Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment? (Read 7613 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

I’m a »mid-audiophile«, wanting to build a new Hi-Fi (or »near Hi-Fi«) setup but I need to keep the budget (very) low at the moment.

Meaning: I’m not a musician and have no »trained« hearing, but I think I can differentiate between what I call »bad« or »there’s something missing/odd/noisy« vs. sound like »brilliant, open, transparent, easy on the ears«. Sorry I find no better words—it’s like with wine: I couldn’t tell you where it’s from or what year, but I do know if it is to my taste. That’s why I’d say I’m a »mid-audiophile« :-)

I’ve been playing around (and working) with several digital audio formats and the possibilities of things like SqueezeCenter (ex Slimserver) very much appeal to me.

Currently I have about »no« Hi-Fi equipment anymore, but I’m planning to buy a decent amp and speakers for my living-room in the long run. My PCs and Servers are all in a separate office room—and I don’t want a PC in my living-room or bedroom. But I’d like to have
  • a decent amp and speakers in my living-room that should be able to pick up from my digital music collection on either a Windows machine or my Linux server. And it should have a remote and be usable for a non-tech person (kids, girlfriend, me when I’m only listening). Must have no cabling to go through 3 walls, i.e. wireless.
  • a small(er) unit that draws on the same collection for the bedroom, to hear some music in bed. Should be decent quality, but here the requirements are not that high. Background music should be »okay« but I’d expect near-top quality when using a good headphone. Also, no cabling please.
  • an investment that’s not »wasted«. So it should either be good enough to switch off built-in speakers and further serve as kind of »transport unit« and feed the data into the living-room Hi-Fi system to come, or be used as a bedroom/patio/kitchen »just for background listening« unit (and be not too bad in sound quality).

From what I’m reading, it seems that the SqueezeCenter plus »SqueezeBox Boom« combo should very much do the trick. If it had »usable« sound quality at that size and could be used later (without using the built-in speakers) as a high-quality input to a good amp/speakers combo, I’d shell out the $269 for it, making myself a nice little Christmas present ;-) Unfortunately, there is no possibility here to lend one or do some listening tests before buying.

So my questions to all of you who own a »SqueezeBox Boom« or had a real chance for some serious listening tests are:
  • Taking into account my statements above, how good would you say is the sound quality of the SqueezeBox Boom using the built-in speakers really?
    • Does ist sound »good« or »plastic«?
    • Would it be loud enough for a party with, say, 8 people?
    • Would it have a good, undistorted frequency response and sound »transparent« enough for listening to some high-quality New Age/World/Jazz music?
  • Could it fulfill the »bedroom part« later on?
  • Would it be good enough to serve as high-quality »input« for a Hi-Fi setup later on? (i.e., DAC quality, cabling possibilites, etc.)
  • Is it »high quality« if used with high-quality headphones?
  • Would you say that, from an audiophile point-of-view, it’s worth the $269?
  • Would you say it’s a »feasible start« when needing to keep the initial budget very low and slowly building up while not wanting to »throw away« things later?

I very much appreciate your feedback — thanks in advance!

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #1 –
> So my questions to all of you who own a »SqueezeBox Boom« or had a real chance for some serious
> listening tests are:

Not sure about the serious listening. I have owned a squeezebox for a few years and have listened to the boom briefly in an Apple store.

> 1. Taking into account my statements above, how good would you say is the sound quality of the
> SqueezeBox Boom using the built-in speakers really?
>
>        1. Does ist sound »good« or »plastic«?

For a boombox it sounded good but it is not really a hi-fi because it is effectively mono in a room and the speakers are too small to play loud and clear.

>        2. Would it be loud enough for a party with, say, 8 people?

No problem for background music while talking. Not really suitable for loud and clear music for dancing.

>        3. Would it have a good, undistorted frequency response and sound »transparent« enough for
> listening to some high-quality New Age/World/Jazz music?

It depends a bit on what you mean by transparent. Many people that opt for boomboxes and computer speakers like the way they sound and dislike the sound of small speakers that have a flat frequency response with the bass obviously missing.

>  2. Could it fulfill the »bedroom part« later on?

I believe it works well as a clock/radio.

>  3. Would it be good enough to serve as high-quality »input« for a Hi-Fi setup later on? (i.e., DAC
> quality, cabling possibilites, etc.)

Probably although it would seem an odd thing to do. I suspect you would be better off using it as a boombox in the kitchen, bedroom, patio or wherever and getting a separate wireless DAC for the hi-fi.

>  4. Is it »high quality« if used with high-quality headphones?

Don't know. It contains a decent power supply for the power amplifiers and is expensive enough for there to be little need to skimp on the headphone circuitry but that is not enough to be sure one way or the other with consumer electronics.

>  5. Would you say that, from an audiophile point-of-view, it’s worth the $269?

I am not sure what you mean by audiophile which is an ambiguous term. To some it means refined and sophisticated appreciator of the subtleties of music reproduction in the home whereas to others it means an ignorant status obsessed fool with no idea about how audio equipment, sound, sound perception or the luxury goods business works. Audiophiles are not usually associated with the purchase of boomboxes and so, I guess, they should have no view.

>  6. Would you say it’s a »feasible start« when needing to keep the initial budget very low and
> slowly building up while not wanting to »throw away« things later?

If you require it to produce loud and clear stereo in a room for 8 people dancing then it is inappropriate. If you want an effectively mono good quality boombox/radio for the kitchen/patio/bedroom then it would seem appropriate. I suspect you may be better off looking for a pair of decent active speakers with 5-6" drivers that can play loud and clear in a room plus a separate wireless networked DAC to achieve all your initial objectives.

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #2 –
honestguv, thanks for taking the time to answer at length.

I think I’ll try to find out if some online stores have a good return policy and probably try this thingy—if it can be returned in case of the sound being too bad. I guess I’m lured by the technical possibilities a bit … Getting SqueezeCenter/MusicIP integration and a nice usable remote access.

The idea of getting active speakers plus something like a wireless DAC sounds good, too. Any idea if there’s something cheaper as the »Transporter« out there? (That was actually my first idea, until I saw the price … so I hoped for the Squeezebox to have (almost) the same technical specs plus the benefit of being an all-in-one-unit for use in other rooms.)

Further input on the original questions, anyone?

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #3 –
Quote from: honestguv on
Not sure about the serious listening. I have owned a squeezebox for a few years and have listened to the boom briefly in an Apple store.

Apple are selling the Boom? I'm amazed to hear that. (No, not amazed - absolutely gobsmacked).

Quote from: Moonbase on
The idea of getting active speakers plus something like a wireless DAC sounds good, too. Any idea if there’s something cheaper as the »Transporter« out there? (That was actually my first idea, until I saw the price … so I hoped for the Squeezebox to have (almost) the same technical specs plus the benefit of being an all-in-one-unit for use in other rooms.)

I can't comment on the Squeezebox Boom specifically, having never seen/heard/touched one. However, it seems to me that you may be unaware of the existance of two other products that could well be more appropriate for your requirements:

1. The Squeezebox Classic (formerly the Squeezebox 3). This is a standalone unit that behaves pretty much like a Boom but without the built-in amp and speakers. It has analogue and digital outputs that you can feed into a normal stereo system. It has a nice display and a traditional IR remote.

2. The Squeezebox Receiver. This is like the Classic, except it doesn't have a display or IR remote. Instead, there is a device called the Squeezebox Controller which is a small wi-fi device that communicates with SqueezeCenter (and hence controls any of the players in your setup). It has a colour screen and an iPod-like wheel. The Receiver and Controller can be bought bundled in a package called "Duet".

You could partner either a Classic or Duet with a set of powered speakers as an initial setup, and then later move the unit to your main stereo (possibly adding a high-end DAC if you like).

Both the Classic and Receiver could be considered a sort of "cost-reduced" Transporter. Some things the Transporter has that these two don't:
- A state of the art DAC. (That said, the DACs in the Classic and Receiver are still pretty good 24-bit devices, about on a par with mid-priced CD players).
- Digital inputs (so you can use its DAC with other digital sources).
- Balanced (as well as the more usual unbalanced) outputs.

The best place for advice would be to go to the Slim Devices Forum. However, be warned that the audiophile section of that forum is (like many "audiophile" discussion groups) a snake-pit of heated disagreement. Stick to the general and beginners sections for basic advice on what each item can do.

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #4 –
Quote from: cliveb on
Apple are selling the Boom? I'm amazed to hear that. (No, not amazed - absolutely gobsmacked).

I think we may be at cross-purposes somewhere. The Boom is a Logitech product but if you go to an Apple shop, in my case Gravis, then on the ipod section there are all sorts of ipod related audio products made by other companies. The Boom was priced at €279.90 which is a bit more than the OP was quoting but then this was an Apple shop.

I am fairly sure Apple does not own the shop if that is the source of confusion. Do Apple own shops in the US? It is a shop that sells Apple products and Apple-related products. It has Apple support desks, Apple coffee bar, Apple presentation room, Apple T-shirts, Apple-this-and-that for Apple people. No PCs.

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #5 –
Quote from: Moonbase on
The idea of getting active speakers plus something like a wireless DAC sounds good, too. Any idea if there’s something cheaper as the »Transporter« out there? (That was actually my first idea, until I saw the price … so I hoped for the Squeezebox to have (almost) the same technical specs plus the benefit of being an all-in-one-unit for use in other rooms.)

The Transporter is an expensive product for audiophiles. As cliveb suggests, there are other more sensibly priced products in the squeezebox range that would appear more appropriate for your needs. A squeezebox (€220) + active speakers (€300) will put the price up but you will be getting a good quality hi-fi rather than a good quality boombox. This may or may not be what you are after.

There are cheaper similarish devices to the squeezebox but when I looked a year or two ago the ones I found were either unable to work with PCM or used proprietary protocols. I am sure there is a wider choice today and my requirements and restrictions are unlikely to match yours.

There are cheaper active speakers with small cones often called computer speakers or media speakers which are too small to fill a room with good quality sound. They are often deliberately distorted to hide their shortcomings but some people like the sound. A pair of reasonable quality active speakers with large enough cones to fill a room with sound start somewhere around €300 a pair in price. But do not expect too much from the bass. There is a degree of judgement involved about what is loud enough, what is deep enough, what is clean enough so you probably need to get a feel for this yourself.

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #6 –
You can also pickup just the receiver half of the Duet system for $149 and use a small Perl script (Net Udap) available on the Slim Devices forums to configure it for your network. Then you could use any number of interface devices to control Squeeze Center, Netbook, Cellphone, PDA, iTouch, etc. add some powered speakers and you should be good to go.

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #8 –
Quote
a decent amp and speakers in my living-room that should be able to pick up from my digital music collection on either a Windows machine or my Linux server. And it should have a remote and be usable for a non-tech person (kids, girlfriend, me when I’m only listening). Must have no cabling to go through 3 walls, i.e. wireless.


What distro of Linux are you running? I think Ubuntu has a apt-package for the SlimServer software readily avaliable.


Quote
The idea of getting active speakers plus something like a wireless DAC sounds good, too. Any idea if there’s something cheaper as the »Transporter« out there? (That was actually my first idea, until I saw the price … so I hoped for the Squeezebox to have (almost) the same technical specs plus the benefit of being an all-in-one-unit for use in other rooms.)


The reason the Transporter costs $2000 dollars and the Squeezebox only cost $269 is simply, because the Transporter uses an extremely high-quality DAC and has reduced clock noise due to intrinsic jitter (Yes it's hard to believe that this is something Audiophiles are actually receptive to). I personally would love to see some blind-listening tests on that one.
budding I.T professional

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #9 –
Thanks a lot for all your input so far. You indeed make me think and investigate a little further.

The idea of a small portable unit is appealing, but since I want to go further (in quality and equipment), I think the »Boom« will only do as an extra for maybe the patio or bedroom. The limitations are the connections (and maybe the DAC) I guess. And I agree very much with the idea of buying a decent set of active speakers for a start – I guess that will make the sound quality more to my liking (since I’m used to »big« speakers anyway and might be disappointed by what comes out of the »mini« speakers).

I do like the display possibilities, though. So I’ll probably go for either a »Classic« or a »Receiver/Duet« plus active speakers for a start. Since both have S/PDIF and digital Coax (the »Boom« only has a switchable headphone/subwoofer stereo mini-jack), the step towards a »real« amp later on will be easier. (I still like the XLR the Transporter has … but that’s out of the question right now … *sigh*)

Does anyone know if there is a notable difference between the Wolfson DAC (Receiver/Duet) and the Burr-Brown (used in the Classic)? I might make my decision depend on the quality of the DACs … (so I can use the stuff later on with more high-end equipment).

Re Linux: An »almost naked« Debian server, and planning to have an additional (k)ubuntu machine in January.

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #10 –
Quote
Does anyone know if there is a notable difference between the Wolfson DAC (Receiver/Duet) and the Burr-Brown (used in the Classic)? I might make my decision depend on the quality of the DACs … (so I can use the stuff later on with more high-end equipment).


I am not an engineer, but from my basic understanding of electronics I heard they were both pretty much equal. A lot of it depends on the characteristics of the signal and what it will be used for. They are both hi-end chipsets. 
budding I.T professional

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #11 –
> Does anyone know if there is a notable difference between the Wolfson DAC (Receiver/Duet) and the
> Burr-Brown (used in the Classic)? I might make my decision depend on the quality of the DACs … (so I
> can use the stuff later on with more high-end equipment).

I would suggest making the decision based on price and functions offered. Many (but not all) cheap on board sound cards these days are not audibly deficient in reasonably "proper" listening tests as can be confirmed by browsing some of the other threads on this site. At the price level of the squeezebox kit, all competently designed DAC-related circuitry is pretty well certain to sound the same in reasonably "proper" listening tests.

If you want an audiophile view on the ever changing, conflicting and in some cases outright magical properties of audio related integrated circuits this is one of the few sites where you are unlikely to get it. Audio ICs are different and this leads to small differences in measured performance but in normal home use these differences are well below the audibility threshold except for products where cost is aggressively pursued, where distortions are introduced by intent in order to sound nice or incompetence is involved.

If you are wondering if the audiophile view might be correct and why people are banging on about "proper" listening tests in order to determine whether perceived differences can be safely assigned to the hardware, here is an oft-cited illustration of one of the issues involved:

http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~rosenblu/VSMcGurk.html

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #12 –
I have decided towards the »Classic« in the meantime.

Main reasons for my decision:
  • Classic is a better »stepping stone« towards a high-end system.
  • There seems no apparent quality difference between the »Classic« and the »Duet Receiver«.
  • I can add whatever active speakers I like (and where I like them) for a starter configuration.
  • Classic has the better display.
  • If really, really needed Classic can be unplugged and used on the bedside table with a pair of headphones.
If I had known about the (working) headphone output on the SB Controller before I bought the Classic, I’d have shelled out the extra $100 and bought a Duet, though.

Benefits: An »extra player« to carry around or use in the bed, nicer display for an old man with bad eyesight. ;-)

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #13 –
Quote from: Moonbase on
  • If really, really needed Classic can be unplugged and used on the bedside table with a pair of headphones.
If I had known about the (working) headphone output on the SB Controller before I bought the Classic, I’d have shelled out the extra $100 and bought a Duet, though.

Benefits: An »extra player« to carry around or use in the bed, nicer display for an old man with bad eyesight. ;-)


Hi Moonbase - we travel in similar circles; this is the 3rd forum I've seen you post to :-).

Congrats on your purchase.  I think you made a wise decision.  The SB Classic display is nice to display weather forcasts using a plugin. 

Regarding the use of the SB classic with headphones - I'm listening to one that way right now.  I listen to music to go to sleep and having the SB on my bedside table is wonderful.  I have access to my full music library via a small remote.

I did find that the headphone jack was prone to some noise that irritated me after a while.  For this reason, I invested in a headphone amp from practical devices.  It made a world of difference.  I also use this amp with my iPod when I'm travelling.

Enjoy!

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #14 –
Yep, looks like one meets the same people all over the place—small world! And nice to meet. :-)

Could you give us a link to the Practical Devices headphone amp? Might be interesting to investigate.
 

SqueezeBox Boom a good starting investment?

Reply #15 –
Quote from: Moonbase on
Yep, looks like one meets the same people all over the place—small world! And nice to meet. :-)

Could you give us a link to the Practical Devices headphone amp? Might be interesting to investigate.


Yes, a small world indeed.  :-)

You can find information here on the amp I was referring to:
http://www.practicaldevices.com/amps.htm

The XM4 is the appropriate model.  The XM5 is intended to be plugged into a PCs USB port and act as a DAC as well as an amp.

What I like about it is that it lends itself well to being used with AC power.  I would recommend getting the AC adaptor from them.  I tried to be cheap and use my own, but I had a lot of trouble with noise and got it from them in the end anyway.

Other models in this price range (< $200) are cheaper, but can only be used with batteries.  Headphone amps which are designed for home use are quite expensive.  It is a niche market, so prices tend to be high.

For me, the XM4 was a good compromise between portability, home use, and cost without compromising on sound quality.  I also like that it has a programmable timer to shut off.  This comes in handy when using to to fall asleep.