Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Off Topic OT: Sonos vs. Squeezebox

I second trying a quality router. My sb3 ran pretty flawless both wired and wireless as well as the transporter.

Get one that supports upgradable antennas.

Also you might consider using Powerline ethernet for receivers which solves wifi issues for some folks.

I run open source firmware on my linksys that is totally awesome. It supports tunneling and Wake-On-Lan. So I can vpn in, turn on squeezecenter server and stream music to work by transcoding to MP3 192kps and use web browser to select music. I think I could even do this to my pda phone.

I'm using the powerline connectors which has taken the wifi issues out of the picture except for the controller. A different router might help it, though I'm partial to the software of the Airport Extreme. Are there significantly better performing routers out there? I've heard mixed things about external antennas. Recommendations/experiences anyone?

Don't you think it should worry Meridian that one of the most popular threads on a forum dedicated to Meridian and with hard core Meridian owners amongst its contributors should be "off topic" and about music servers of various types?

They should also be worried by the very positive response of server users when they get their systems working.

Malcolm,

I agree, we have said it before that the whole music streaming/networked wireless/wired market is missing a high end 'player'. It was even discussed at the HH visit last year!

I have to ask why haven't Meridian come up with a solution to this? with their kit all based around digital it would seem a logical move and if they do have a relationship with apple of any sort potentially elegant as well... an integrated airport express in a DSP3100 and i would buy 4 pairs at least... anyway, we can but hope!

Personally i am over the moon with my airport express/apple tv solution. Even my wife can work it... sometimes.

Just a note, looks like Sonos will has some updated boxes coming out:

http://smart-home-blog.com/archives/1007

As I now understand it from PM:ing my friend they no longer play nice together since the latest Sonos SW upgrades. When you make a call Sonos reset the server, making it hard for anything else to control the system. He doesn't use the combination at home, and only partly at work (and they do Crestron programming, among other things).

Edit: I got it explained more thoroughly. Sonos mesh net uses DHCP and when something, like a remote, is inactive for a while it's thrown out to free up an IP address. Crestron, however, uses fixed IP addresses. To get this to work together they ping'ed the server so the Crestron units weren't thrown out due to inactivity. But with the SW change, the server was reset for every ping. They worked on a workaround for that problem, and were finishing it, when they learned that one (other) company would get the exclusive Sonos rights here in Sweden. So it wasn't interesting finalizing it since they couldn't do custom installations selling Sonos. They can use the Crestron for stop/play, but the feedback thing isn't ready - and the visual controller is one of the main selling points for Sonos...

They are obviously clever people and I suspect that the above is a simplification of the cause, but I would have thought that setting the DHCP lease time for the device on the DHCP server to a long enough period (ie days, weeks, years, who knows) would have effectively made the IP address specific to the device. ie, when the device dropped off the network, the IP would not be reallocated so next time the device connects to the net and 'asks' for an IP address, it would get the same address. Some DHCP servers also allow IP addresses to be pre allocated to a device, again, effectively making the IP address static to the device.

It's probably both a simplification and a scrambling (by me) of the facts. It didn't help that I have lousy cell coverage here, while his new phone rebooted right in the middle...

Tommy:

Appreciate the follow -- really it is GREAT...although I had hoped you and your friend had a solution it will have to wait...after a few days of the SONOS being fully functional (i.e. speakers installed) I must admit that other than in the HT it is not bad having a separate SONOS remote.

Again, thanks so much.

PS. For those interested in good/great little speakers check out the B&W M1's...they are tremendous (and, for the record, need to be use dinstead of in-walls in by bedroom because the bedroom had a steel beam running across the wall where the speakers were to go).

And for those wondering...the SONOS rocks and I am one very happy consumer...

For the Sonos users out there, a few questions...

Thinking of using Sonos as line level input to F80 and also to power outside speakers.

1. Am I right in saying that ZP100 has audio input and output?
2. What is Audio input for? Looks to be for audio in of external sources. If this was connected to F80 headphone/line out (for DAB or CD etc) but F80 was connected to line in, is there anything to prevent feedback?
3. Can ZP100 output as amp (to speakers) and line out (to F80) and can these be independently controlled, even if it muting speaker output whilst using line out? If so, how user friendly is this - ie can speakers be left on mute through standby without having to remember to must them each time it is turned on.

Thanks

-Ian

Ian,

The ZP100 has analog audio inputs, line outputs and speaker outputs.

The ZP80 has analog audio inputs and line outputs, plus optical and coaxial digital outputs.

If you set the ZP100 for variable volume control, both line and speaker outputs are controlled simultaneously. I don't think there's any way to control them seperately.

The Audio Input is for a line level device (CD player, TV, etc.) I don't know how feedback could be avoided, as there's no logical link between inputs and outputs.

You might want to consider a ZP80 to connect to the F80 digitally (much better fidelity), but, of course, you'd lose the amp from the ZP100.

Good luck,

John