# Linux as a Music Server



## yustr (Sep 27, 2004)

I'm going to be setting up an old computer (Pentium 3 @ 900mHz - I think) as a music server for my approx 1000 CD's. My intent is to rip all of them to the HD and send the playback through the sound card to my stereo. 

A co-worker suggested I look into doing it in Linux rather than Windows. But, I've not played with Linux and am wondering if it makes sense.

Q1: Is there any advantage in doing so? One drawback to Win is the time to boot. Is Linux significantly quicker? Are the rip programs and music management programs better than for Win?

Q2: If so, how do I go about it?


----------



## Aeuzent (Sep 4, 2004)

yustr said:


> Q1: Is there any advantage in doing so? One drawback to Win is the time to boot. Is Linux significantly quicker? Are the rip programs and music management programs better than for Win?


Well with linux you get reliability. Sure Windows takes less time to boot, but it beats Linux to a crash every time. Linux machines (properlly configured) can stay up almost indefinatlly. As far as ripping and music management you'll find similar programs on both sides. But over 90% of the programs for linux are free. So while you may find an awesome ripper for XP you may have to pay $200 for it while an equally awesome alternative would be free in linux.



yustr said:


> Q2: If so, how do I go about it?


Well first you'd need to install linux. I suggest Ubuntu because of how easy it is to use and the ease of installing new programs using apt. Next comes finding a music server that works for you. There are hundreds of them. Just do a google search for "linux music server" and see what you get.


----------



## V0lt (Sep 14, 2002)

I would use Windows, simply because Winamp makes it so easy to set up playlists, and shoutcast is so easy to use.


----------



## Aeuzent (Sep 4, 2004)

Linux is just as easy to use with more controll and customizibility. Not to mention he has an older machine. It'd be nice if it didn't have to waste it's entire processor running Windows.


----------



## Volt-Schwibe (Jan 12, 2003)

yeah, for any server application, everyone i talk to says linux is the bees' knees.


----------



## V0lt (Sep 14, 2002)

> Linux is just as easy to use with more controll and customizibility. Not to mention he has an older machine. It'd be nice if it didn't have to waste it's entire processor running Windows.


Yeah, but how much time will be wasted installing and configuring ubuntu vs., say, windows 98? On an older machine, either of them would be fine- it's not like it's going to be doing cad renderings on the highest resolution. 

Look, all I'm saying is that for the purpose, I think windows would be much easier to set up and work with. Linux has its own benefits, but I wouldn't call it easy to install and configure for a first time user; that would be a blatant lie.


----------



## Resolution (Sep 17, 2005)

I agree with Fox. It would be ludicrous to tell someone to install a new and entirely different operating system just to share/stream music files.


----------



## Aeuzent (Sep 4, 2004)

They guy asked about a linux music server and I anwsered.


He also may not have a 98 CD lying around where as he could download Ubuntu today for free. And yes it's just as easy to install and configure. Sorry you got scared and ran when you have no start menu.


----------



## Resolution (Sep 17, 2005)

Aeuzent said:


> Sorry you got scared and ran when you have no start menu.


I run both Linux and BSD without GUIs so you can save the overpresumptous remarks.  

If yustr wants to venture and try Linux, then that is his prerogative, however, Windows will do what he wants just fine, especially if it is just to send music to his stereo system.


----------



## yustr (Sep 27, 2004)

Enough already...I didn't mean to start a Linux vs Win debate. If there's no significant advantage then I'll probably stick to what I'm familiar.

Maybe tackle Linux sometime in the future.

Thanks, all.


----------



## Resolution (Sep 17, 2005)

There is no Windows vs Linux holy war here. :smile: It's really your decision. If you feel like jumping into Linux to install your server, that is cool. I just don't agree when people tell users to install a new operating system to solve a "problem", or tell someone who isn't a programmer that "it would be easier to code your own application". 

All i'm saying is that if you are familiar with Windows, then there are free utilities that will allow you to stream your music for you.


----------



## Volt-Schwibe (Jan 12, 2003)

i'll agree with that, looking at it retrospectively, if you have a spare windows98 disc, and you aren't familliar with linux, and all you want to do is make a music server, then it sounds like it would be easier to go with windows.


----------



## loninappleton (Apr 1, 2005)

Just to do the music and load it off a drive to listen to:
definately just set up Windows.


But I'd add some things to what has been said.

I've been a Linux noob for over half a year. I got into
it because I fugiure that my OS -- Windows 98se --
is on the phase out path with little or no support
from M$.

I don't intend to buy any new Windows product with 
good free OS out there. So I've taken the time to
get through all the bugs, half truths and the rest of
it with Linux. 

There is a special distrubution of Linux built on Ubuntu
called Demudi for the Debian Music Distribution. There is a wealth of tools in there for the sound editor, internet radio broadcaster... whatevs. It's difficult to learn the 
lingo but in the long term, I think it's worth it.


----------



## Volt-Schwibe (Jan 12, 2003)

we just had another discussion about demudi, it might have been you, i don't remember off the top of my head.

i read as much as i can about it, and if someone is trying to build a computer to sit in their entertainment center and play movies, music, and things like that, it's definately a good candidate. 

it also seems to be widely revered, with alot of forums discussing it.

but in this application, just to sit there and share music, anything will work.

yustr might want to get acquainted with linux in the future, and should probably see demudi, even if it's just for something to reference from, but for now, windows is going to work fine to share music.

either way, the question was about linux music servers, and demudi has the capability, so it's a good call bringing it to light.


----------



## loninappleton (Apr 1, 2005)

The Demuid distro has more than a few headaches right now and I think it' may be applied better on Apple systems.

The Yamaha RP U100 apparently gets recognized on Demudi for Apple.


I always thought of a music server as one which would
handle file sharing as a dedicated activity or perhaps
bittorents. Having a computer set up just to be a juke box seems sort of limited. On a properly set up file share
machine on the home network, you could (as I'm expecting to do) have the file shared machines firewalled in hardware and have it run always on.


Another benefit of Linux here is that IIRC there are 
encoding schemes for the data in and out which are not
proprietary that protect the broadcaster from copyright headaches.


----------



## LoneWolf071 (Nov 10, 2004)

they make winamp with the shoutcast and internet radio funtion for linux also, just to let you know...


----------



## loninappleton (Apr 1, 2005)

What is all this shoot the duck anf get a free Xbox stuff
up there? Do people really click on that stuff?


Back on point, I'd like to use Winamp on Linux vs
xmms. is there a Debian version orit it only in
RPMs?


My news program (Flashpoints from Pacifica) loads
Realplayer on Linux and Windamp in Windows.


Something is stuck with my sound setup on Linux:
no volume control. I get sound from various sources
such as cdrom on xmms, audio streams from news shows
and system notifications. But no software volume control.

I have been at this for months now.

Perhaps under Demudi, the JACK program can connect
this stuff.


But so far no volume control-- _except_ in the player in
KDE to test system notifications. I just had an idea:
how do I find out how the player in system notifications is hooked up? System notifications is really buried in KDE.
But if _that_ works, how can the rest of sound pick up
what it needs?


----------



## Resolution (Sep 17, 2005)

loninappleton, you should create your own thread if you have questions to ask.


----------



## loninappleton (Apr 1, 2005)

I have made several on this all over the place.

I don't even know how to phrase it correctly.

Something like

How to get the information used by KDE sound player in
system notifications applied to other other software
volume controls and EQ.


Loading alsacong hasn't worked, kmix doesn't work,
etc. etc. The main volume slider on KDE desktop 
doesn't work either.


----------



## Resolution (Sep 17, 2005)

So continue with the thread you already started or start another thread on the subject, but don't "hijack" someone else's thread.


----------



## LoneWolf071 (Nov 10, 2004)

Ok, So Any Resolution, I Also Would like to setup a music server, i have a server running http, ssh, ftp, etc, and would like to add music to it, it's linux, so any command line programs?


----------

