Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Ampache – Self-hosted personal music and video streaming server

ampache.org

1–10 of 28 posts

Re: Show HN: Ampache – Self-hosted personal music and video streaming server

#3
post #2

Changelog - https://github.com/ampache/ampache/blob/master/docs/CHANGELO... This is a pretty great streaming solution but last time I used it didn't deal with as many codecs as Kodi

That's right but I believe both Ampache and Kodi are complementary (I'm using both, Ampache on a web server and Kodi at home) and have a quite different approach.

Re: Show HN: Ampache – Self-hosted personal music and video streaming server

#5
I love Ampache. While the web interface is not that great, it really shines with its multitude of backends: Subsonic, Plex, DAAP, UPnP/DLNA, and also WebDAV access. I'm mostly accessing Ampache via the Subsonic and UPnP backends, and it works really great. There are excellent mobile clients which work pretty much out of the box with it (DSub, BubbleUPnP).

Re: Show HN: Ampache – Self-hosted personal music and video streaming server

#6
post #2

Changelog - https://github.com/ampache/ampache/blob/master/docs/CHANGELO... This is a pretty great streaming solution but last time I used it didn't deal with as many codecs as Kodi

I think the last version I used was 3.5.4, it looks like a lot changed since then. I'm glad to see MusicBrainz support got added. Ampache was definitely a nice way to organize and stream stuff.

Re: Show HN: Ampache – Self-hosted personal music and video streaming server

#10
post #8
post #4

Where am I supposed to store all the music? S3?

I'm storing it on a personal server. S3 would be theoretically fine if you mount it as a file system but I'm not sure this would be the cheaper plan.

S3 or other static hosts can certainly be the cheapest thing if used efficiently, cheapness is one of the main reasons people use them at all! So it should be mounted, I guess that's the easiest way of enumerating tracks and getting metadata (edit: and all the file manager features, duh). But would the traffic also have to go though Ampache? Like this:

      S3 (music files) -> Ampache server -> client
Because it would be a lot more efficient to have the option of specifying that files should be streamed directly from another host like this:

      S3 (music files) --->(streaming)>--------\
       |                                        \
  (read metadata, manage files)                  `-> client
       |                                         /
       |                                        /
     Ampache server -->(web interface etc.)>---/
I now realize it might be kind of a PITA to implement this because of Ampache's extensive feature set. Still, it would be really cool and an efficient way from a pricing as well as speed point of view. Of course, having a fixed IP and a server in your basement is a also decent solution when it's available to you. (hah, definitely not available to me right now)
Post reply on HN