JLP wdm-ks player

[nige2000]

New versions come out at head spinning speed.

when testing mqn i think the record is 6 versions in 24 hours
often i tested a few versions then to realise theres one or two new to be tested when done

Mqn 2.7x is still the King for now

At this stage I do a cold restart of the computer. Old habits die hard.

the solution to many problems, not as bad as it used to be
many hours have been lost for the lack of a restart

this is whats in my start .bat C:\ProgramData\Squeezebox\Cache\InstalledPlugins\Plugins\LocalPlayer\Bin\squeezelite-win.exe -o "SPDIF Out (Amanero Technologies Streaming) [Windows WDM-KS]" -a 0 -b 448:450

[erin]

If you back up little bit, and follow story about .bat file which calls squeezelite-win.exe, you will find answer to your question. When you call it with that batch program you actually passing your device as a parameter to the SL-win. The second .bat is used to list your devices, that you can paste into the first one, but it didn't work. The only way for me was to run one of the old versions to read exact name of my device, and I inserted it into that .bat, everything came to normal.
I hope this helps.

I reread what you have written and I get the idea now.
but I tried putting this text into notepad and saving it as "list devices.bat"
"C:\PROGRA~3\SQUEEZ~1\Cache\INSTAL~1\Plugins\LOCALP~1\Bin\SQ12E0~1.EXE -l "

It brings up a dos box which disappears. I cant read it....

What am I doing wrong?

I also guess that this text below is meant to be for starting squeezlite so I need to put this text into a .bat file:

C:\PROGRA~3\SQUEEZ~1\Cache\INSTAL~1\Plugins\LOCALP~1\Bin\SQ12E0~1.EXE -o "SPDIF Out (insert usb converter name here) [Windows WDM-KS]" -d output=none -a 1 -b 0:2000000

is this correct?

the issue with the batch files is I copied in a shortened version of the path, just repace it with your own path and it should work

Thanks.
when I change it to:
"C:\PROGRA~3\SQUEEZ~1\Cache\INSTAL~1\Plugins\LOCALP~1\Bin\squeezelite.exe -l"

I get the dos box coming up really quickly and I can see that my usb device is there. but the problem is the dos box goes away really quickly. is there any way to make it stay on screen?

Edit: I ended up copying that text into windows cmd, and I get the information staying on screen.


I have started squeezelite using the text (copied into windows cmd). But then I have no web control. Is this deliberately killing the web control so only for using the android / ipone app?

Will this provide significantly better sound than using the web control?

So what does "-d output=none -a 1 -b 0:2000000" this text mean?

thanks

PS. respectfully, and politely, I wouldn't have to ask so many questions if the documentation was better.

[sbgk]

Thanks.
when I change it to:
"C:\PROGRA~3\SQUEEZ~1\Cache\INSTAL~1\Plugins\LOCALP~1\Bin\squeezelite.exe -l"

I get the dos box coming up really quickly and I can see that my usb device is there. but the problem is the dos box goes away really quickly. is there any way to make it stay on screen?

Edit: I ended up copying that text into windows cmd, and I get the information staying on screen.


I have started squeezelite using the text (copied into windows cmd). But then I have no web control. Is this deliberately killing the web control so only for using the android / ipone app?

Will this provide significantly better sound than using the web control?

So what does "-d output=none -a 1 -b 0:2000000" this text mean?

thanks

PS. respectfully, and politely, I wouldn't have to ask so many questions if the documentation was better.

put a pause in after the -l command so that the results stay visible

drop the -d output=none as that doesn't work

the final version will have instructions

[erin]

the final version will have instructions

Thanks for your help.

Fair enough.

[Julf]

what would be Adrian/Triode's motivation to change his code ? That would be admitting that the way the software was written affects the sound, think that would open him up for criticism by the likes of yourself who believe that if it can't be measured then there can't be any effect.

So why do you think he would be happy to make changes not supported by science and facts ?

Good point, but he might have an interest to produce a version that would allow us Linux users to verify the difference (or absence of it) ourselves, and he might want to cater for those users who want to use your improvements independent of whether they make a verifiable difference or not.

[sbgk]

what would be Adrian/Triode's motivation to change his code ? That would be admitting that the way the software was written affects the sound, think that would open him up for criticism by the likes of yourself who believe that if it can't be measured then there can't be any effect.

So why do you think he would be happy to make changes not supported by science and facts ?

Good point, but he might have an interest to produce a version that would allow us Linux users to verify the difference (or absence of it) ourselves, and he might want to cater for those users who want to use your improvements independent of whether they make a verifiable difference or not.

In which case, I'll speak to the organ grinder and not the monkey.

[jrling]

think could have lms interfacing with a ks version of mqn, configurable using using the local file option.

Now you're talking. 'Best of both Worlds' or 'Have your cake and eat it'.

[jrling]

This post was on Squeezelite forum and although it is talking about Squeezelite on Linux, I guess the basic fundamentals apply to JLP on Windows?

Quote Originally Posted by soundcheck
Triode: One Q. The 2nd buffer parameter of -b x:x what is it exactly used for? Decoding? If that's the case it might make sense to make that value bigger then the streaming receive buffer - in case of streaming flacs.
In case of PCM it might be kept pretty small.
Could you please once more explain the logic behind -b x:x
=============================================
There are two buffers - the first one stores the raw stream (compressed) audio, the second the decode audio. PCM is a special case as the process of decoding is just unpacking samples into the second buffer so they are in 32bit format which is used in the output thread, but this is only a special case of decoding. The decode process thread runs whenever there is enough data in the first buffer and enough free space in the second one.

So if you want to stream the whole file at the start then probably make the first one big and keep the second one smaller (defaults at 10 seconds). If you want to stream and decode the whole file at the start then make the second one big.

The second buffer is really only needed to allow crossfade to happen and to separate the high priority output thread from the rest of the processing. Note that it uses 8 bytes per sample (2x32bits) whereas the first buffer uses the native sample rate and so will use less memory for the same amount of audio.

Would SBGK care to comment? Loading a whole track into RAM before playing (as an option by the appropriate buffer settings) would have good potential SQ implications?

Thanks
Jonathan

[Aleg]

This post was on Squeezelite forum and although it is talking about Squeezelite on Linux, I guess the basic fundamentals apply to JLP on Windows?

Quote Originally Posted by soundcheck
Triode: One Q. The 2nd buffer parameter of -b x:x what is it exactly used for? Decoding? If that's the case it might make sense to make that value bigger then the streaming receive buffer - in case of streaming flacs.
In case of PCM it might be kept pretty small.
Could you please once more explain the logic behind -b x:x
=============================================
There are two buffers - the first one stores the raw stream (compressed) audio, the second the decode audio. PCM is a special case as the process of decoding is just unpacking samples into the second buffer so they are in 32bit format which is used in the output thread, but this is only a special case of decoding. The decode process thread runs whenever there is enough data in the first buffer and enough free space in the second one.

So if you want to stream the whole file at the start then probably make the first one big and keep the second one smaller (defaults at 10 seconds). If you want to stream and decode the whole file at the start then make the second one big.

The second buffer is really only needed to allow crossfade to happen and to separate the high priority output thread from the rest of the processing. Note that it uses 8 bytes per sample (2x32bits) whereas the first buffer uses the native sample rate and so will use less memory for the same amount of audio.

Would SBGK care to comment? Loading a whole track into RAM before playing (as an option by the appropriate buffer settings) would have good potential SQ implications?

Thanks
Jonathan

I get the impression the answer is given from a bits-are-bits viewpoint from somebody who doesn't care about how the bits are delivered.
I think from our earlier experiences it pays dividend how you choose values for those two buffer sizes.
If I read correctly the driver is fed from the second buffer (by portaudio routines) and there is a continuously running thread (in squeezelite) that converts data from the first buffer into the second buffer to keep that one filled up.

In that case the second buffer size should have some correlation with the buffer size set inside your driver,
or
would it be best to have a complete track loaded into the second buffer before playback starts so there would only be activity for transferring data from the second buffer into the driver buffer?

Looking forward to Gordon's comments

Cheers

Aleg

[jesuscheung]

Would SBGK care to comment? Loading a whole track into RAM before playing (as an option by the appropriate buffer settings) would have good potential SQ implications?

Thanks
Jonathan

am still a little confused of what's going on. why load whole track to RAM? that ruins the idea of bypassing CPU. i thought the idea is reading from network card's own memory. but then KS already supports hardware buffer. why bother with a NIC? what is going on