Julf wrote:
> I like to determine truth based on evidence and facts, not whether it
> happens to conform to my belief system or not.
Evidence and facts? So you're not the sort of person that would buy a
DAC because it goes, Where no DAC has gone before! LOL.
-
marcoc1712 wrote:
> I dislike CA, but i dislike HA too, as in gneral dislike who always
> pretend to stay by the side of the 'real thruth'.
I like to determine truth based on evidence and facts, not whether it
happens to conform to my belief system or not. What do you think of the
"well-tempered
REMOVED, double post. Sorry.
SB+, Klimo Merlino + Kent Gold, Monitor Audio Studio 20 Gold SE+, Klimo
reference and DIS Interconnect.
marcoc1712's Profile: http:/
Julf wrote:
> I assume you are talking about Computer Audiophile, a commercial,
> ad-sponsored site (where the advertisers are audiophool vendors). No the
> best place for neutral advice - funny enough, the site tends to promote
> all sorts of foo, and I got blocked for pointing out some of the s
marcoc1712 wrote:
> Shall I ask where, other than CA you could read about that matter?
I assume you are talking about Computer Audiophile, a commercial,
ad-sponsored site (where the advertisers are audiophool vendors). No the
best place for neutral advice - funny enough, the site tends to promo
JackOfAll wrote:
> LOL. My local builds of the original squeezelite code are using a "-Z"
> option to do something very similar.. resulting in re-sampling on
> the client, not server...
Thank you for the patch.
marcoc1712 wrote:
> Again, that's my fault, I did not realized you were waiting
JackOfAll wrote:
> There is a bigger issue and it is more political than practical. What I
> need to do, is have a way of making original squeezelite code compatible
> with code not compatible with GPL. The slightly murky way of doing this,
> is to add a plugin interface to squeezelite, with the
JackOfAll wrote:
> There is a bigger issue and it is more political than practical. What I
> need to do, is have a way of making original squeezelite code compatible
> with code not compatible with GPL. The slightly murky way of doing this,
> is to add a plugin interface to squeezelite, with the
marcoc1712 wrote:
>
> If your PCM /DSD converter is a library with LGPL licence, I could not
> see any problem and even any 'unfair play' by you.
>
There is a bigger issue and it is more political than practical. What I
need to do, is have a way of making original squeezelite code compatible
w
JackOfAll wrote:
> but IMHO C.A. is (or was) full of the "audiophool loonies" that have
> more money than sense
I have the really same feeling, but then I have also to work hard to
make you discern me (and some others) from them!
___
JackOfAll wrote:
> Yes, it's not clear to me either. LOL. It would be a bit of a cheek
> to call what I have now squeezelite. It started out from squeezelite,
> but it is so heavily modified now I already implemented PCM->DSD
> conversion in the front-end (what you would still call squeez
marcoc1712 wrote:
>
> ...
> BTW, I think you found a Bug and probably Kimmo is going to release a
> new version of the patch, I think we all then better use that one, I
> suppose.
> ...
Here is an update:
http://www.daphile.com/gpl-src/00-Daphile-patches/squeezelite/04-lms_downsampling_option
ralphy wrote:
> No. I haven't added -x to my builds yet.
>
> I sent you a link to this patch in a pm that doesn't include the extra
> sample rates to try.
>
> http://ralph_irving.users.sourceforge.net/dumps/daphile-disable-lms-downsample.patch
Again, that's my fault, I did not realized you wer
marcoc1712 wrote:
> That's not clear to me: Are you working on a libsoxr fork or is a
> completely new library/tool? Is your work somehow related to mansr patch
> ?
Yes, it's not clear to me either. LOL. It would be a bit of a cheek
to call what I have now squeezelite. It started out from sq
marcoc1712 wrote:
> Just curios if mansr (the author of tha sox patch) and others are now
> writing about that matter other than in C.A. forum, that seems to me is
> not up to date, considering what people are reporting here.
>
Oh, I understand the question, now! But I have not got a good answ
JackOfAll wrote:
> i7 should be fine for realtime I would have thought. I always test
> worst possible scenario's on low-end hardware.
>
> I was interested in testing this sox PCM->DSD implementation on the
> back-end, vs, the (still unreleased) front-end impl I put into
> squeezelite. Main di
JackOfAll wrote:
>
> Sorry Marco, I don't understand what you mean?
Just curios if mansr (the author of tha sox patch) and others are now
writing about that matter other than in C.A. forum, that seems to me is
not up to date, considering what people are reporting here.
Hope is more clear.
kipeta wrote:
> No, it does not. It can play multi-channel FLACs but only with two
> channel output. Only the front left and front right channels will be
> used from the FLAC, all other channels will be dropped.:( Too bad. Thanks for
> clarifying.
--
marcoc1712 wrote:
> I was talking about a Core I7 4th generation server, as I wrote in
> previous post, but reading your numbers I understand real time with HQ
> settings is now possible also with a NUC I5 or even a PI 3. If so I'm
> ready to change my mind and give another try to pcm to dsd con
ralphy wrote:
>
> http://ralph_irving.users.sourceforge.net/dumps/daphile-disable-lms-downsample.patch
LOL. My local builds are using a "-Z" option to do something very
similar..
+---+
|Filename: squeezelite-maxSampleRate.pat
kipeta wrote:
> Multichannel files are streamed fine from LMS to squeezelite but
> squeezelite is hardcoded to use only two main front channels from them.
> Actually the multichannel PCM required a patch to get it working the
> same as FLAC. See:
> http://www.daphile.com/gpl-src/00-Daphile-patche
Macro can you confirm that all your stuff went into Ralphs fork? And
Ralphs fork can be considered as a kind of new squeezelite master?
Thx.
BTW: There's also a sox fork with offers PCM DSD/DOP conversion.
https://github.com/mansr/sox
::: ' Touch Toolbox and more' (http://soundcheck-audio.b
marcoc1712 wrote:
> The patch that I have received form Daphile was togheter for -x AND Max
> sample rate support.
> You could look at here:
> https://github.com/marcoc1712/squeezelite-R2/blob/Release/patches/lms_downsampling_option%2B768kHz_maxrate.patch
>
> NO i did try only -W option, this
ralphy wrote:
> There are 18 sample rates in the array with your patch, but
> MAX_SUPPORTED_SAMPLERATES is still the original 16.
Good catch, thanks. Fortunately the only problem it has caused is that
8kHz sample rate support was disabled.
Kimmo
www.daphile.com
---
JackOfAll wrote:
> Well, I'm an old, "2 channel audio", stick in the mud. ;) Perhaps a
> ralphy, marco, or someone else with an interest in multichannel could
> take a look? I suspect it is the sort of functionality that is only
> going to get implemented, at the point someone with coding skills
kipeta wrote:
> This one does:
> http://www.daphile.com/gpl-src/00-Daphile-patches/squeezelite/04-lms_downsampling_option+768kHz_maxrate.patch
There are 18 sample rates in the array with your patch, but
MAX_SUPPORTED_SAMPLERATES is still the original 16.
Ralphy
*1*-Touch, *5*-Classics, *2*-B
gorman wrote:
> Daphile supports FLAC multi-channel output through HDMI? And it connects
> to LMS?
No, it does not. It can play multi-channel FLACs but only with two
channel output. Only the front left and front right channels will be
used from the FLAC, all other channels will be dropped.
Ki
marcoc1712 wrote:
> hem... I support REAL stereo! :-), but why not give a chance to
> Daphile?Daphile supports FLAC multi-channel output through HDMI? And it
> connects
to LMS?
gorman's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices
I was briefly looking into different "NO-DAC" projects ongoing on the
net.
Basically these use Amanero or JLSOUNDS USB-I2S/DSD interfaces with
direct DSD processing capabilities, feeding the DSD stream into a basic
LowPassFilter. There are different projects with different complexity
(FlipFlops/
JackOfAll wrote:
> Not all audiophiles are audiophools, just 99.99% of them! ;) (IMHO)
>
> I know of one 'phool who paid a kings ransom for a professional studio
> software package, when he could have bought a HQPlayer license for
> PCM->DSD conversion! Not sure if it still is now, but the Korg
gorman wrote:
> Anyone? :)
Adding code to squeezelite to support multichannel output, maybe.
Currently, it will only output 2 channel. Does LMS even support
streaming multi-channel??? (I didn't think it did, but I might be
wrong.)
---
JackOfAll wrote:
> I am sure you don't need me to explain that it may be a problem playing
> in realtime, a track of 04:15, when it takes 09:00 to process. ;) What
> is a, "normal server"? LOL.
>
> Seriously, CORE5 is a "two generation old" Corei5 laptop. NUC5P is the
> second NUC up from bottom
kipeta wrote:
> This one does:
> http://www.daphile.com/gpl-src/00-Daphile-patches/squeezelite/04-lms_downsampling_option+768kHz_maxrate.patch
I better read all answers, but thanks, I think is the one you sent to me
and I applied.
S
kipeta wrote:
> iDSD micro (http://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/micro-idsd/) supports
> 768kHz PCM and DSD512 uses 705,6kHz with native DSD_U32_LE sample format
> (or DSD_U32_BE, I don't remember).
That's new for me (PCM 768Khz support), I knew is 'normal' for DSD
players. I supposed that if yo
JackOfAll wrote:
> Well, I'm an old, "2 channel audio", stick in the mud. ;) Perhaps a
> ralphy, marco, or someone else with an interest in multichannel could
> take a look? I suspect it is the sort of functionality that is only
> going to get implemented, at the point someone with coding skills
ralphy wrote:
> The patch I proposed to you for -x does not include the additional
> sample rates. Have you tried it?
> I agree with JOA, and the original daphile patch didn't update
> MAX_SUPPORTED_SAMPLERATES for the extra rates anyway.
The patch that I have received form Daphile was togheter
kipeta wrote:
> You could try it with Daphile. I recommend the latest beta version:
> http://www.daphile.com/firmware/beta/
I was quite sure It was like that, thanks Kimmo to comfirm.
SB+, Klimo Merlino + Kent Gold, Monitor Audio S
JackOfAll wrote:
> Marco, I mean you no disrespect, and I wouldn't be surprised if English
> isn't your first language, but the line I have quoted above, is the only
> part of what you said I understand.
>
> Look, if people want to claim that having applied processing to PCM, to
> transcode to D
kipeta wrote:
> That's inevitable But first we all must update our libraries to MQA.
"Step into the magic of the original performance"
Stupid me. I have my head buried so far up my backside, that I
didn't realise that time travel, was anything other than a theoretical
possibility. Doh!!!
JackOfAll wrote:
> Kimmo, I'll be aiming both barrels at you, for "pandering" to these
> people and encouraging their "audiophool neurosis"! ;)
>
> Cynic that I am. Oh right, this'll be the excuse for why we need yet
> another remaster of Dire Straits, Brother in Arms. LOL
That's inevitable
marcoc1712 wrote:
> Hi Kimmo, nice to see you here.
>
> Some time ago, I was playing with sox, for testing purpose, I did'nt
> have 'real' multichannel files at hands, then I was just 'cloning'
> channels from 1 and 2 in a wav stream starting from a two channel input
> file. That was not working
chrissy wrote:
> You should have read the whole story before being ironic
The whole story You mean the parts where the "marketing" is more
important than anything else.
Where no DAC has gone gone before. (Yep, they really are scraping the
barrel with that press release.)
"The micro i
JackOfAll wrote:
> "The micro iDSD has 3 different power modes Eco, Normal and Turbo." LOL.
> I stopped reading at that point! ;) Now we just need to wait for the
> "crazies" to start demanding that HDTracks makes high-res PCM available
> in 768k! High-res Nope, not good enough! We need TURBO
kipeta wrote:
> Just wait the hype when we get DSD1024 and >1MHz PCM rates ;-)
Kimmo, I'll be aiming both barrels at you, for "pandering" to these
people and encouraging their "audiophool neurosis"! ;)
JackOfAll's Profile
kipeta wrote:
> iDSD micro (http://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/micro-idsd/) supports
> 768kHz PCM .
"The micro iDSD has 3 different power modes Eco, Normal and Turbo." LOL.
I stopped reading at that point! ;) Now we just need to wait for the
"crazies" to start demanding that HDTracks ma
marcoc1712 wrote:
> Is now possible to use high or very high quality settings in runtime on
> a 'normal' server?
I am sure you don't need me to explain that it may be a problem playing
in realtime, a track of 04:15, when it takes 09:00 to process. ;) What
is a, "normal server"? LOL.
Seriously,
JackOfAll wrote:
> I was only thinking. 768kHz. What are the audiophool crazies up
> to this time?? ;)
Just wait the hype when we get DSD1024 and >1MHz PCM rates ;-)
Kimmo
www.daphile.com
kipeta's Profile: ht
ralphy wrote:
> The patch I proposed to you for -x does not include the additional
> sample rates. Have you tried it?
> I agree with JOA, and the original daphile patch didn't update
> MAX_SUPPORTED_SAMPLERATES for the extra rates anyway.
This one does:
http://www.daphile.com/gpl-src/00-Daphile-
marcoc1712 wrote:
> Yes no actual device I know is 768Khz capable with PCM, so I suppose is
> for DSD. In reality is just a placeHolder, it does nothing, but it comes
> togheter with the -x patch and my opinion is that you use some work from
> others You should always take it in his integrity and
I concur. Lately I'm tempted by learning to code. I use too much open
source stuff for not getting frustrated by my inability to contribute.
gorman's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56
View this t
gorman wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, the above is completely uninformed and there might be
> serious hurdles to stop it from happening. One could even think "what's
> the point?". But being a fan of multichannel music I'd disagree. :)
Well, I'm an old, "2 channel audio", stick in the mud. ;) Perhap
ralphy wrote:
> I agree with JOA, and the original daphile patch didn't update
> MAX_SUPPORTED_SAMPLERATES for the extra rates anyway.
I was only thinking. 768kHz. What the the audiophool crazies up
to this time?? ;)
-
gorman wrote:
> I know I asked before but... What's stopping squeezelite from outputting
> multichannel FLAC files through HDMI?
>
> I don't understand how and why LMS might be stopping that from happening
> (I'd understand the need for special rules in the conversion config
> files).
>
> Thank
marcoc1712 wrote:
> Yes no actual device I know is 768Khz capable with PCM, so I suppose is
> for DSD. In reality is just a placeHolder, it does nothing, but it comes
> togheter with the -x patch and my opinion is that you use some work from
> others You should always take it in his integrity and
marcoc1712 wrote:
>
> Then all audiophiles are fools. No, is wrong.
Not all audiphiles are audiophools, just 99.99% of them! ;) (IMHO)
I know of one 'phool who paid a kings ransom for a professional studio
software package, when he could have bought a HQPlayer license for
PCM->DSD conversion!
JackOfAll wrote:
> Adding code to squeezelite to support multichannel output, maybe.
> Currently, it will only output 2 channel. Does LMS even support
> streaming multi-channel??? (I didn't think it did, but I might be
> wrong.)
I've tried to output more than 2 channel with sox, but with no
JackOfAll wrote:
> Adding code to squeezelite to support multichannel output, maybe.
> Currently, it will only output 2 channel. Does LMS even support
> streaming multi-channel??? (I didn't think it did, but I might be
> wrong.)Unfortunately I'm no coder, so I cannot look at the code and hope
JackOfAll wrote:
> I already know I'm going to regret asking this question. 768KHz.
> What is the point of that? This is for DSD right? No one is doing
> anything that stupid with PCM (Like upsampling PCM to 768k)
Yes no actual device I know is 768Khz capable with PCM, so I suppose i
I am thinking of setting up Squeezelite on my OpenELEC RPi currently
outputting through HDMI (which then gets extracted to SPDIF) to a 5.1
A/V receiver and speakers in my living room.
My LMS audio library is all 2 channel. Is there something that I would
need to do to make sure it all works fine,
kipeta wrote:
> Mansr has improved the SDM filters couple of weeks ago (new ones are
> included in the latest Daphile beta). The upsampling is done with SoX
> directly to DSD rate (for the SDM), there is no need to resample to
> intermidiate 88.2kHz.
Thath's a good news, I've missed this. Is tha
JackOfAll wrote:
> Yes, the problem for me is that they do not say "different", they say
> "better", they say that somehow they have managed to turn lead (crappy
> old PCM) into gold (DSD). Alchemy! Most of these hardcore audiophool
> types are completely bonkers and they don't even understan
marcoc1712 wrote:
>
> The problem is - as you said - the concept of "Better". But If you
> translate it to "different" there is nothing wrong in your friend
> statement, converting PCM to DSD is lossy and (could) change the sound
> quality, when the DAC revert back to PCM, again is lossy. I thin
soundcheck wrote:
> I was briefly looking into different "NO-DAC" projects ongoing on the
> net.
>
> Basically these use Amanero or JLSOUNDS USB-I2S/DSD interfaces with
> direct DSD processing capabilities, feeding the DSD stream into a basic
> LowPassFilter. On the first glance that looks fair
Multichannel files are streamed fine from LMS to squeezelite but
squeezelite is hardcoded to use only two main front channels from them.
Actually the multichannel PCM required a patch to get it working the
same as FLAC. See:
http://www.daphile.com/gpl-src/00-Daphile-patches/squeezelite/. The full
marcoc1712 wrote:
> Sure it works on LMS and, as Kimmo reported, You coud try exactly this
> configuration using Daphile.
>
> As far as i know, the italian forum where my projects are hosted is
> hosting one of the more advanced NO DAC procjects, using JLSOUND and
> HQPLAYER, but I'm quite sure
marcoc1712 wrote:
> Yes it incorporate my mods if using -W option , but not the -x option
> and support to 768KHz from Daphile that are in my R2 version.
I already know I'm going to regret asking this question. 768KHz.
What is the point of that? This is for DSD right? No one is doing
anythin
soundcheck wrote:
>
> ...
> 2. I'm also not sure if a project
> LMS&sox(dsd-fork)->squeezelite->JLSOUNDS-USB->LPF @ up2 DSD256 would
> work.
>
>
> Let me know if anybody went that path.
>
> Thx
You could try it with Daphile. I recommend the latest beta version:
http://www.daphile.com/firmwa
soundcheck wrote:
> Macro can you confirm that all your stuff went into Ralphs fork? And
> Ralphs fork can be considered as a kind of new squeezelite master?
>
> Thx.
Yes it incorporate my mods if using -W option , but not the -x option
and support to 768KHz from Daphile that are in my R2 versi
soundcheck wrote:
> Macro can you confirm that all your stuff went into Ralphs fork? And
> Ralphs fork can be considered as a kind of new squeezelite master?[/url]
My squeezelite builds versions 1.8.3+ enables these two patches when the
-W command line option is given.
http://www.daphile.com/gp
> I just wanted to ask if it is possible to change the player volume of
> squeezelite by changing the volume of the connected Alsa Mixer device
> (in a way that the player instance knows about the volume change).
>
> I know it is possible to connect squeezelite to the mixer device by
> adding the
Hi,
If you take a look @ the sources from squeezelite you would see - there
is no "library" for DACS and their capabilities. squeezelite uses the
default or a choosen Device for the Soundoutput.
All the other Hardwareplayers (except you put and external DAC to them)
have fixed Settings - stored
JackOfAll wrote:
> Eh, why is that not a good idea? Squeezelite can convert DSD to PCM, so
> it can be played back even if you don't have a DoP capable DAC.
If it can convert DSD to PCM it is no problem to have DSD enabled by
default. But apparantly it does not do it for me. How does Squeezelite
Calm down guys...
Its that typical thing Daphile Website wrote:
> The software solutions of the Daphile are optimized for the best
> possible audiophile experience.
> /snip
> \snap
> The use of the Daphile is simple and requires no expertize
Its the same thing with the statement > You must not
marcoc1712 wrote:
>
> I dislike this way to blame people just becouse they value things you
> don't care about.
>
Marco, I mean you no disrespect, and I wouldn't be surprised if English
isn't your first language, but the line I have quoted above, is the only
part of what you said I understand.
JackOfAll wrote:
> Two issues People running hardware not powerful enought for DSD->PCM
> transcode on the client (eg. Raspberry Pi) need to use the -e option.
> Even early Pi hardware is capable of DoP output, for people with
> suitable DAC's, so it would be completely stupid to disable DSD
DJanGo wrote:
> IMHO its something with his Daphne that converts wav to DSD or something
> else.
> Its clearly not a squeezelite issue its a issue from daphne. (Some LMS
> for audioph...ish and non techie geeks)
Two issues People running hardware not powerful enought for DSD->PCM
transcode o
JackOfAll wrote:
> Eh, why is that not a good idea? Squeezelite can convert DSD to PCM, so
> it can be played back even if you don't have a DoP capable DAC.
IMHO its something with his Daphne that converts wav to DSD or something
else.
Its clearly not a squeezelite issue its a issue from daphne.
Candlemass wrote:
>
> I just wanted to point to the fact, that IMHO disabling DSD support by
> default in Squeezelite (and enable it with command line option) would be
> a more sane default behaviour for most users who just expect things to
> work.
Yep, dumb everything down for the lusers.
Candlemass wrote:
> Squeezelite does enable DSD by default (which IMHO is not a good idea).
Eh, why is that not a good idea? Squeezelite can convert DSD to PCM, so
it can be played back even if you don't have a DoP capable DAC.
--
Yes, no problem for me ;)
I just wanted to point to the fact, that IMHO disabling DSD support by
default in Squeezelite (and enable it with command line option) would be
a more sane default behaviour for most users who just expect things to
work.
-
Candlemass wrote:
> Yes, let's concentrate on question 1:
> AFAIK DSD playback is not supported by the majority of DACs and I'm sure
> all of my tested DACs do not support it, but of course all of them
> support PCM: the USB DAC in my main PC, the onboard DAC in my main PC,
> the Hifiberry on my
Yes, let's concentrate on question 1:
AFAIK DSD playback is not supported by the majority of DACs and I'm sure
all of my tested DACs do not support it, but of course all of them
support PCM: the USB DAC in my main PC, the onboard DAC in my main PC,
the Hifiberry on my RPi, the onboard DAC on my s
Candlemass wrote:
> The the questions are:
> 1. Why does Squeezelite announce DSD playback capability to the server
> (by default)? The Output devices are not able to play DSD.
> 2. Why would I want my LMS to convert the file format before streaming?
> Why is it enabled by default and where are t
The the questions are:
1. Why does Squeezelite announce DSD playback capability to the server
(by default)? The Output devices are not able to play DSD.
2. Why would I want my LMS to convert the file format before streaming?
Why is it enabled by default and where are the settings?
--
Candlemass wrote:
> Squeezelite on my PC (tested versions 1.6, 1.7, 1.8.3) and on my
> piCorePlayer does not play FLAC files anymore together with Daphile
> 16.01 (LMS 7.9.0 git64e1de0). I don't know when exactly this problem was
> introduced, but I guess it was during the last Daphile upgrade. B
Squeezelite on my PC (tested versions 1.6, 1.7, 1.8.3) and on my
piCorePlayer does not play FLAC files anymore together with Daphile
16.01 (LMS 7.9.0 git64e1de0). I don't know when exactly this problem was
introduced, but I guess it was during the last Daphile upgrade. But my
Squeezebox Radios and
chrissy wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I have a strange problem with squeezelite 1.8.3-712 and older versions
> of squeezelite under debian jessie on cubietruck. No dsf files are
> giving output. This is only with debian jessie. In wheezy the same
> binaries play dsf. An ldd gives no missing libraries.
flysurfer wrote:
> @castalla: the addon is still in Beta and not listed on the website. I
> sent you a PM with the link.
Thanks
Touch - Muse M50 EX TPA3123 T-Amp Mini - Acoustics Q10 speakers
Logitech Radio
Logitech UE Radio
O2 Joggler + SqpOS + Aune X2 T-amp + Mordaunt Short ms-3.40 speakers
@castalla: the addon is still in Beta and not listed on the website. I
sent you a PM with the link.
2 x Max2Play on ODROID U2/U3 with LMS, Squeezelite, Shairport, XBMC
1 x Squeezebox Receiver
1 x Denon 1713 AVR + Nubert 5.1 System
iPeng
Max2Play Webinterface and SD-Image: http://www.max2play.c
flysurfer wrote:
> There are also other addons (e.g. 1-click-setup accesspoint, connect
> bluethooth speakers,...) and the email/forum-support that is not free.
>
>
Where are the details for the BT addon? I can't find any reference on
your website.
Touch - Muse M50 EX TPA3123 T-Amp Mini -
Hi Clive,
thanks for your reply!
I thought more about modifying the squeezelite code to tell the LMS
about the volume changes of the Alsa-Mixer-Device that is connected to
squeezelite with the "-V" parameter on startup, rather than changing the
way the rotary encoder is applying updates on the v
flysurfer wrote:
>
> EDIT: Creating a update event ("updateVolume") that calls "send_packet"
> in slimproto.c at the same place where "sendSTAT" is called could
> work... is there any documentation about the opcodes and how to define a
> set-volume call?
Stefan,
Yes, this is the way to do it,
flysurfer wrote:
> Anyone can test this by connecting to the Alsa Mixer with "-V" option in
> squeezelite and then using alsamixer to change the volume. The volume
> for the squeezelite instance won't change (as seen in squeezebox server
> web interface or Apps) and this will overwrite the volume
flysurfer wrote:
> Hi Ronnie,
>
> yes - I talked about this with Gordon and he sent me one (rotary
> encoder) for testing ;)
>
> Now I like to get it working... the problem should be the same for all
> who like to change the volume of the Alsa Mixer device by some kind of
> hardware, as squeez
Hi Ronnie,
yes - I talked about this with Gordon and he sent me one for testing ;)
Now I like to get it working...
2 x Max2Play on ODROID U2/U3 with LMS, Squeezelite, Shairport, XBMC
1 x Squeezebox Receiver
1 x Denon 1713 AVR + Nubert 5.1 System
iPeng
Max2Play Webinterface and SD-Image: htt
flysurfer wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Why do I ask? There is a (hardware) rotary encoder for IQAudIO cards
> (DAC) that connects to the Alsa Mixer device and changes the volume. To
> help this volume change to survive longer than the currently playing
> song, I need a way to tell squeezelite about th
Hi marcoc1712,
yes, this is the default setting as otherwise the volume would always
pop to 100% and I want squeezelite to use the Alsa Mixer to control the
volume on hardware level - and if possible vice versa (set squeezelite
volume from Alsa Mixer with rotary encoder).
I just saw the possibil
flysurfer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just wanted to ask if it is possible to change the player volume of
> squeezelite by changing the volume of the connected Alsa Mixer device
> (in a way that the player instance knows about the volume change).
>
> I know it is possible to connect squeezelite to the
Hi,
I just wanted to ask if it is possible to change the player volume of
squeezelite by changing the volume of the connected Alsa Mixer device
(in a way that the player instance knows about the volume change).
I know it is possible to connect squeezelite to the mixer device by
adding the -V [D
PasTim wrote:
> I do use 24 bit pcm (from flac) from LMS with squeeze2upnp at the
> moment, so I'm not sure what the problem is that you are solving.
I suppose you are transcoding FLAC to PCM via custom-convert.conf but
without upsampling. Try to add SOX upsamplint in the custom-convert.conf
an
801 - 900 of 3853 matches
Mail list logo
