Archimago wrote:
Yes. That sounds about right.
It'll be a bit of work though. The only way these recordings would sound
any good in digital is if we do vinyl drops at 384kHz, 32-bits floating
point using the esteemed Caliburn turntable and esoteric cartridge (at
least set us back another
Archimago wrote:
I'm impressed again at the power and flexibility of the Squeezebox/LMS
system!
It's pretty simple, really. There's a big difference between systems
with servers running (mostly) on general purpose computers rather than
having software running on the limited, low power
JJZolx wrote:
It's pretty simple, really. There's a big difference between systems
with servers running (mostly) on general purpose computers rather than
having software running on the limited, low power hardware contained in
many devices. It's exactly the same problem that Logitech ran in
probedb wrote:
It isn'tand you just changed the goalposts. Let's take just one
track from my collection:
Artist Name: 65daysofstatic
Track Title: The Distant Mechanised Glow of Eastern European Dance
Parties
Album Title: The Destruction of Small Ideas
...just broke your
utgg wrote:
I did say well organised. And I still maintain 100 is reasonable as an
average - for all those long titles there will plenty of short ones as
well. No need to store as full unicode - and the strings are readily
compressible if you want. Artist strings and the like shouldn't be
probedb wrote:
Track Title: The Distant Mechanised Glow of Eastern European Dance
Parties
I can beat that with the following track titles:
When The Going Gets Tough, The Tough Get Karazee (Serious Bonus Beats
Mix)
or
Wortkabular (Tobi Neumann S
Archimago wrote:
Okay. Fine. I have seen the light!
$12,500.01 it is.
Not a penny less! And to optimize the performance of this server
machine, it'll have a 8GB vintage 10-year-old flash drive (because those
were the quietest drives of course!). 2X DVD burner circa 2001 approved
by
Can it not be flash promed with all the 50 usual suspects in audiophile
music :D no internet
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100
Mnyb wrote:
Can it not be flash promed with all the 50 usual suspects in audiophile
music :D no internet
Which is EXACTLY what 90% of the garbage on the HP Super Discs lists is
- pure audiophile approved well recorded trash.
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen
ralphpnj wrote:
Which is EXACTLY what 90% of the garbage on the HP Super Discs lists is
- pure audiophile approved well recorded trash.
I meant on circuits soldered in the device not on removable media :D who
ever want to listen to something else
Mnyb wrote:
I meant on circuits soldered in the device not on removable media :D who
ever want to listen to something else
In that case the model with the preinstalled audiophile recordings would
be the Super Disc Deluxe Model and would sell for a minimum $5,000
extra.
Living Rm:
ralphpnj wrote:
In that case the model with the preinstalled audiophile recordings would
be the Super Disc Deluxe Model and would sell for a minimum $5,000
extra.
Yes. That sounds about right.
It'll be a bit of work though. The only way these recordings would sound
any good is if we do
utgg wrote:
Agree it is almost certainly a player memory size limitation - the
database is probably held in ram. Plus the use of 16-bit track
references.
It's instructive to have a feel for how much memory you actually need. I
would have thought 100 bytes average for per-track tag
probedb wrote:
100 bytes is nothing though and if the tags are unicode then you just
halved that. 50 characters wouldn't cover the song title + artist for
many of the bands I listen to.
I did say well organised. And I still maintain 100 is reasonable as an
average - for all those long titles
Archimago, you should know better that you will not succeed with your
business if you try to undercut the competition. You have to sell with a
higher price!
reinholdk's Profile:
garym wrote:
Unfortunately, these turn in to mud slinging contests (and be prepared
to be told that if you say you need more than 65,000 tracks you're
either lying or crazy).
Or a file sharer who doesn't pay for his music ;)
utgg wrote:
I did say well organised. And I still maintain 100 is reasonable as an
average - for all those long titles there will plenty of short ones as
well.
100 bytes is ridiculously small. For search, you need to store artist,
album artist, composer, track name, album name, genre, release
reinholdk wrote:
Archimago, you should know better that you will not succeed with your
business if you try to undercut the competition. You have to sell with a
higher price!
Yes that's the weird economy for luxury items for the rich .
You sell more if you hike the price ! Porsche did that
Mnyb wrote:
Yes that's the weird economy for luxury items for the rich .
You sell more if you hike the price ! Porsche did that mistakes in the
80's and early 90's was it not some model that was relatively
affordable so that just maybe a working class hero could get one if he
worked hard
poing wrote:
Or a file sharer who doesn't pay for his music ;)
... thats the OCD people here with 45 tracks , you cant possible
listen to that even if you did not have a day job and did it for 10
hours a day . and then only listen once :D
65k is quite possible given that your now in your
Reminds me on some garbage i once wrote.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/pc-based/202369-hand-made-sata-cable-cat-5.html#post2824871
NO joke, i got PMs for that asking for more details because others hear
the same!
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -
Archimago wrote:
Okay. Fine. I have seen the light!
$12,500.01 it is.
Not a penny less! And to optimize the performance of this server
machine, it'll have a 8GB vintage 10-year-old flash drive (because those
were the quietest drives of course!). 2X DVD burner circa 2001 approved
by
Wombat wrote:
Reminds me on some garbage i once wrote.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/pc-based/202369-hand-made-sata-cable-cat-5.html#post2824871
NO joke, i got PMs for that asking for more details because others hear
the same!
Lol! That's funny.
Archimago wrote:
Clearly: The. Ultimate. Serving. Machine.
And this is the name of your business: T.U.S.M.
(I agree to receive $1,000 per sold unit from you.)
reinholdk's Profile:
A decent sized artwork cache is another matter though.
This I presume must be the issue... Since the BlueSound can handle 65k
tracks, it must not be a 16-bit indexing limitation.
Based on this review:
http://www.audiostream.com/content/bluesound-vault
It looks like the BlueSound Vault only has
ralphpnj wrote:
Funny you should that overpriced hardware is highway robbery in an
audiophile section - overpriced hardware is the most basic and important
feature of high end audio!
And then there is Apple which charges around $100 for each additional
64GB of flash memory in their
Archimago wrote:
A decent sized artwork cache is another matter though.
This I presume must be the issue... Since the BlueSound can handle 65k
tracks, it must not be a 16-bit indexing limitation.
Based on this review:
http://www.audiostream.com/content/bluesound-vault
It looks like
Archimago wrote:
Sad but true...
However, I must note that the $6000+ music server does have a nice
milled aluminum fascia (not sure if aeronautical grade). So it's
probably worth the extra few thousand dollars. :-)
Lets start a business folk. We can get it done for $3000 and undercut
My media server was pretty nice looking (Silverstone Grandia GD04-USB3.0
Case), but it was the first thing I threw into the closet when I ran out
of shelf space. I know that a lot of users aren't tech-savy enough to
build their own, but there has to be at least one geek in the family
that can
ralphpnj wrote:
I'm not sure about that Southern Seas voyage but I am pretty sure that
no matter hard we tried we could not build and sell a audiophile music
server for $3,000 that would be a success.
Here's why:
Let's say the cost to design and manufacture each music server comes up
riffer wrote:
My media server was pretty nice looking (Silverstone Grandia GD04-USB3.0
Case), but it was the first thing I threw into the closet when I ran out
of shelf space. I know that a lot of users aren't tech-savy enough to
build their own, but there has to be at least one geek in the
ralphpnj wrote:
I'm not sure about that Southern Seas voyage but I am pretty sure that
no matter hard we tried we could not build and sell a audiophile music
server for $3,000 that would be a success.
Here's why:
Let's say the cost to design and manufacture each music server comes up
It's nice that the SB/LMS system is being kept alive by projects like
piCorePlayer too. I sold my original SB3 and bought a RPi with a
HifiBerry Digi+ board for less money. I see no reason to use a Sonos
player...so expensive in comparison.
As a programmer the only reason for these limits I can
probedb wrote:
It's nice that the SB/LMS system is being kept alive by projects like
piCorePlayer too. I sold my original SB3 and bought a RPi with a
HifiBerry Digi+ board for less money. I see no reason to use a Sonos
player...so expensive in comparison.
As a programmer the only reason
Was curious about some of the new music servers and did some reading in
the event that my Squeezebox system goes kaput one day...
Looks like the 'Sonos has a 65000 track limit'
(https://ask.sonos.com/sonos/topics/future_of_the_65k_limit).
BlueSound has a '~8 track limit'
Archimago wrote:
Was curious about some of the new music servers and did some reading in
the event that my Squeezebox system goes kaput one day...
Looks like the 'Sonos has a 65000 track limit'
(https://ask.sonos.com/sonos/topics/future_of_the_65k_limit).
BlueSound has a '~8 track
Archimago wrote:
Was curious about some of the new music servers and did some reading in
the event that my Squeezebox system goes kaput one day...
Looks like the 'Sonos has a 65000 track limit'
(https://ask.sonos.com/sonos/topics/future_of_the_65k_limit).
BlueSound has a '~8 track
ralphpnj wrote:
I have so many tracks in my music library that I'm hoping that Madonna
will want come visit me and dry hump my music server.
:cool:
*Home:* VortexBox 4TB (2.3) LMS 7.8 Transporter, Touch, Boom, Radio
w/Battery (all ethernet)
*Cottage:* VBA 3TB (2.3) LMS 7.8 Touch
All kidding aside I understand the popularity of the various music
streaming services however if one is a fan and listener of other musical
genres besides pop, rock, RB, dance, rap, hip-hop then the music
streaming services tend to fall way short.
I listen to tons and tons of all kinds of jazz
Thanks for the note Garym.
I see that SONOS was started back in 2002 so perhaps some of the
limitations can be understandable although to not update features like
add 24-bits support does take it out of contention for high-res music
downloads.
But BlueSound's limit seems really quite silly for
40 matches
Mail list logo
