Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] (no subject)
From: Erik Steffl (steffl_AT_bigfoot.com)
Date: Sat Aug 14 2004 - 04:03:20 EEST
Dylan wrote:
> On Saturday 14 Aug 2004 00:02 am, Erik Steffl wrote:
>
>>Dylan wrote:
>>
>>>On Friday 13 Aug 2004 20:02 pm, Erik Steffl wrote:
>>>
>>>>Dylan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Thursday 12 Aug 2004 20:43 pm, Erik Steffl wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Dylan wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi List,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>This may be somewhat off topic, but I figure some of you may
>>>>>>>well know the answer...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'm trying to set up an audio server to connect to my home
>>>>>>>stereo, and have been looking for an app with the following
>>>>>>>features: web based interface for playlisting, and playback
>>>>>>>through local sound card.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I've found plenty of options which provide streaming, but none
>>>>>>>which play through the server's own sound system.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> have client on the same machine.
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't want to stream the audio anywhere at all. Why on earth
>>>>>should I have to install, configure and maintain a streaming
>>>>>server and client when I can simply have the machine play the
>>>>>file directly - less resources used, less to go wrong, less to
>>>>>worry about.
>>>>
>>>> you have to install, configure and maintain jukebox a player
>>>>anyway,
>>>
>>>To my mind, the application which indexes and organises the media
>>>files need have nothing to do with the playing of said files,
>>>except that it needs to be able to call a player app.
>>>
>>>
>>>>whether they communicate via network (streaming) or not is
>>>>not really a big issue... or a big difference in resources used.
>>>
>>>I'm sorry, but I disagree.
>>
>> no need to be sorry, did you measure it?
>
>
> No, but it's an accademic point anyway - the machine would be more than
> capable of doing it.
>
>
>>>>Most
>>>>jukeboxes use external players anyway.
>>>
>>>Good, I hope they are able to use a player of my choice.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Or do you want jukebox with
>>>>built-in player?
>>>
>>>Definitely not.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Freeamp could possibly be used as jukebox (I found
>>>>it somewhat unstable but haven't used it for quite some time). Or
>>>>xmms with some plugin (there are some plugins that offer better
>>>>control than default playlist). And instead of web interface use X
>>>>across network (or vnc if you want to be able to
>>>>disconnect/reconnect from/to jukebox/player).
>>>
>>>There's no X on this box - why should there be if it's headless?
>>
>> so that you can display whatever you want to display on another
>>machine. I am not saying you should be using it but just because the
>>box is headless doesn't mean there shouldn't be X installed.
>
>
> A - X is massively overkill for running a single app
you don't run X on the server, just the X client (e.g. xmms), you
have to have some x libraries but X is not running on server
> B - Remote X shenanegans would need to be danced for several users and
> client machines
> C - I don't know and have no need/desire to learn how to set up secure
> remote X connectons
it's not that complicated:
ssh -X erik_AT_zasran.com xterm
> D - I want to be able to use it from Windows, Linux and console only
> clients
X server for windows might not be a good idea (commercial ones are
expensive, free ones don't seem to be very good), vnc might be a better
solution but that still leaves console only systems out.
>>>If I was intending to have this server stream to clients on the
>>>network then, yes, configuring it to stream to itself would be
>>>appropriate. But I'm not - that introduces all sorts of timing and
>>>bandwidth issues.
>>
>> timing - possibly, might be important for full-duplex recording
>>but for audio player???
>
> Two clients playing the same stream are not going to play in sync - only
> slightly off but enough to be annoying. The house stereo can pipe music
> to every room with no sync issues.
there's some disconnect here - functionally there is no difference
between local player and the player that uses stream. Regardless of
whether you are using streaming or not you can pipe it to house stereo.
Or perhaps I am misunderstanding what you are trying to do.
>> bandwidth - what bandwidth? it's on local box. no network
>>involved.
>
> I meant that streaming in general has bandwidth issues, which is why I'm
> not particularly interested in it. Of course it doesn't matter a toss
> machine internal, but to the several clients around the house it would
> take a toll on the performance. And would need each machine to be
> powered on and logged in.
I am not suggesting you add machines to your home and stream it to
those machines. What I was suggesting is to use the streaming just like
you would use the local client. The only difference is that instead of
controlling the player directly (in one way or another, depending on
player) the server only controls what is being streamed and the player
essentially sits there and plays the stream (i.e. you never touch
controls on the player), output goes to the home stereo.
>>yes there is overhead which might be significant if you are
>>using a really really low end machine, think calculator (but if
>>you're already running web server and audio player it cannot be that
>>low end)
>
> And PHP and MySQL, and...
>
>> maybe you could just try it and see if it works well enough, I
>>have an impression that you simpy said "no streaming" and that's it.
>
> Not quite, I'd prefer not to stream mainly because it's unnecessary in
> principle and I personally like things to be lean if possible.
on a modern operating system there is already so much stuff that you
don't neccessarily need that streaming or not streaming does not make
much change (IMO). To get a really minimalistic solution you'd have to
have a DOS box:-)
>>It might be better to specify functional requirements (like what you
>>want it to do, what machine you have available for it etc.)
>
> I have just such a list, and the server is already functional.
what is the list? which server are you using? I could try to remember
the testing/evaluations I did and post something useful if I knew what
exactly do you want to do...
erik
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Aug 14 2004 - 04:08:17 EEST