced by intersymbol interference. This is exactly what I suspected given what I know about crystal oscillators -- they have the lowest phase noise of any kind of RF oscillator, and suffer only from frequency inaccuracy and slow drift. And what happens if the crystal is inaccurate? So it seems to me that if you're really worried about jitter, just use the analog outputs on the Squeezebox and don't even connect anything to the S/P-DIF outputs! That is of course not feasible if you want to use an external DAC, in which case you need to minimise jitter, which brings back to where we started. One could ask why you even need an external DAC in the first place, as the Squeezebox already provides exactly that function. At least it gets the DAC out of my computer where 100A ground currents circulate! Because I can hear that my DAC sounds better than the DAC in the Squeezebox. I know some people think that something costing only $200 can't *possibly* be any good, and that at least $1K of fancy, gold-plated high-end accessories
Re: [slim] Squeezebox installation creates IP address conflict
Phil Karn wrote: If you have a typical small home router box with DHCP support (e.g., Linksys, Netgear, D-Link, SMC), it will generally let you specify the range of addresses that it will allocate dynamically. Allocate a reasonable number of addresses in your subnet to the dynamic pool for visitors, and make static assignments to each of your own hosts that are outside the range of this pool in the remainder of the subnet. You will have to turn off DHCP and manually configure the IP address on each of your own hosts, though; if they use DHCP, they'll still get a dynamic address out of the dynamic pool. If you have a more sophisticated DHCP server, e.g., if you're running one on a general purpose Linux, UNIX or OS X box, then you can probably enter the individual Ethernet MAC addresses of each host into the DHCP server database and assign each one a fixed IP address. When the device boots with DHCP, the server will recognize the MAC address and always assign it the same, fixed IP address. This way you avoid having to manually (re)configure all of your hosts with IP addresses. If an unknown MAC address shows up, as from a visitor's laptop, the DHCP server will fall back to giving it one out of the dynamic pool. FWIW, all small home router boxes I've used have the facility to fix DHCP leases, ie. always allocated the same IP address to a given MAC address. Generally speaking, you boot your Pc or whatever and it is allocated a dynamic address. You then use the router admin tool to fix the address. R. -- http://robinbowes.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Squeezebox installation creates IP address conflict
On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 14:00:36 -0800, Phil Karn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The best way is to assign a fixed, static IP address to each host on your own local network. There's really no point in allocating IP addresses dynamically to your own hosts given that you have such an abundant supply of 192.168.0.xxx addresses. Dynamic assignment also makes it difficult for your hosts to find and talk to each other (unless they use Apple's Rendezvous). However, it's still useful to keep DHCP and dynamic addressing around for the benefit of guests with laptops, so you don't really want to turn it off entirely. The problem is a mis configuration of the dhcp server. It should not have been assigning IP's in the same range that some are manually set. .1 is my router. I reserver .2 through .10 for utility purposes (print server, local yum server, dmz machine, caching name server, etc. - some of those are actually same box, but done through multihoming so I can seperate them in future if I need to) 11 through 99 I reserve for static IP's when needed. When something requests an IP - it gets one from the 100 to 149 range - 50 dhcp addresses are far far far more than I'll ever use. 150 through 254 I just do not use, and probably never will. But that was the problem - something was assinged an IP address that was in use in the static range. My squeezebox will most certainly be dhcp, it has no need to be static. My slimserver currently is on my main box (.11) but is likely in the near future to be moved to a shuttle, where it will get a utility IP address. Using dhcp is fine as long as you have no need to talk to the box from another, and as long as your static IP's are not in the range the dhcp server controls. -- http://mpeters.us/ ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Squeezebox installation creates IP address conflict
I have a linksys WRT54G. Can you tell me how to do this? I can find no setting to allow this in the WRT54G. Thanks Jay On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 00:17:23 +, Robin Bowes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FWIW, all small home router boxes I've used have the facility to fix DHCP leases, ie. always allocated the same IP address to a given MAC address. Generally speaking, you boot your Pc or whatever and it is allocated a dynamic address. You then use the router admin tool to fix the address. R. -- ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Squeezebox installation creates IP address conflict
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:43:34 -0500, Jay Sissom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a linksys WRT54G. Can you tell me how to do this? I can find no setting to allow this in the WRT54G. I also have that router. The default lease time is a day. Go to Setup - Basis Setup Scroll down to DHCP Server set the lease time value to 0 (that will reserve an IP for the same machine for 24 hours) Set the starting IP address to something like 192.168.1.100 - and only use values below 100 for your local machines that you want to have a static IP address. -- http://mpeters.us/ ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Modifying squeezebox clock
Robin Bowes wrote: What information on that image tells you that? It seems to me you're not understanding what you're seeing. The legend says the time trace is 5 ns/div. A pair of measuring lines implies that the jitter on the uncorrected is somewhat less than that, about 3 ns. As I recall (I can't find good, recent references), each subframe in S/P-DIF carries a (usually) 16-bit PCM sample in a 32-bit subframe, so the clock rate of the composite stereo signal would be 64 times the 44.1 KHz CD sampling rate, or 2.8224 MHz. At this rate, a bit time is 354.31 ns, so the 5 ns jitter is a tiny fraction of the bit time. That's why you only see one bit transition on the scope -- because its horizontal sweep rate has been blown way up to make the small jitter visible. Even if that jitter were directly imposed on the local VCO, which it is not because of loop filtering, it would still be reduced by a factor of 64 as the VCO clock is divided by 64 to produce the DAC sample clock. 5ns of jitter would become 78 ps. Even tinier when you consider that a cycle of 20 KHz (the highest frequency the CD can reproduce) takes 50 *microseconds* to complete. What fraction of an audio cycle is that? What's the FM modulation index? What is the resulting spectrum of sidebands around the 20 KHz signal? What about lower frequency audio? I'll leave the precise numbers to the reader, but it should already be obvious that they're already tiny for the 20 KHz signal, and even smaller at the lower frequencies. Not only that, but it's showing us the raw signal jitter, before the bit clock has been reconstructed by the receiver's PLL and divided down to the sample rate, which decreases the jitter accordingly. And furthermore, there's no indication of the exposure time, so we don't know anything about the frequency spectrum of the jitter. That's important too. It's the same for both cases. Level playing field, anybody? Except that, in both cases, it's just too small to matter! But you don't believe in all this audiophile mumbo jumbo about good cables and bad cables, do you? Don't put words in my mouth. You don't need cables that can pass 2 MHz if you're carrying baseband analog. If you're carrying S/P-DIF, which has its spectral peak at 2.8 MHz, then you do. It would be hard to find a coaxial cable that couldn't do an adequate job of passing the spectral components of a 2.8 MHz S/P-DIF signal over a few feet in a home stereo system. We regularly use even smaller coaxes to carry far higher frequencies from cell phones to external antennas. I *can* see how there might be a problem with ordinary shielded, twisted-pair microphone cables such as the kind long used in professional work to run 600 ohm analog signals over significant distances. Here you'd probably want a redesigned cable better suited for megabit digital signals. Something like Cat-5, for example, which is really cheap and goes up to 100 MHz. It doesn't have to be expensive or gold plated to be good. You're general POV seems to be that if *you* can't hear a difference then no-one else should either. Not at all! For one thing, I'm 48 and my hearing is not what it was at 18. But if I can't hear a difference, and some calculations cast strong doubt on *anyone* hearing the difference, then I think it reasonable to ask those who claim to hear a difference if they have conducted any proper blinded listening tests. If not, then I question their assertion. Audiophiles have a very long history of hearing all sorts of amazing differences that seem to disappear as soon as proper controls are introduced. That's a fact, and it would be foolish to ignore it here. Have you ever heard the effect of phase modulation on an audio signal? Sure I have. Remember I said I help design modems for a living. Phase modulation (e.g., PSK) is one of the modem designer's standard methods. I'm well aware of what large amounts of phase modulation sound like; I've spent many hours listening to these things while developing and using modems on satellite links. But that doesn't mean very tiny amounts of phase modulation sound at all alike. The sort of improvements audio enthusiasts wax lyrical about can often be attributed to phase. Soundstage, depth, clarity, all that sort of stuff. Even a small phase error can radically smear the sound. Yeah, but can you do it in a properly controlled test? How do you know you're not just fooling yourself? I don't hear discrete sounds or tones, no, but I do hear relationships between sounds and positional information that is encoded in the HF band. If you lose that you lose clarity and detail in the sound. Again, so you say. People can claim to hear anything. Prove it with a properly controlled test. That's all I ask. And what happens if the crystal is inaccurate? If it's in a wall clock, the clock runs a little fast or slow. If it's a local oscillator in a radio receiver, then its dial frequency calibration is a
[slim] Re: Completely removing and installing from scratch
* Mike Marley shaped the electrons to say... I am running 6.0a2 on a mac running 10.3.8 and am having some weird behavior. I am having the composer being included with artist problem and I just want to start from scratch. Does anyone know how to completely remove every single file that Slim installs. I want to start with a completely clean slate using 6.0a2. Thanks a lot. Mike - there's a preference for this under Settings - Behavior. If that doesn't work for you, the database file can be removed from: ~/Library/Caches/SlimServer/slimserversql.db -D ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Modifying squeezebox clock
Phil Karn wrote: Even if that jitter were directly imposed on the local VCO, which it is not because of loop filtering, it would still be reduced by a factor of 64 as the VCO clock is divided by 64 to produce the DAC sample clock. I'm going to have to revise and correct this. (In my defense, I've been home sick with the flu for the past few days, and I'm not firing on all cylinders.) When the VCO clock is divided by 64 to obtain the 44.1 KHz sample clock, the jitter time is *not* divided by 64. With this correction, I believe the rest of my analysis remains valid. That is, the clock division by 64 reduces the modulation index of the jitter on audio components by that same factor. So 5ns of jitter (a little more than that scope showed) represents only 1/10,000 of a cycle of a 20 KHz sine wave (period 50 microsec). And the modulation index would be proportionately lower at lower audio frequencies; down at 1 KHz, where there's far more energy in a typical audio signal, 5 ns would be only 5/100 (5 millionths) of an audio cycle! These are truly *tiny* phase modulation indices that would produce very little in the way of PM/FM sidebands. I just can't imagine that anyone could hear them. And I've left out the effects of PLL smoothing, which reduces jitter even further. But if you feel otherwise, conduct some properly controlled listening tests. I'm all ears. --Phil ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] New Squeezebox?
On Mar 2, 2005, at 10:45 AM, Jack Coates wrote: http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=918 +1 on that feature request! I hope you guys don't get around to doing it too soonI need to expand my back yard. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Squeezebox installation creates IP address conflict
Thanks, but that isn't what I want to do. I want to make the router always assign a specific IP address based on the Mac address in my ethernet card. Robin said all the routers he has seen allow this, so I would like him to explain it for WRT54G. This is one of the most popular ones out there. I can't find this setting. I'd like to know where it is hiding. I know how to change the lease on DHCP and how to assign static addresses. Both useful tasks, but neither are what I would like to do. Thanks for your help Jay On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 16:51:06 -0800, Michael Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:43:34 -0500, Jay Sissom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a linksys WRT54G. Can you tell me how to do this? I can find no setting to allow this in the WRT54G. I also have that router. The default lease time is a day. Go to Setup - Basis Setup Scroll down to DHCP Server set the lease time value to 0 (that will reserve an IP for the same machine for 24 hours) Set the starting IP address to something like 192.168.1.100 - and only use values below 100 for your local machines that you want to have a static IP address. -- http://mpeters.us/ ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Squeezebox installation creates IP address conflict
Jay Sissom wrote: Thanks, but that isn't what I want to do. I want to make the router always assign a specific IP address based on the Mac address in my ethernet card. Robin said all the routers he has seen allow this, so I would like him to explain it for WRT54G. This is one of the most popular ones out there. I can't find this setting. I'd like to know where it is hiding. I know how to change the lease on DHCP and how to assign static addresses. Both useful tasks, but neither are what I would like to do. Thanks for your help Jay On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 16:51:06 -0800, Michael Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:43:34 -0500, Jay Sissom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a linksys WRT54G. Can you tell me how to do this? I can find no setting to allow this in the WRT54G. I also have that router. The default lease time is a day. Go to Setup - Basis Setup Scroll down to DHCP Server set the lease time value to 0 (that will reserve an IP for the same machine for 24 hours) Set the starting IP address to something like 192.168.1.100 - and only use values below 100 for your local machines that you want to have a static IP address. -- http://mpeters.us/ ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss Not sure if you're running the Sveasoft firmware, but if you are adding an entry like 10.0.0.3 00:04:20:05:91:BF sbox to the 'Dhcpd' section of the 'Management' section under 'Administration' on the web interface will do what you are asking. Of course, please replace the IP, MAC address and hostname with your own values. Good luck, Tom ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Announce: SlimServer 6.0a2
Quoting Michael Bowyer [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Kevin, I'm a Mac user, I double-click things ;) Double-clicking the installer seems to go through the motions. I install over 5.4.1, and get a new preference pane. I click the pref pane START button, the button changes to a greyed-out STOP, there's some disk activity, then the button becomes a clickable START again, and I assume its crashed! My Squeeze Boxen never get as far as showing the time, and there are no messages in the console. I also tried deleting every SlimDevices file, and installing fresh, but with the same results. If you can help me with some command line arguments I'd be more than happy to share any error messages. I believe it is: /Library/PreferencePanes/SlimServer.prefPane/Contents/server/slimserver.pl --d_info --d_server -kdf ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
Re: [slim] Modifying squeezebox clock
Absolutely sure - this is definetely a lock/nolock senario. The same stream fed to another DAC works perfectly. From: Phil Karn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Slim Devices Discussion discuss@lists.slimdevices.com To: Slim Devices Discussion discuss@lists.slimdevices.com Subject: Re: [slim] Modifying squeezebox clock Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 14:31:34 -0800 Neil Hastie wrote: Hi All, I have some further information regarding this problem. Late last year I was trying to get a freinds MK1 Audio Synthesis DAX to lock to my Squeezebox. We saw the same problem, A good lock with MP3 streams, no lock at all with FLAC. Are you *sure* you aren't seeing any buffer underruns in FLAC/WAV mode? The buffer is a lot shorter in raw PCM mode, which makes underruns far more likely than in MP3 mode. Even a brief underrun might cause a glitch in the S/P-DIF clock that would case your external DAC to have trouble re-locking for a while, especially given its tight PLL loop. Or you could simply connect the analog outputs on your Squeezebox directly to your amplifier and enjoy the music. :-) Phil ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
RE: [slim] Now Playing information
Thanks for the pointers - I should have thought of that myself! Kind regards Richard -Original Message- From: Michael Herger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 March 2005 07:12 To: Slim Devices Discussion Subject: Re: [slim] Now Playing information On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 06:58:18 -, Richard Scales [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I would really like to be able to extract information such as 'Now Playing.' from my slimserver to include on a web page but have absolutely no idea where to start. I can see that I can point a browser to my slimserver web interface which is visible on the internet, enter my username/password and view that information - is there some way that I can code this so that I can display the information another web site? I appreciate that it might need to get past the username/password thing which may render those credentials being visible in some viewable source but that aside - can anyone point me in the direction of some html code that I could plunder to do this? Did you have a look at the plugins page (http://www.slimdevices.com/dev_plugins.html). There's some stuff like slimclass.php, Geeklog etc. which will help you getting the information you need to your page. -- Michael --- Help translate SlimServer by using the SlimString Translation Helper (http://www.herger.net/slim/) ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
