Slim Devices Wireless Squeezebox V3
|
Author:
Editor:
Sponsor:
Published:
|
Bradford Day
Kurtis
Slim Devices
Jun. 26, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
Introduction
Music changes; such is its nature. From sticks and rocks to electric guitars and drum machines, the will of music is to evolve. And as music evolves, so does the technology that delivers it. Digital music has become a landscape almost unto itself, a culture that is both dependent on and separate from the musicians who create the notes.
As such, the halcyon days of record players and cassette tapes have nearly vanished, giving way to digital devices that require little, if any, rotating platters or spiraling tapes. But some of us just can't let go of that warm, fuzzy feeling of listening to music as it flows from a set of cabinet speakers just like Dad had. After all, sitting in your favorite cushy arm chair while you click through your digital music collection with a sterile mouse is pretty soulless. So how do you add a little retro component feel to your stereo system without losing touch with your digital media?
The Squeezebox by Slim Devices bridges the gap between component stereo systems and digital media in a small and stylish package. Think of it as a stereo receiver made just for your digital music files, but that's not all. With optional Wi-Fi connectivity, internet radio, and RSS news feeds, it's practically a PC!with soul.
First Looks
Upon first removing the Squeezebox package from its UPS cocoon, my initial impression was a favorable one. I quite liked the simple design of the product packaging, although it was a little short on product shots, using one image repeated three times. However, I couldn't help thinking that the Squeezebox looked a little like a bedside alarm clock.
 
After removing the Squeezebox (technically mine is a Squeezebox V3, or version 3) player from its packaging I realized I was right, it does look like an alarm clock (strangely enough, it also has an alarm clock feature, more on that later). Slim Devices live up to their moniker as the silver and black Squeezebox is a svelte, smartly designed audio device. The large display outputs info in brilliant blue. Around back Slim Devices has tucked two RCA outputs, a digital optical output, digital coax output, a 3.5mm headphone jack and an Ethernet port into the Squeezebox. The fact that the info screen takes up most of the useable space makes the array of inputs and outputs that much more impressive. A small metal stand supports the Squeezebox, keeping it upright.
              
Included with the unit is a multi-function remote control, a pair of AAA batteries, a power cord, a set of RCA cables and they even included a polishing cloth to keep that display fingerprint-free. Paperwork consists of a quick start guide, a thank you note for purchasing the Squeezebox and a sticker that says "MP3 is not a crime." These are my kind of people, civilly disobedient yet polite. There is no driver or software disc included with the Squeezebox. Instead, Slim Devices asks that you download the newest version of their Slim Server from their website. This is a smart move in that it not only saves them cash but also keeps one-time-use CDs from ending up in the landfill. They also probably figured that anyone who purchases this device most likely has internet access to download the 15.7MB installation file. In another smart (and particularly l33t) maneuver, Slim Devices has made their Slim Server software Mac AND Linux compatible. Good show. Oh, and did I mention that it is open source as well?
Page 1: Introduction & First Looks
Page 2: Setup
Page 3: Testing
Page 4: Conclusion
1 - Posted by
zicada
on July 4, 2006 - 7:08 pm
I think you'll find the lag is more to do with your network than the squeezebox.
When you use the remote you are actually controlling the slimserver software on your computer, not the squeezbox itself.
I have a v1 squeezebox and when i upgraded my PC (switched to debian) and used wired ethernet to the squeezebox the lag dissappeared.
If I win a Squeezebox (and I really hope that I do) I will need to keep this in mind. I had planned on using WiFi connectivity, but I can utilize Ethernet as well.
3 - Posted by
Rich
on July 5, 2006 - 12:23 pm
4 - Posted by
handrail
on July 7, 2006 - 8:39 am
that is quite possible. i did notice that it only lagged on certain operations, so maybe specific instructions require just a touch more network traffic than others. although, theorhetically, the amount of data that the device is sending can't be all that huge and with wireless G, the transmission speed as compared with a wired connection shouldn't be perceivable when sending small packets of data. i suppose there could have been some interference of some kind as well. either way, the lag was not anything to worry about.
Add Comment
To add a comment without being a member, you may omit the password field, but you must enter your name (or nickname) along with your comment. * Denotes required fields.
|
VICE Nov. 20, 2009 - 7:17 pm
Wired Nov. 20, 2009 - 7:07 pm
BBC Nov. 20, 2009 - 6:38 pm
Wired Nov. 16, 2009 - 11:56 pm
|