krochat;597808 Wrote: > One thing that needs to be emphasized - use an always-on music server of > adequate power - I can't recommend VortexBox on an old PC (or newer > low-power silent PC) highly enough. > > The problem I experienced was connection problems if the server wasn't > available, and reconnecting after waking the server required > persistence and several minutes - one of those annoyances you're trying > to avoid. > > I used to run SqueezeCenter on a regular PC that I would suspend at the > end of the day. Squeezeboxes can send Wake-On-Lan (WOL) to wake up > suspended servers but it never worked properly for that machine. > > So I switched to a separate VortexBox machine and it worked beautifully > for weeks - press "play" and it played. > > Then I got worried about power usage (40 watts for that particular PC, > some are as low as 20 watts), so I activated the "Server Power Control" > plugin for end-of-day power suspension and used the player's WOL > capability to wake up the server in the morning. > > This worked, but it took a couple of minutes to wake up and reconnect > in the morning - a delay I found so annoying that I turned off the > power plugin and now just run 24 hours a day. > > With regards to running SqueezeCenter on a NAS - many here have > reported poor performance with some NAS units. > VortexBox is a much better solution. It also has a one-click software > "update" feature. > > FWIW, the Vortexbox is hard-wired to the network, 4 of my 5 players are > wireless.
Hi Jaggy I've been a Squeezebox user for 3 years now, I have 4 players, 3 connect wirelessly and 1 is hard wired (a Touch), as the above post I also run a vortexbox solution installed on low power server, it is also hard wired into the router - my router is pretty bog standard. I would echo the sentiments of the person above, regardless of how many players you've got the importance of the server and network often hinder the effectiveness of the players, I've got no complaints over my setup - however to illustrate I previously had the server located upstairs and connected to router via ethernet powerplugs, this was inefficient and there was a lot of rebuffering, I moved downstairs and located next to router and its been very good. In terms of your initial question The kinds of issues especially I'm interested in hearing about are: - basic tasks like ease of the interface (whether through the unit or dedicated or iphone/touch/android remotes) Always works well for me, I do have a number of plugins, one heavily used is the trackstat plugin for rating songs, I have noticed that when rating a song there is a slight delay in the server when using my Duet controller but not a problem on the touch - speed, lags, glitches very very occasional, see comment above re: plugin - dropouts because of wifi issues Not been a problem for me - stability of server software; ease of updates (esp on a NAS) Fine for me - anything else worth knowing about I think the Touch is a quality device but as with all SB products how good your server/network is will impact the usability, IMO this is the achillies heel for SB in comparison to Sonos range in that Sonos controls those 2 factors differently in the design giving more 'plug and play' however that doesn't mean that SB don't work well out of the box. I also much prefer the product range that SB offer, simple things like being able to control the players directly rather then via a controller is a big thing for me. Ian -- socistep ------------------------------------------------------------------------ socistep's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18860 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84267 _______________________________________________ Touch mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
