Transcoding to lossy format for bandwidth reasons

FireFly Media Server Firefly Media Server Forums Firefly Media Server Feature Requests Transcoding to lossy format for bandwidth reasons

  • This topic has 10 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 13 years ago by Anonymous.
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 11 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1630
    polpo
    Participant

    I like to use Firefly to listen to my home audio library while I’m at work. This works great for MP3, AAC, and OGG, but many of my files are stored as flac and this uses too much bandwidth. Having ssc transcode to one or any of the above formats would be quite beneficial.

    I’ve tried hacking this in to both script- and plugin-based SSC but it seems like too much of the code is built around providing WAV data to make quick work of it.

    #12067
    rpedde
    Participant

    @polpo wrote:

    I like to use Firefly to listen to my home audio library while I’m at work. This works great for MP3, AAC, and OGG, but many of my files are stored as flac and this uses too much bandwidth. Having ssc transcode to one or any of the above formats would be quite beneficial.

    I’ve tried hacking this in to both script- and plugin-based SSC but it seems like too much of the code is built around providing WAV data to make quick work of it.

    True. I had at some point toyed with the idea of doing anything to anything, but it seems like mp3 is the lowest common denominator, so I think I will end up with a mp3 transcode target at some point.

    — Ron

    #12068
    emma_peel
    Participant

    Oh yeah, this functionality would be great.

    The players that don’t support .ogg & .flac, do not require more than .mp3.

    That would be really better for the bandwidth, especially while tunneling over internet. 😉

    #12069
    ginormous
    Participant

    This would be great. My coworker tunnels his home collection into work network. He has resisted ripping his CDs to Flac because he doesn’t want kill his bandwidth when he tunnels. I’d probably tunnel as well if I could transcode into mp3 (since collection is largely Flac).

    #12070
    hypatia
    Guest

    I’d like to add my vote for this too.

    What exactly has to be done to make this work? Rewrite wavstreamer as mp3streamer?

    Thanks for a media server,
    hypatia

    #12071
    rpedde
    Participant

    @hypatia wrote:

    I’d like to add my vote for this too.

    What exactly has to be done to make this work? Rewrite wavstreamer as mp3streamer?

    Thanks for a media server,
    hypatia

    That’s almost all. The cheap answer, if you wanted to *just* do mp3, and didn’t want to be able to choose which, would be to change the transcode script mt-daapd-ssc.sh so that it converted to .mp3 by using lame or something after converting to wav, then changing line 507 of plugin.c to emit a header type of “audio/mp3” rather than “audio/wav”.

    But I’d like something that could choose to transcode to mp3 or wav depending on connection IP, so that when you connected via a tunnel from work, it would automatically transcode to mp3, but transcoded to wav at home. Something more integrated like that. But the above would work if that’s what you wanted all the time.

    — Ron

    #12072
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    @rpedde wrote:

    …The cheap answer, if you wanted to *just* do mp3, and didn’t want to be able to choose which, would be to change the transcode script mt-daapd-ssc.sh so that it converted to .mp3 by using lame or something after converting to wav, then changing line 507 of plugin.c to emit a header type of “audio/mp3” rather than “audio/wav”….

    Is this still a legit way of getting firefly to stream transcoded mp3? I grabbed the source and can’t locate the file plugin.c nor can I find ‘audio/wav’ in anywhere is the source code. Am I not looking in the right place?

    #12073
    fizze
    Participant

    Which source did you grab? 😉

    The source sure hasn’t change much since late 2007.

    #12074
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I grabbed the lastest stable release from source forge: 0.2.4.2. I grabbed it from this page: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=98211&package_id=105189

    It says that the release date for 0.2.4.2 is April, 2008. Based on your comment should I be using the older stable release from October 2007?

    #12075
    fizze
    Participant

    Yes. 0.2.4.* is ancient, there were just some ancient security bugfixes applied to an ancient codebase.
    You can get access to the recent sources thrugh trac @ http://trac.fireflymediaserver.org/

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 11 total)
  • The forum ‘Feature Requests’ is closed to new topics and replies.