Squeze Box Question

For me definitely.

For you? IMHO probably

On the whole, most people will agree that a hard drive based transport will out perform all but the very best CD transports.

While the devil is in the details, all computer based systems basically work the same way:

- a CD is ripped to a hard drive at pre-determined resolution and format - this tends to be along PCvsMac lines.

- the metatags for the CD are populated (name, title etc) automatically from a web database accessed by your software

- the files are organized in any number of browser or player metaphors - Squeezebox includes a web browser

- using the file organizing software, the files are retrieved from the hard drive. Most often the file is moved out of the computer via USB, SPDIF, Toslink, Ethernet or WiFi to a DAC

- The same DAC can be used with either type of transport - hard drive or platter based (the Squeezebox comes with a built in DAC so in addition to SPDIF it can also output analog to a suitable input)

It is very important to understand that a single set of files (ie a hard drive full of rips) can be accessed by multiple kinds of software and hardware. It is very common to access one library with both a Mac and a PC running iTunes, an iPod and a Squeezebox. This is why closed proprietary systems and formats have largely failed.

This is a transitional period - there are certainly lots of people who have both a traditional CD player and a computer based system in various rooms of their house

I tend to think about the decision to go to computer based audio as a lifestyle choice as much as a technology choice. Most often people who select computer audio solutions do so because:

- they can achieve better audio quality for the same or less money

- they enjoy being able to access every nook and cranny of their collections, make playlists etc

- they are thrilled to remove the physical presence of a large CD library from their living space. I would say filing but some people really enjoy the tactile experience of managing their collections

- they already have music on hard drives for their iPods and other devices and they have experienced the benefits.

- they like to listen to Internet radio

- they want to be able to distribute a single library to one or more locations in their home or office. They do not want to maintain multiple copies. Nor do they want to constantly ferry CDs from room to room. The Squeezebox is particularly well suited to distribution.

The mantra of this movement is "rip once, use many"

So - if lower cost, higher quality and greater flexibility is appealing, then this might be a logical way for you to go.

Depending on your very specific situation and plans, it may or may not also be true that a Squeezebox is the best solution for your system.

You probably need to do some homework - there are a million threads on the by now very broad subject of computer based audio.

Swanny -

I hope that you are giving serious consideration to a Mac... what you want is what they are built to do.

If you haven't you owe it to yourself to go to your nearest Apple store and spend some time at the Genius Bar.

Wayne -

There is an old phrase, horses for courses. The bottom line is you don't need a Squeezebox unless you want music where you don't have a computer.

As I tried to point out in my first post, all computer audio works basically the same but there are many variations.

Let's deal with a few that have cropped up here.

1) Computers are not created equal. This is especially true in the PC world where they are assembled to many price points with no particular concern for this type of application.

The biggest problem with most computers is that they are electronically very noisy. That is why you have to get the music data out from the computer before converting it to an analog signal. And why almost no one who is serious does this with a sound card (with the exception of some very expensive cards from Lynx and Apogee).

2) Computer speed as measured by MIPs, RAM, GHz or whatever you like is a moot point with audio. Audio files are very small and require virtually no processing by the computer - the processing is done outboard by a dedicated piece of hardware called a DAC...

3) There are significant differences between PCs and Macs. In addition, many PC users are not that happy with the quality of iTunes especially when compared to using EAC, FLAC etc. On the other hand with a Mac, iTunes is great and EAC is not even available.

4) There is some debate about which cabling format is the best. Many people will argue AES/EBU followed by SPDIF followed by USB. But as in all things audio the devil is in the details. That is why an unmodded Squeezebox can't touch a Wavelength Brick - though one uses Ethernet and SPDIF and the other USB.

But keep in mind that because USB is a global computer standard it represents the biggest market for a manufacturer by an enormous margin. This is why you see so much activity in USB DACs.

Plus USB is good to 15 feet at a reasonable price. A 15 foot SPDIF cable would break the bank.

5) SLIM Devices developed the Squeezebox. They were recently purchased by Logitech.

6) What to do and why. The unique selling proposition that Squeezebox offers is that it is a two-way node on a computer network. Michael and Mapman both addressed this.

Let me try paint a picture.

If you use USB to connect your computer to a DAC in the other room (which could be done), you cannot control the content. Meaning that if you want to change tracks or pick a different playlist you will have to go back to the room with the computer, make the change on the computer then go back to the other room to listen.

ERGO USB devices are best suited to systems where the computer and the audio system are in the same space and can be used simultaneously. That is one reason the MacMini is so popular - it is small and quiet.

On the other hand, if you put a Squeezebox (Roku etc) in the other room using either Ethernet cabling or WiFi you can sit in the listening room and using the remote and the display on the device access the computer - wherever it is - to change tracks, select playlists etc. (How much fun that is with a large library and a single line display is a different question.)

ERGO A Squeezebox or similar device is only necessary if you want to control the content (interact) from the listening area that does not have a computer. Or as Michael describes his rig, if you want to distribute your content to multiple rooms simultaneously (which of course requires multiples of all the hardware)

Now to be clear there are alternative strategies. In the Apple world you can look at distributing your audio via Airport Express. Or controlling a remote computer using your iPhone with the free remote software.

And a Squeezebox can be controlled on small PDA type devices using specialized software.

Both these solutions utilize larger displays making the browsing experience more pleasant. Both these solutions have limitations because they are wireless devices - as does a wireless Squeezebox solution. It is location specific - you'll have to try it in your space to know.

AND FINALLY The Squeezebox can be used as a cost effective DAC in the same room. Or it can be used as an analog source. What this means is that you would then control it from your computer using the free browser based software that SLIM provides instead of something like iTunes.

In this scenario you would be using a Squeezebox instead of a USB DAC. If you are a PC guy there would be an advantage because the Squeezebox will decode FLAC.

Which brings us back to the beginning. The bottom line is you don't need a Squeezebox unless you want to control your music where you don't have a computer. Or you want a low cost DAC or analog source.

Kana -

Bluejean delivers great value for the money. And I suspect they will build you a real 75ohm cable.

That said, no one runs SPDIF that far - the implementation at both ends would have to be near perfect.

Once you get into the fact that there is tremendous variation in the sound of SPDIF cables (is it the cable? does one cable do a better job overcoming problems at one end or both? no one knows) My point is simply that most of us could not afford a "name" 15'. And there is no compelling reason to run one to connect a computer rig to a DAC.

I agree with your comment on Wavelength versus SB quality. Wayne posited the question. But the actual reason that it is better is not cost but the fact that Gordon Rankin has invested an enormous amount of time in perfecting the implementation of his solution.

Kana - I don't want to get in a pissing match here and as long as you are happy, that's all that matters. BUT for the newbs out there, please consider these quotes from the Analog Research website - or should I say sales pitch:

...when it comes to RF interfaces, and ones as poorly conceived as SPDIF, it is essential that cable (and equipment ) designers have a thorough knowledge of the subject. Alas, few do.

ED I feel better already

OK, now the bad news:

The cable is around 16' long, and is only available with BNC connectors.

Why so long, you ask.

Well, let us say that a detailed explanation would give too much help to the competition. There is a reason, and that reason is to minimise the effects that reflections. The good news is that you don't have to stretch it out, all over your listening room. It can stay rolled up, in a neat coil, and tucked away.

ED because coiled cables are not very good antennas??? you can find any number of threads here arguing that 1.5m is the perfect length for a SPDIF cable. An equal number suggesting that you never coil a signal cable.

But, your equipment has those nasty RCA jacks. Once again, this shows how poorly conceived the SPDIF interface is. However, all is not lost. We can supply BNC - RCA adaptors. Will this will have a somewhat deleterious effect, it will still allow you to utilise most of the benefits of our cable.

ED yes, coax - which is what we are talking about here - uses BNC - a great connector - who knows why more people don't use them - maybe because Cardas and WBT don't make them so they can't figure out how to charge enough???

We will proudly match our cable up against any cable, regardless of price. Even those costing 10 times as much. We believe in it that much. (The ironic part is: the better the equipment design is, the less difference there is between cables. So why pay over $1000 for a cable when you can have one that is just as good, and costs substantially less?) ...Even if the equipment wouldn't pass the muster at our lab or uses RCAs, you will still hear a marked improvement.

ED wow - not only can these guys save me money but they can overcome all the design flaws in my crappy gear

Come on

Peace

Kana -

I have been at this for five years now - in that time I found one SPDIF I liked - it was $350 used for 1 meter - the old Stealth Varidig

I have helped an awful lot of people figure this out - literally hundreds of posts here and hundreds more on AA -

Perhaps more relevant to our mutual readers is that I have read thousands of posts - you are the first and only person advocating a 15' SPDIF - and the only person who has ever mentioned this supplier.

As I said, the main thing is that you are happy - but you are certainly not representative of what most people have experienced

Plus with no PC in your listening room, SPDIF like USB and Toslink has the huge disadvantage of being one way - no easy way to control your source -

If removing the PC from your listening environment is the goal, Squeezebox/Roku is probably the best solution

enjoy the music