[Inscrutable]

Finally going to start hooking up my home network and also building audio server.  I have two squeezeboxes as well.  I will need a network server in the office. I will use squeezeboxes in casual listening areas.

The question is about serving music in my main listening area.  I see thre options:
1. I could run a squeezebox off the office server, using it as an audio server as well. 
2. Or I could use a second computer located in the listening area, still served off the office server. 
3. Or I could use a standalone computer/audio server in the listening room.

I know there are people here who have done it each way.  Which way would you expect to get the best sound?  I know there are many variables with each - unmodded vs modded SB, quality/cost of soundcard, etc.    While having a computer up there to do other things is a non-issue (as I have a couple tablets/notebooks with built-in wireless that I can use) I do have an HTPC not being used that I can convert - and I have s/pdif off the mobo now.  Let's say I spend a few hundred bucks to mod the SB or upgrade the sound card.

Now the/more stupid questions: Is it a good/bad idea to have the same box acting as a office apps server AND the slim/audio server?  Does the slimserver software need to be installed on the same drive with the files?

Thanks for your opinions.

[totoro]

If you're using a squeezebox, I don't understand why you'd want a computer in the same room. The noise from the computer will be noticable at low listening levels, and it won't bring you any benefit.  One of the reasons for getting a squeezebox is precisely so you don't need a computer feeding into your stereo.

As far as wireless or wired: this depends entirely on your connection strength. I run mine wireless with no problems.  I've seen people claim the sound was much better wired. My view on this is that either they were having network problems or experiencing a blast of audiophoolery.

Unless you're using inguz for room correction, you don't need a terribly powerful computer. The inguz stuff is really cool, though, and for that you need a pretty powerful machine (http://www.inguzaudio.com/ has details), and then you wouldn't want to be doing much else with it.

[jqp]

I don't own a squeezbox, but in general I like to keep a single function on a server. Using Notepad on a server should not affect the server's other activities, but opening a 180MB text file with UltraEdit can!

The reason for this approach is that you will tend to optimize the server for one function to the detriment of other functions. This is a very strict approach that is often not practiced, especially for home computing. But it becomes more attractive with more complex functions like transcoding video and other media processing.

Here is a practical example. You have the server as an email server and as a video/audio streaming server and a recipe server for the wife who is cooking Christmas dinner. You have to reboot the server because you are applying critical patches on the email system. No video, Christmas cooking interupted, while the server reboots. Also sending email with attachments bogs down the video streaming. Not the end of the world but it illustrates why this shared functionality is not ideal.

Then there is the hassle of others monkeying with the perfect setup on the server because they need to use it too...

So you will have to weigh the costs and benefits. Some "servers" can be a $200 desktop, so it is easier to follow this approch these days.

The disadvantages may be multiple power outlets/surge supressors/UPS/OS licenses/networking to support all these PCs. But nowadays we collect these things over the years.

No wonder so many have a laptop and an ipod as their sound system!

[bpape]

No difference in sound - other than the noise of the server in the listening room mucking up the noise floor.

I'd agree to use a single server for music serving.  Keep it where you won't be listening.  Hard net connection if you can - though if it's not too far and you get it set up right wireless can be just as good. 

Bryan

[sleepysurf]

FWIW, I am running a 300GB Buffalo Tech Linkstation on my home network, for streaming FLAC files to 3 Squeezeboxes (plus Softsqueeze on my laptop).  I run slimserver on my office laptop.  My wife/kids run two labor intensive computers off the same network, and we rarely experience slowdowns.  The biggest problem I've experienced (happens a couple times a week) is an IP address conflict between a Squeezebox and one of the peripherals.  Re-powering on the offending Squeezebox takes care of it. 

I do use a WIRED ethernet connection for the Squeezebox in my main listening room, but that's only because I experienced microwave and cordless phone interference with Wireless B.

[Inscrutable]

Thanks for the replies guys.

If you're using a squeezebox, I don't understand why you'd want a computer in the same room. The noise from the computer will be noticable at low listening levels, and it won't bring you any benefit.

No difference in sound - other than the noise of the server in the listening room mucking up the noise floor.

bryan and totoro, at one friends house we did hear a noticeable difference between the digital out from his PC vs the output of the SB.  One of those I might not notice without an AB, though ... and might not be the same in my setup.  Wondered if others had experienced the same. WRT noise, I have a pretty quiet (former) htpc I would use, and can even squirrel it away. 

I don't own a squeezbox, but in general I like to keep a single function on a server.

jqp, I had been thinking this way also, fearing too many interrupts or latency issues.  I got away from htpc/crt because it was too finicky and I don't have the patience nor time for that anymore. I don't want to replicate that with the music server.  But I am not a network admin, don't play one on TV, and aren't staying in a Holiday Inn Express. 

I have run network cable thoughout the house, but I haven't terminated all of it yet.  Am I able and would I want two different boxes performing two different serving operations hung on the same star topology system, or are you saying I should have a separate hard network for each single server?  I was not going to run wireless from a security and glitchiness standpoint, but I could be persuaded to run that for the music-only system and keep the 'work'/email system hard-wired.

[bpape]

Sorry for any confusion.  I was referring to no difference in sound between wired and wireless network connections between SB and Slim Server.

Bryan

[JEaton]

Finally going to start hooking up my home network and also building audio server.  I have two squeezeboxes as well.  I will need a network server in the office. I will use squeezeboxes in casual listening areas.

The question is about serving music in my main listening area.  I see thre options:
1. I could run a squeezebox off the office server, using it as an audio server as well. 
2. Or I could use a second computer located in the listening area, still served off the office server. 
3. Or I could use a standalone computer/audio server in the listening room.

Squeezebox all the way.  The only question is whether you want to run SlimServer on the office server.

I know there are people here who have done it each way.  Which way would you expect to get the best sound?  I know there are many variables with each - unmodded vs modded SB, quality/cost of soundcard, etc.    While having a computer up there to do other things is a non-issue (as I have a couple tablets/notebooks with built-in wireless that I can use) I do have an HTPC not being used that I can convert - and I have s/pdif off the mobo now.  Let's say I spend a few hundred bucks to mod the SB or upgrade the sound card.

Again, the Squeezebox is the simplest solution, fed from a server anywhere on your network.  You decide whether you'd like to have the SB modded or not.

Now the/more stupid questions: Is it a good/bad idea to have the same box acting as a office apps server AND the slim/audio server?  Does the slimserver software need to be installed on the same drive with the files?

I'd say it depends on what that office server is going to be doing, and to a lesser degree the spec of the server.  Will the server be running Terminal Services for multiple users, some extensive SQL accounting package, or just doing file and print serving?  My guess is that in a home office setting you'll have more than enough processing power and disk throughput to run SlimServer along with your server apps.  If not, then you can draft another PC/server for the task of running SlimServer.  SlimServer doesn't need to run on the same machine that houses the music files - you could easily store the files on a file server share and have SlimServer on another machine.  You can also easily have files stored in multiple locations.

My only recommendation, if you plan on connecting wirelessly to the Squeezebox, is to make sure you're running an 802.11g access point ('wireless router') - the increased speed of 11g over 11b makes the SB less susceptible to dropouts, since the buffer can be refilled more quickly.

[Inscrutable]

OK, I think you've convinced me to go with a single server on the network, in the office, and just have a SB in the listening room.

Warning: stupid question ahead ... can slimserver pick songs/playlists from multiple hard drives on the single computer?  The owners guide says to "collect your digitized music into one (emphasis added) place on your computer"

[JEaton]

Can slimserver pick songs/playlists from multiple hard drives on the single computer?  The owners guide says to "collect your digitized music into one (emphasis added) place on your computer"

Yes.  Music files can be located on different drives, and/or different computers on the network.  They all get cosolidated into your library, so that if one album were on drive C and another on drive D and another on drive E, it will be transparent to the user of the Squeezebox.  Playlists pointing at tracks on different drives and computers is also doable, but I would guess that if you moved the music, or changed drive letters, then the tracks wouldn't be referenced correctly any longer.  You'd either need to rebuild the referencing playlists from scratch or else edit them to point to the correct location.

SlimServer only lets you designate a single folder (and its subfolders) as the location of your music library.  To have SlimServer also see the other locations (assuming you're running Windows on the server) you just place Windows shortcuts pointing at them inside your main music folder.