Slashdot Mirror


Multi-Room Wireless Sound System?

abrinton asks: "I just went into escrow on a new house. Of course, first thoughts are to the sound system. I don't want to wire. Anything. I've got a wireless network, so computers are all sorted. But what do I do for sound? I need ideas for a centrally controlled sound system that can use 802.11g for transport. I'd like to have the same music everywhere, or better still, options to play different things in different rooms. I've got access to tons of old PIII laptops, wireless gear, old computers, sound cards, etc to make this work. Has anyone got any ideas or done anything like this?"

47 of 641 comments (clear)

  1. iTunes by BWJones · · Score: 4, Informative

    I am sure someone else will mention it, but I use iTunes exclusively for music throughout our home. A central server with our entire 10k song plus collection ripped onto it resides in the study with an old Powerbook connected up to the main stereo system in the house that spins out the tunes for most to hear (A Mac Mini would be perfect for this task). Others who want to listen to something else in differing parts of the house (or outside) can also tie into iTunes and listen simultaneously to completely independent streams, all wirelessly. In fact, before they moved, my next door neighbors used to stream from our server as well.

    I don't know if PIII laptops can run iTunes or not, but my six year old Powerbook spins tunes with no problem whatsoever. For those truly particular about their music ( or those with high end home stereo systems possessing digital audio connectors ), Powermac G5's and the new 17in Powerbook also have digital audio out. Combine that with Apple's lossless audio format and you have some kick ass tunage available without ever again having to search through your CD collection for that particular song. A cheaper option is to purchase Airport Express units for differing parts of your house that each have an audio out and can plug into any available power socket.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:iTunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      " I am sure someone else will mention it, but I use iTunes exclusively for music throughout our home."

      What, are you famous or something? Why would anybody else be telling us what you use in your home? And BTW, who the hell are you anyway?

    2. Re:iTunes by over_exposed · · Score: 4, Informative

      Right on - and a PIII should have no problems running iTunes. I would highly recommend this setup. It worked great for me for two years - although my setup isn't as elaborate as yours sounds like it may be. Just make sure to A) Secure your wireless network then B) make sure Remote Desktop or a VNC solution are enabled on all of the machines. That way you can either pick the music you want to play in that room FROM that room, or you can connect remotely and make changes that way.

      --
      "The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his." - Patton
    3. Re:iTunes by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative
      Your system (as you described it) lacks two things:
      1. A `push' capability - i.e. the ability to select the music being played in a different room, and
      2. The ability to synchronise the music in multiple locations.
      Apple could add both of these very easily with two modifications to iTunes. The first would allow a computer running iTunes to be set as a slave - the machine would appear as an Airport Express station to other instances of iTunes on the local network. The second would allow you to send a stream to multiple locations (Airport Express nodes, slaved iTunes clients and your own speakers). I honestly don't know why these features aren't in iTunes already.
      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:iTunes by Synthageek · · Score: 3, Informative

      I have run up to 5 streams (3 wired) and 2 802.11g from an old 600 Mhz P3 without any need for rebuffering the stream. The only downside to using iTunes is that the functionality to stream beyond ones own network was phased out. It would have been much better had the left in the ability to stream over the internet so I could listen to my collection at work.

    5. Re:iTunes by redheadedokie · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yep. I had pretty much the same setup in my old house. My G4 lived in my bedroom and we had a PowerBook G3/500 hooked up to the stereo and tv. Sharing MP3's wirelessly with iTunes worked flawlessly. We also used the PowerBook to watch downloaded TV shows (BBC stuff not availabled in the US). It'd stream most formats (Divx, Xvid, etc) wirelessly from the G4...but higher bitrates needed to be copied over first. Everything looked fantastic when connected via S-Video. Also, the only real limitation to the AirPort Express is that they will only play what's playing on the main iTunes "server"--i.e. no different songs in different rooms. Another cool thing that you might consider is to have a BlueTooth cell phone. I never got around t to it, but there is some software called Salling Clicker that'll let you control iTunes (skip songs and stuff) from your cell phone. Here's the link (too lazy to do HTML at the moment) http://homepage.mac.com/jonassalling/Shareware/Cli cker/

    6. Re:iTunes by mr+i+want+to+go+home · · Score: 4, Informative
      iTunes has both these capabilities.

      1. Requires airport express. You name the Airport Express(es) as "Living Room", "Kitchen", etc. You can then select these from any wi-fi Mac and stream to each one (ie - push). Airport Express has digital audio-out, BTW.

      2. You only need one central music library really. You then share that library with iTunes. Any other copies of iTunes on the network (Mac or PC) can the see that library and any playlists on it, and play music from it. I haven't noticed any lag when playing music shared this way, even over wireless networks even with 3 or 4 people sharing.

      If you require true synchronisation of multiple libraries, then a little rsync is your friend. Here's the options I use to keep my 2 libraries in sync (note: I only add music on one machine, so this is a one way sync) - I'm not sure what Slashcode will do to the following, so you may have to remove spaces...

      rsync -v -r -C --ignore-existing --rsh="ssh" /users/my_local_account/music/itunes me@myserver_name_or_ip_address:/users/my_account_o n_the_server/music/

      The one thing that iTunes lacks that annoys me is the ability to remotely control another copy of iTunes (like on the server) from my laptop. I actually have a script to do this through the shell, but I'd really like to be doing it through the iTunes interface.

    7. Re:iTunes by MultiModeRb87 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Unfortunately, I think that the first post in this thread was referring to sound synchronization. It's easy to get multiple machines to have access to the same song files, but it's more difficult to get multiple machines to output that sound in phase with one another.

      The only way that you could reliably make that happen would be to calibrate your network of machines via a test sound file and a microphone. And even then, I don't know how well the synchronization would hold up if the machines are running anything else. Maybe you need to continuously run such a calibration program on the master machine, and restart/insert delays via pause/unpause to remote machines to correct slippage?

    8. Re:iTunes by Phrack · · Score: 4, Informative

      Doing iTunes sharing from a central Linux box:

      http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=200 30 711140157143

      Old article, but it'll be a step in a particular direction should someone be looking for that.

      No, it's not a player.. it's just a repository that looks like a shared iTunes to other clients.

      --
      Dump the IRS - http://www.fairtax.org
    9. Re:iTunes by tgibbs · · Score: 3, Informative

      The one thing that iTunes lacks that annoys me is the ability to remotely control another copy of iTunes (like on the server) from my laptop. I actually have a script to do this through the shell, but I'd really like to be doing it through the iTunes interface.

      The program you want is called NetTunes. It provides a remote iTunes window for your music server, although the remote iTunes is not as responsive as a local copy. I'm using it to run a "headless" beige G3 as a music server.

  2. Hmmm, go wired! by Paolo+DF · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, if you are serious about sound, you really should go for wired solutions. If you can't go for wires, then you should consider some good (and expensive) wireless sound speakers. If you -finally- are just thinking of PC-like sounds, well, I think I can't help. Sorry. PS: I'd stress you to go for the wired solutions. And wire the speakers with MonsterCable or similar. drop the cheap car-audio stuff. Ciao!

    --
    Pumbaa! I don't wonder; I know.
    1. Re:Hmmm, go wired! by pdbogen · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm going to have to agree. Wireless is all well and good, but don't use it if you don't bloody have to. Wireless is for laptops, so you can walk around with internet. Are you going to wander around with a speaker in your hand? Anyway, I can't see a hacked-together wireless sound solution with P3 laptops and whatnot being nearly as good as a few well-placed wired speakers.

    2. Re:Hmmm, go wired! by Matey-O · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You had me all the way up to Monster Cable. [Shudder] You're falling for a lot of marketing hype.

      I've got a hybrid house with wireless iTunes going to the kids' iMac upstairs, the Wired Xbox playing audio in the family room (cat 5 to the xbox, optical from there to the home theatre). You do NOT want to pipe video over 802.11g. You can do it, but if the main living spaces can be wired, leave the wireless bandwidth for better uses. The 'College Audiophile stereo' is hooked up to the music server in my office.

      Any other music needs (garage) are handled by my iPod and an iTrip.

      --
      "Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
    3. Re:Hmmm, go wired! by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Anyway, I can't see a hacked-together wireless sound solution with P3 laptops and whatnot being nearly as good as a few well-placed wired speakers.

      Digital sound. Wired, wireless, whatever, the transport medium does not really make a difference. It's 1's and 0's and whether they get from point A to point B via a wire or via EM it does not matter. P3 laptops should be fine for reassembling that audio and if they have a USB port or other digital audio out and connect to good speakers there is no reason why the sound quality would be any worse than any other solution. The wirelessness just makes it more portable (if you are a renter) and keeps you from having to run wires through your walls, ceiling, or floor.

    4. Re:Hmmm, go wired! by fishbowl · · Score: 5, Informative


      "You had me all the way up to Monster Cable. [Shudder] You're falling for a lot of marketing hype."

      ABX testing has shown Home Depot 18 gauge lamp cord to be identical or even superior to Monster Cable in all respects.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    5. Re:Hmmm, go wired! by QMO · · Score: 4, Funny

      Forget digital, go vinyl.

      But, if you're really serious:

      Forget viny, forget CD, forget DVD audio, forget 8-track. The only way to go is to get the whole orchestra in your house, and bring John Williams himself home to conduct it.

      Anything less is for pikers who might as well just listen to 75-year-old AM radio playing scratchy wire-recordings, or the neighborhood cats singing in the street.

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    6. Re:Hmmm, go wired! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Professional "golden ears" refuse to submit to blind tests. However, some tests using a placebo cable while the real cable was hidden showed that the "golden ears" consistently claim to hear what the marketing information for the cable they think they are testing says they should hear. When the placebos are swapped and the actual cable being used is left fixed they consistently pick the best looking placebo.

      http://home.austin.rr.com/tnulla/duncable.htm

    7. Re:Hmmm, go wired! by borkus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wired, wireless, whatever, the transport medium does not really make a difference. It's 1's and 0's and whether they get from point A to point B via a wire or via EM it does not matter.

      As long as the format is digital, you are correct. But typically the signal between between the amplifier and the speakers is analog. For analog, the quality of the connection matters.

      In sound terms, you typically have four parts -
      1. Source (in this case digital music files).
      2. A Digital to Audio Converter.
      3. Amplifier
      4. Speakers

      Wireless between points one and two (say a music server and a laptop playing the files) can be digital. However, at some point, you have to convert to analog.

      In my option, a good setup for playback in each room would be an old laptop hooked up to an old stereo receiver/amp wired to a nice pair of bookshelf speakers - something with at least 5/12-6/12 low drivers. If you look around, you can probably find some nice used stereo amplifiers - pioneer, onkyo, yamaha. You can even buy decent new stereo amps for a small amount of money these days. I'd spring for new speakers in any event.

    8. Re:Hmmm, go wired! by jwdb · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, any cable's fine as long as it has negligible inductance and capacitance. A bit of resistance is ok - it'll just reduce the ammount of power reaching your speakers, but as long as your amp can handle a variety of load resistances it shouldn't be a problem.

      Distortion due to cables mainly arises when the cable resistance becomes frequency dependent. At that point it will damp some tones more than others, and everything falls apart. I suppose you could fix it by playing with the equalizer, but that is far from a good solution.

      Prognosis: use a braided cable (many small strands, not one solid) with decent quality copper to keep the resistance down and your music should sound fine. The braids will reduce the increase in resistance due to the skin effect (where high-frequency current migrates to the surface of the conductor, reducing the effective cross-section of your cable).

      Jw

    9. Re:Hmmm, go wired! by eggoeater · · Score: 4, Informative

      I use to run a pro-sound company (we ran big sound systems for bands and DJs). Every now-and-then I'd get to a gig and find out I was missing a speaker cable or not have a long enough speaker cable to get to the speakers they owner wanted outside on the deck,etc.

      Whenever that happened I just ran to the nearest Lowe's or WalMart and bought two 16 gauge extension cords, chop off the ends and put Neutrik speaker connectors on it. Worked great and got a 100ft speaker cable for 8 dollars. You actually don't need more than 16 guage unless you're pushing serious wattage (>150 RMS).
      Of course for any install job I would use 14 and 12 guage.

    10. Re:Hmmm, go wired! by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, they're digital to the amp, at best. If they're digital headed into the speaker, then they are internally amplified and will be converted to analog at the input to the amp, at the very latest. I.E. they're run through a DAC and put into the amplifier, since the only way you can amplify sound for a speaker is with... an amplifier. And amplifiers (despite marketspeak calling lovely Class D amps "Digital") are inherently analog processes.

      If they're biamped, they might be digital through the crossover even, but that's only because the amplifier is after the crossover. The amplifier is, and will always be, analog.

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
  3. revealing quote by halfelven · · Score: 3, Funny

    Of course, first thoughts are to the sound system.

    Geek. :-)

  4. Same music in every room by eln · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is so easy, I don't even know why you had to post it to Slashdot.

    So, here it is, how to have the same music play in every room in your house, in 3 easy steps:

    1.) Buy stereo system with very large speakers
    2.) Put stereo system in one room of your house. Orient speakers so they face toward the rest of the house.
    3.) Turn volume up all the way.

    If you still have some "dead spots" in the house where the sound doesn't reach, you'll need my specidal educational pamphlet "Sledgehammers and You," available for only $9.95, plus shipping and handling.

  5. New House? by CommanderData · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When you say "new house" do you mean that it's being built for you right now? If so, forget the wireless idea immediately. Go to Home Depot, buy boxes of Cat5/6 cable, spools of coax, and heavy duty speaker cable. Pick out a closet somewhat close to your living/family room and make it the distribution hub for your new home. Get your butt down to the construction site and run coax, network, and speaker wires to all the rooms of the house from this central location. It also wouldn't hurt to run RCA, S-Video, and maybe even VGA or DVI from the closet to the expected location of your main TV.

    Any wires that you do not plan to use right away can be left inside the walls (Take pictures of EVERYTHING before they sheetrock the place, you'll be glad you did later when you want to find the wires!). The rest of the stuff should have standard boxes that you can add the appropriate wall plates to later.

    Smarthome is your friend for a lot of the finishing touches. I recommend a box like the ChannelPlus that allows you to insert your own audio/video on an unused cable channel. I did that and now I can watch DVDs or Movies coming from the computer in the closet on any TV in the house. ChannelPlus thoughtfully has IR devices that feed back up the coax line to the source so your remote controls will activate everything hidden in the closet.

    I could go on and on about this- I've done it for my current home and will be building another home this year. I've already started thinking about improvements to my original layout :)

    --
    Urge to post... fading... fading... RISING!... fading... fading... gone.
    1. Re:New House? by jedinite · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No question, if you're still in the pre-rough-in stages (i.e. no drywall up yet), wire your house.

      Even if you've got drywall down, depending on your insulation type you may still be able to fish wires through, especially if your ceiling/floor is not directly insulated - you can easily run wire parallel to floor joice if its not insulated, cut a small hole at the ceiling, and fish through the insulated walls - assuming its a spray-in non-hardening insulation, which most people use these days - my house is blown recycled newspaper which is apparently a very common insulation.

      In more detail, I just (this weekend) closed on my new custom-built house. I've got 1.26 miles of wire in the house (easily calculated since everyone sold me the wire I used by the foot). Cat5e for phone, Cat6e for data, speakerwire, multiple coax runs to almost every room (so I can RF-mod signals and broadcast them to any other room), and in appropriate places audio, video, even two 25' DVI runs and two 25' RGB runs. In fact, voice/data/coax terminates to a Futuresmart panel in my furnace room where signals can be routed...

      As someone has already said, wireless is good for walking around with the laptop/etc. Not what you want for speakers. But not to mention when you've got the opportunity to build a gigabit backbone for the majority of the house, take it while you still can. Especially if you're serious about moving music or especially video.

      My recently-received Mac Mini will be taking over as a media center in my home theater, and i'll be pulling MP3s and videos from my WinXP boxes via Samba (cut me some slack on the Windows comments, my dedicated server is BSD but XP still is my best machine for gaming and video).

      --

      ---------
      There is no try at jedinite.com
  6. Apple AirPort with AirTunes by DaKrzyGuy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Apple makes a neat little device that you can use to stream music to and hooks up to your stereo. This combined with iTunes is a great way to play music all over the house.

  7. Sonos might be your answer... by klubar · · Score: 5, Informative

    You might look into the Sonos system (previously discussed on /. It's wireless and allows unique content at each location. I saw an early demo and it was very impressive. Cost might be a factor, but the system and controllers have a very nice look and feel.

  8. Don't forget by Mr2cents · · Score: 4, Funny

    > I don't want to wire. Anything.

    I suggest batteries.. a lot of them.

    --
    "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
  9. [tt] lemmie get this straight... by FortKnox · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You put down money for a NEW house. Studs still in the walls? Where wiring up speakers and such is a piece of cake. Putting in a full sound system in every room (you can do it yourself for free) is pretty simple and easy to do...

    But you'd rather drop a big clunky P3 in the room with a wireless card.... why? I see no advantage in it. Wire up speakers in every room. All wires go to computer room. Wires then attached to a single machine that manipulates everything.

    But, being a computer geek and having a buncha P3 boxes lying about is what makes you happy, knock yourself out.

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
  10. Roku Soundbridge by davegust · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Roku Labs has a neat solution.

    1. Re:Roku Soundbridge by kraut · · Score: 3, Informative

      Or a slimdevices Squeezebox. http://www.slimdevices.com/ - I've just bought one, and it works a treat. Sounds good, to. And it's cheaper than the Roku stuff.

      --
      no taxation without representation!
  11. Ethernet (wired or wireless)... by WonderSnatch · · Score: 5, Interesting

    isn't going to work. Since each sound card will have a slightly different version of 44.1-kHz, none of the rooms will match. It won't take long for the songs to get out of sync. Ethernet is also no isochronous, meaning it can't gaurantee the arrival time of packets...

  12. sound in all your rooms by sidhe7 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've been playing with this problem for a couple of years now. The problem is that sound streaming over IP is basically impossible to sync properly. As mentioned above, it's pretty simple to stream different streams to each room but if you want all the rooms playing the same thing, each will be off by a few parts of a second. It drove me crazy. We just ran audio over Cat5e everywhere from a central system in the living room. Home Depot's got punch down blocks that convert Cat5e into an unamplified audio output RCA jack.

    1. Re:sound in all your rooms by ldspartan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've come across this problem as well, and it seems to me that it's really not very hard, just that none of the currently-available streaming protocols are designed to do it. It seems like it would be trivial to timing metadata in the stream, and have the endpoints buffer a second or two of data. Then you just need to synchronize every endpoints clock, but that's a problem that NTP has solved for years.

      Just random thoughts.

      --
      lds

    2. Re:sound in all your rooms by Wugger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Think back, think waaaaay back, before packets, before computers. When you wanted the same music in all your rooms, what did you do? You tuned all your radios to the same station.

      Buy an FM transmitter kit for a hundred bucks, and your problems are solved. Synchronization is perfect, price is low, deployment is trivial.

  13. Wireless audio distribution by jnolen · · Score: 5, Informative

    So it turns out that this is harder that you might think. Getting different wireless audio into different rooms isn't too bad. It's mostly a function of throughput. But getting the SAME wireless audio is into different rooms and keeping it in sync is a surprisingly difficult.

    I have the SlimDevices Squeezebox (http://www.slimdevices.com/), and it works great at the first task, but only moderately well at the second. There's a new company called Sonos (http://www.sonos.com/) that just released their product which does both very well.

    I had a chance to beta-test the product and it really is as good as described. It's Linux-based, but not open-source. It utilizes a proprietary mesh-network running on top of 802.11g and it worked flawlessly in my three zone setup. All three zones could play high-bitrate audio in perfect sync with no drops.

    The downside is that it is fairly expensive. If you don't need sync'd audio, I might go with a cheaper option. But if you do, I've yet to find anything that can top Sonos.

    1. Re:Wireless audio distribution by revans · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The amazingly stupid thing about Sonos is their marketing folks don't scream this time-base synchronization feature. This thread shows how important it is. I've been looking for a multi-zone digital playback system for years and this is the first one I've found. To me it is the ONE thing that makes them stand out. Well, that, and their cool iPod-like remote control.

  14. Re:Monster Cable by futuresheep · · Score: 5, Informative
    Here comes the flame war about cabling, but you'll get the same sound quality by wiring your house with lamp cord as you will with Monster Cable. Monster is an outstanding marketing machine. The product are good quality, but the bang for buck ratio is pretty bad.

    If you don't want to belive me, and since I'm just some schmo on the internet you shouldn't, do a search on Monster Cable at either of these websites, and read the consensus opinions.

    Avs Forum
    HDTVoice

    If you're looking for high quality cables at an excellent price, try Bluejeans Cable

  15. My Home-Grown System by SlipJig · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wrote a little Java app (actually three apps) that allow me to stream audio over the network. The cool part (well, I think it's cool, anyway) is that it's in three pieces: a server, player, and controller. The server serves the files, the player plays it out to audio, and the controller (you guessed it) lets you set up playlists and jobs from a central location (there's little point in streaming audio to another room if you have to walk there to start it up). You can play multiple jobs to different rooms at the same time.

    My wife uses this to stream music (in ogg and mp3 format) from my server downstairs to a Linux box in the living room I built for this purpose. She controls it from a GUI on a Windows box on the kitchen counter. I've tested it over wireless and it works fine.

    I was thinking of putting this up on SourceForge - if anyone's interested let me know (msimpson at abel solutions dot com).

    --
    Read my keyboard review.
  16. Re:Slimp3 by chiphart · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You can definitely do cheaper than a slimserver (though mine is on its way).

    The
    NetGear MP101 can be had for ~$75 after rebate at your local Big Box Electronics Store. Note, though, that the experiences with this product range from miserable to acceptable, largely because of weak wireless capability (it works for some, not others) and a flaky server software package.

    The slim, on the other hand, has a fairly amazing open package with some awesome plugins developed by the community. The downside, though, is that it's not compatible with UPnP (which the MP101 is), making alternative servers, like Twonkyvision
    useless.

    Why am I switching to the slim, even with the higher price (3x)? Two reasons: first, the open server software - perl based! - means that I'll get features I really dig and not get stuck without answers. Second, the MP101 can only really do radio streams if you pay a one time? $20 fee OR monkey around considerably. While the service is pretty nice during the trial period, I'd prefer to not pay for something I can do for free.

    --

    ...if I wanted to read garbage like that, I'd go to \.
  17. MythTV by Mike+Miller · · Score: 4, Informative
    While the entire app is a bit overkill, using mythtv would be a reasonable solution. For just Music, you would need to run a backend server with the music and NFS and then just install the clients on your laptops. There's also a Knoppix distro for it - http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html

    There are several websites on converting laptops into "picture frames" http://www.likelysoft.com/hacks/pictureframes.shtm l, http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/27/023922 2&tid=222&tid=1, http://channel9.msdn.com/wiki/default.aspx/Channel 9.JunktopRevival Which you could modify slightly to add built in powered speakers and hang one in each room.

    - Mike

  18. Buy a walkman by delmoi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Honestly, you'd rather have a bunch of ugly, old computer equipment sitting around (and plugged into the wall no less) in every room in your house then put in wireing? Are you planning on buying high-fidelity amps and good speakers for every room too?

    As much as I hate apple, just buy an Ipod and cary it around with you if you can't stand to be stuck in just one room listening to music.

    --

    ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
  19. Use Slimserver and Softsqueeze by ZedmanAuk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Install Slimserver (http://www.slimdevices.com/index.html) on a central server with all your music. Put a P3 laptop (or some other machine) with wireless in every room you will want music. Run SoftSqueeze (http://softsqueeze.sourceforge.net/) on each client, connecting to the server. Get a PDA with wireless and use Slimserver's built-in handheld skin to control your music.

    Done!

    --
    -ZA
  20. Really simple, here's how: by cypherz · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you have a network, and a stack 'o PIII's then you have what you need. It doesn't really matter what kind of network, as long as everything connects via TCP and has enough bandwidth for your needs.
    Setup a linux server, with enough disk space for your media collection and whatever else you want to store there. Install gnumpd3 from
    here: http://www.gnu.org/software/gnump3d/
    Install a desktop linux distro on the machines in each room. Aim a web browser from any machine at the URL of the gnump3d server and viola! you have music from your collection on demand in any room!
    Streaming radio style music is easy as well. Install icecast from here:http://www.icecast.org/
    and aim the xmms player from here: http://www.xmms.org/ and you have streaming media! woohoo!
    If you want to control a distribution system that plays the same songs things get more complicated, you'll need Apple computer's RTSP server and some client software to get everything sync'd throughout the house.
    I use secure shell from my zaurus wireless pda and mpg123 and aumix to operate this from a pocket sized device. For everything else I just browse the music library with gnump3d's web interface. FWIW, I use SuSE linux. It came with all the above except for the Darwin Stream Server (or whatever it is that Apple calls it these days). I had to download and compile the icecast source, but what the heck, it wasn't to hard to do either.

    HTH

    --
    This sig kills fascists.
  21. FM Transmitter by DrinkDr.Pepper · · Score: 3, Funny

    Instead of trying to use 802.11g and multiple computers, why not just buy your own FM radio station and put a radio in each room?

    --
    0xfeedface
  22. Glod plated optical cables by LanMan04 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah, I think "GOLD PLATED CONNECTORS!!" on optical audio cables is all I have to say about Monster Cable. [shudder]

    --
    With the first link, the chain is forged.
  23. Re:Monster Cable by peawee03 · · Score: 3, Informative

    feeds troll...

    Speaker wire is nothing more than fancy AC power cables, and with a good reason- analog audio is represented electrically as AC current. Nothing special, just simple AC. It's voltage and frequency vary considerably (voltage = volume, frequency = pitch), but it's just AC nonetheless. The only reason why it doesn't look like it is because most of the time there's a fancy connector on the end of it... or other times, just bare wire.

    The only reason why your dryer has thicker cable than your TV is due to the fact that the dryer pulls much more current than the TV, and to avoid literally melting your cables and starting a nice electrical fire the conductive material is thicker to carry the increased current. The same is true for speaker cables- the cable used on big, multi-kW PA systems is much bigger than the 1 W headphones you've got.

    As long as you don't do silly things like running audio parallel to power cables (tends to induce a 60 Hz hum into your audio) and make sure you cross all power cables @ 90 degree (or pi/2 radian) angles, you will get great performance with either Home Depot extension cords or Monster Cable speaker cable, because they are the exact same thing. Keyboard magazine ran an article a few years back on cable comparisons. The listening test, done with at least 10-15 people, showed no superior performer. The only way they could rank them is in how well they lasted (one of their tests: slam the cable in a pickup truck bed door 10 times and see if it still works).

    There is differences between different kinds of cable, but the differences are for signal types. Analog audio is AC, so AC cables work just *great*. For example, twisted pair ethernet uses a differential signal to avoid interference problems, more details can be found here. Check up on your stuff next time before trolling so hard.

    --
    I wish I could write clever and witty sigs.