 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
75.131.20.113
Is it possible to clone the SB-Touch software and load it on a regular computer with a more powerful processor and more memory etc.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Follow Ups:
The Touch pretty much is that kind of HW which IMO challenges a CMP2 setup. CMP2 many people regard as kind of reference setup.
The CMP2 guys try to strip a normal PC down since years to achieve a HW-level comparable to a Touch. Why should I switch to a normal PC??
The Touch comes at a fragment of cost. And today even USB works quite well.
I tried Squeezeslave and Squeezeplay as well as mpd and pretty much all the other players out there on a PC under Windows and realtime Linux. ( As you know that's what I did first in the early days)
I also tried Squeezeslave (the arm version) instead fo Squeezeplay on the Touch btw.
IMO all streaming clients suffer a major problem compared to audiophile players.
Flac offline decoding and RAM playback is not part of the feature list.
That'll give you a hard time to beat a top level audiophile player.
Even server based decoding on a streaming system is not solving the realtime flac decoding issue. WAV still sounds better.
I think it is better to look for a better audio interface, instead of trying to fix the PC/transport setup.
Hint: Have a look at Vortexbox/Vortexboxplayer and their forum. Over there you'll find instructions of to setup squeezplay/squeezeslave asf.
Good luck.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
::: Squeezebox Touch Toolbox 3.0 and more ::: by soundcheck
I have built squeezeplay and squeezeos from the sources and poked around significantly in the sources, so I have a fairly good understanding of what is there.
Squeezeplay is a program which contains a lua interpreter, a large part of the interface is written in lua, all the actual audio data processing is written in C. This is a "player" software and includes all the user interface part as well.
SqueezeOS is a version of linux (it's not "based on linux" is IS linux, just as much as debian or ubuntu or fedora etc are linux). Its a very stripped down linux distribution, it doesn't have X Windows and word processors and spread sheets etc. The kernel has been compiled for real time use. The kernel has compiled into it the drivers for the peripherals built into the processor it runs on. There is no reason to "port" it to a different computer because the only thing that makes it unique is the drivers for the processor it runs on.
One thing unusual about the Touch system is that is does not run X Windows, (note that X Windows is a separate program that most linux systems use to display information on screens) The kernel contains a frame buffer driver for it's LCD and touch screen. When run on the Touch squeezeplay talks directly to the frame buffer rather than going through X windows. You can easily do this on other hardware, but the generic squeezeplay for linux has been compiled to talk to X windows because most people run X Windows on their linux machines. If you want squeezeplay to take over the screen you can compile it to talk to the framebuffer directly as it does on the Touch.
The audio out is done differently when it's on the Touch and when it's done for other computers. On the Touch there is a separate program called jive_alsa that actually talks to alsa and gets it's data from queezeplay, a generic compile uses a generic audio interface layer that knows how to talk to the audio interface subsystem on many different OS's (Windows, linux, OSX etc). IF you want to run squeezeplay on a linux box you certainly can run it the same way it works on the Touch with jive_alsa, but you have to make sure that nothing else on your linux box is trying to output audio.
As to TinyLMS, it's the same program as the "big" LMS, it's just started with some options that turn off certain functionality.
There is some lua code that isn't used in a generic squeezeplay implementation because it's specific to the Touch hardware, such as ambient light sensors used to set the screen brightness, IR receiver etc.
So it certainly is possible to run squeezeplay very close to how it's run on the Touch hardware if that really is important. There is no need to "port" squeezeOS, just use whatever stripped down linux you want to use. I personally have done this with puppy linux on a fitpc2 which works very well. I just configure it to not start X Windows which gives you a very stripped down linux system.
John S.
Hi John, thank you for the information. Its exactly what I was looking to undersstand..
> > > The kernel has compiled into it the drivers for the peripherals built into the processor it runs on. There is no reason to "port" it to a different computer because the only thing that makes it unique is the drivers for the processor it runs on.
Do you think that the current processor it optimal for audio? vs. a more powerful processor? Also what about memory...
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
This is one of the big debates going on now. My experience has been that lower powered devices sound better, but there are quite a few others that insist that the fastest processors with gazillions of gigabytes of ram sound best.I did a test several years ago where I took a stripped down puppy linux with realtime kernal and just ethernet and USB running (no X windows, no display) and netjack2 and ran this from a USB stick with a USB DAC on a whole bunch of diferent computers. (the USB stick is only accessed at boot time, the OS and all programs are copied into ram). The music data came over the ethernet from another computer also running netjack2 and a simple wav player. Netjack2 is a very simple protocol which just uses UDP so it takes very little processing on the "player" computer.
There were major differences in sound quality with this test. The best was a FitPCslim (Geode LX800) closely followed by an old VIA EPIA mini-itx board running at 600MHz. The FitPC2 was not as good as either of these. The worst were the three laptops I tried it on (a Lenovo, Fujitsu and Dell). The desktops faired inbetween with the server that I usually use for running the squeeze box server being the best and the old pentium 4 box being the worst.
This was about as tightly controled as I could get, exactly the same software running on all the machines, no local storage used for programs or data.
There was no correlation with the amount of memory that I could find, they all had plenty of memory to run this VERY stripped down system, as far as CPU performance went, there was correlation on the lower side (the two very underpowered wimpy systems sounded the best) but not on the upper end. Most of the desktop systems had more powerful processors than the laptops yet the laptops sounded worse.
John S.
Edits: 06/13/12
more memory meant loading the track into memory so that loading via ethernet was not required during playback = less noise
more cores meant eg for 4 cores putting i/o tasks on one core 0, cpu tasks on core 1, playback program on core 2 and ancilliary tasks on core 3 = less noise
agree that the sound is better at lower voltages/frequencies and lower irq counts = less noise
John -
"I did a test several years ago where I took a stripped down puppy linux with realtime kernal and just ethernet and USB running (no X windows, no display) and netjack2 and ran this from a USB stick with a USB DAC on a whole bunch of diferent computers. (the USB stick is only accessed at boot time, the OS and all programs are copied into ram)."
I have a FIT-PC2 and was thinking of trying just this sort of set-up. Did you use an available stripped down puppy linux or did you do it yourself?
In hindsight did you find the results (irrespective of the hardware) were good and how did they compare with the many other Linux or Windows platforms you have experimented with? I am running Windows7 modestly minimised with Foobar 2000 on my FIT-PC2.
Many thanks
Jonathan
Some would say you may want the *least* powerful and amount of hardware needed to do the job. I would think the SBT hardware is already stripped down to a level far beyond what any typical person could assemble from modules. Less HW allows PS (noise) and heat issues to be more manageable too.
think there would be benefits in it being multicore and also if it had enough memory so that it could load into and play from memory
Yes, possibly. I am just speculating because I haven't built such a device. It is also possible that more frequent access to the memory that there already is could be beneficial too (see next thought).
I have this thought (untested) that choosing an architecture that keeps the power supply busses at a constant level would be beneficial. What CPU arch. and memory etc. would have to be matched to the software being run...tricky outside a proper development "lab".
This is assuming one buys into the minimalist philosophy, and the Touch-like device is merely an interface unit (to the "PC" brain) that doesn't have to do anything smart at all. Simple and clean are more likely to lead to audio satisfaction.
It is not so much that it is merely an interface to the 'pc brain'. A more powerful Linux device than the Touch would be able to build on the Touch strengths which are to act as a buffer so that the pc does not have to operate in a way where latency is key, meaning the pc and Touch like device could be designed to operate at lower noise levels.
I believe Soundcheck has experimented with such a device and claims great benefits to sound quality. Although, I am driven more towards lower frequency/irq operations as a way to reduce noise than Soundcheck.
It it amusing that the pc/mac is seen as a solution to serving music to a dac when an optimised Touch like device is the logical way forward.
I certainly don't need to worry about clicks/crackles and pauses when using the Touch and it can be tuned for low noise operation ala TT3.0 etc
Agreed.
I am looking forward to Soundcheck's TT4.0 as he has stated elsewhere he is (was??) working to make that version quite compatible with EDO.
I have mixed results combining TT3.0 and EDO, and think I get better results using each individually. I haven't gone to the tuning extents you have though, mostly I just made minor mods to various lua files to customize to my taste (not things that affect playback, mostly just UI).
It looks to me like you can freely check out SqueezeOS (see below)
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/SqueezePlay
Here's the download site for the current Squeezeplay programs. They've got versions for Windows, Mac & Linux.
.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
SqueezePlay is only a Touch emulator. It's not SqueezeOS. Your computer wouldn't really behave like a Touch, it would only be running a program that mimics the player interface and plays music streamed from a Squeezebox Server. You wouldn't, for instance, have the "TinySBS" server that the Touch has, and you couldn't get USB output by using Triode's hacks, nor take advantage of any of the software tweaks for improving sound quality.
One use for SqueezePlay that I've played with a little is for use on a car PC. I think the touch interface is pretty good and also want to take advantage of my familiarity with Squeezebox Server, and things like Random Mix playback. With a little work the interface can be modified to work on a different resolution touch screen.
Which is why I posted my original question.
I realy don't know enough about either to know the difference or what those differences are, but I guess I assumed that the 'real' SB-Touch OS would not be free to everyone.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
The CPU used in the Touch is a Freescale i.MX35 533 MHz ARM11 (link noted below). The Linux OS used is encoded to the firmware and heavily deprecated to run on a platform with limited capability.
I'm not sure why you'd want to carry those limitations forward to a PC with more power.
From the way you put it, the SB-Touch could possibly sound a lot better if they would use more up to date firmware/software. I am almost sure it would be much better if it was using a more powerful processor, more memory and the latest drivers etc.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
> > From the way you put it, the SB-Touch could possibly sound a
> > lot better if they would use more up to date firmware/software.
> > I am almost sure it would be much better if it was using a
> > more powerful processor, more memory and the latest drivers etc.
The firmware for the Touch has been revised a number of times as they've addressed glitches and issues the past few years in the Touch itself and the server software one installs when you use an external PC as server.
Keep in mind we're talking a $300 device that, by most accounts, already performs far better than it has a right to sound. And the tweakers have had a great time exploring various options for the eminently hackable Linux based system.
If you want the high dollar, no-holds barred approach to computer audio, other companies have products on the market and certainly more are in the works. I seriously doubt that Logitech is going to ever play in that end of the market.
> I guess I assumed that the 'real' SB-Touch OS would not be free to everyone.
It's based on Linux, which is open source, so it has to be made available, although certain bits and pieces, such as the source code for hardware drivers, may not have to be. What it would take to get it working on different hardware, such as a general purpose PC with a different audio and peripheral system, I don't really know. I'd guess it would be a fair amount of work.
I'm not sure if the repository URL below is up to date. They're in the midst of switching over from SVN to a new version control system.
Well, SqueezeOS certainly contains a lot of GPLed software, most likely tweaked a bit. Release of the source code is required. On the other hand, kudos to Slimdevices/Logitech for releasing the whole build environment as well, that makes a HUGE difference.
Thats why in my original post I asked if it is possible to "Clone" the OS...ie not something SB has released to the public.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
what about another linux box that can still use ethernet with kernel optimised for sound quality and stripped down functionality just for playing music
squeezeplay restricted to 44.1
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
