SHOUTcast vs. Icecast

rgATL · 2nd June 2005, 03:59

Hey Everyone,

SHOUTcast has been good to me, but because of web-devel needs, I am considering moving my streams to Icecast, and I wanted to get your ideas on it:

What are Icecast's strengths? weaknesses?
What does SHOUTcast do better?
What does Icecast do better?
Which is better supported? Which has a bigger community?

What would be the drawbacks to moving to Icecast?

Any other thoughts?

Thanks so much,
rg.

MegaRock · 2nd June 2005, 04:38

First one I could throw into this would be that Icecast is still being developed whereas from what I have been told Shoutcast's development is either stalled or dead.

Although since Icecast is open source there is a community out there but it's not connected through it's website like Shoutcast is.

A drawback to Icecast would likely be there just aren't anywhere near as many listeners to their directory nor stations - at current there are less than 700 in their directory.

To me Icecast is just an alternative and another directory to be listed in (I am) but Shoutcast and WMA are dominant for my listeners at the time.

If you want to move to anything head for AAC+. I've been messing with it for some time but just recently implemented it (had to wait for Shoutcast directory support). The audio is amazing at 24k and higher bitrates only improve upon it (see link below..you'll see what I mean). Shoutcast and Icecast both support it as well as Winamp, Real (with registration) and I'm sure more to follow).

rgATL · 2nd June 2005, 05:08

The main reason for the move to Icecast would be to constuct a universal ("moron proof" as someone put it earlier) Flash player for the stream (SHOUTcast/Flash/IE seem to be near impossible to implement).

* Any idea if AAC+ works with Flash and all browsers?
* What is needed to broadcast AAC+ (ie, what takes the place of the SHOUTcast DSP and DNAS)?
* Does (or when will) SAM support AAC+? (or does Orban have something better themselves?)
* Any idea how AAC+ streaming will affect iTunes listing?

Can you direct me to somewhere to read more about AAC+ (suggestions more specific than just "check out orban.com" would be greatly appreciated)?

To All: Also, please continue your comments on Icecast as well.

Thank you much,
rg.

CraigF · 2nd June 2005, 08:31

could always try out ultravox. anyone up and running that yet?

bored_womble · 2nd June 2005, 08:50

well if you could point us in the direction of a download, i'm sure we would try it ? I was under the impression it wasnt released into the wild ?

BW

Wavestreaming · 2nd June 2005, 10:52

I think Ultravox is not a software server such as shoutcast, it is 'firmware' which is installed on hardware devices.

Don't think its public either

Jay · 2nd June 2005, 18:09

I for one really like what the icecast community stands for, but I think it may be a while before they can stand up to other media servers, the platform is definately a good start but they ommitted many other features that I think would make a server more beneficial, such as udp support for stats. I am currently working on a simple protocal for this but it could be a while before you see new directory structures based off it and other stand alone clients as well as hardware device support for it.

rgATL · 2nd June 2005, 18:23

Jay, does Steamcast work with Flash and IE?

Thanks,
rg.

Jay · 2nd June 2005, 18:36

I plan on adding a mechnism to steamcast to allow clients who puke on ICY responses a way in. For now steamcast uses the codec to determine the correct response.

CraigF · 3rd June 2005, 17:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Wavestreaming
I think Ultravox is not a software server such as shoutcast, it is 'firmware' which is installed on hardware devices.

Don't think its public either

well, i wasnt sure if it was public when i posted what i did earlier, so i didnt pass out the url (well, i did, but then removed it straight away).

Anyway, its out there now, so check out http://ultravox.aol.com/

bored_womble · 3rd June 2005, 18:41

well that got my attention ... cheers

BW

ps. the source code compiles lovely tooo ... cor ... its gonna be a long night ....

bored_womble · 6th June 2005, 16:59

i have it working ... which was a challenge ... and to get winamp to play it was an even bigger challenge .... and it seems to work quite well

( duh! )

now all i have to figure out ... how to use all the rest of the functionality ...

i'll be moving my stuff to it ... ASAP

BW

rgATL · 6th June 2005, 17:07

bored_womble: What exactly are you doing? What are the advantages?

Thanks,
rg.

bored_womble · 6th June 2005, 17:51

well according to the release notes it is 3 versions above Shoutcast (at least), so has loads more features ... but for the general Shoutcaster wont make tooo much difference, ...

BW

rgATL · 7th June 2005, 00:35

it acts as the DNAS?

rg.

bored_womble · 7th June 2005, 02:01

yep, effectively .. an extract from the docs

Protocol Development
• Shoutcast: Justin Frankel & Tom Pepper
• Ultravox1: Tom Pepper, Stephen Loomis, David Biderman
• Ultravox2: Stephen Loomis & David Biderman, Tom Pepper, Lance Richardson
• Ultravox3: David Pare, Art Howarth, Stephen Loomis

BW

2nd June 2005, 03:59	#1
rgATL Major Dude Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: ATL, of course. Posts: 724	SHOUTcast vs. Icecast Hey Everyone, SHOUTcast has been good to me, but because of web-devel needs, I am considering moving my streams to Icecast, and I wanted to get your ideas on it: What are Icecast's strengths? weaknesses? What does SHOUTcast do better? What does Icecast do better? Which is better supported? Which has a bigger community? What would be the drawbacks to moving to Icecast? Any other thoughts? Thanks so much, rg.

2nd June 2005, 04:38	#2
MegaRock Forum King Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Inside my water bong Posts: 6,865	First one I could throw into this would be that Icecast is still being developed whereas from what I have been told Shoutcast's development is either stalled or dead. Although since Icecast is open source there is a community out there but it's not connected through it's website like Shoutcast is. A drawback to Icecast would likely be there just aren't anywhere near as many listeners to their directory nor stations - at current there are less than 700 in their directory. To me Icecast is just an alternative and another directory to be listed in (I am) but Shoutcast and WMA are dominant for my listeners at the time. If you want to move to anything head for AAC+. I've been messing with it for some time but just recently implemented it (had to wait for Shoutcast directory support). The audio is amazing at 24k and higher bitrates only improve upon it (see link below..you'll see what I mean). Shoutcast and Icecast both support it as well as Winamp, Real (with registration) and I'm sure more to follow). Megarock Radio - St. Louis Since 1998! Don't click this link! Corporate Radio Sucks! No suits, all rock!

2nd June 2005, 08:50	#5
bored_womble Winamp's Womble Join Date: May 2004 Location: Wimbledon Common Posts: 1,100	well if you could point us in the direction of a download, i'm sure we would try it ? I was under the impression it wasnt released into the wild ? BW Without open minds the world will die. Open yours and correct the mistakes you are making right now.

2nd June 2005, 10:52	#6
Wavestreaming Major Dude Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 1,563	I think Ultravox is not a software server such as shoutcast, it is 'firmware' which is installed on hardware devices. Don't think its public either Wavestreaming \| Shoutcast Hosting \| Auto DJ \| How To Start An Internet Radio Station

2nd June 2005, 18:09	#7
Jay Moderator Alumni Join Date: May 2000 Location: Next Door Posts: 8,942	I for one really like what the icecast community stands for, but I think it may be a while before they can stand up to other media servers, the platform is definately a good start but they ommitted many other features that I think would make a server more beneficial, such as udp support for stats. I am currently working on a simple protocal for this but it could be a while before you see new directory structures based off it and other stand alone clients as well as hardware device support for it. -Jay \| Radio Toolbox.com

2nd June 2005, 05:08	#3
rgATL Major Dude Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: ATL, of course. Posts: 724	The main reason for the move to Icecast would be to constuct a universal ("moron proof" as someone put it earlier) Flash player for the stream (SHOUTcast/Flash/IE seem to be near impossible to implement). * Any idea if AAC+ works with Flash and all browsers? * What is needed to broadcast AAC+ (ie, what takes the place of the SHOUTcast DSP and DNAS)? * Does (or when will) SAM support AAC+? (or does Orban have something better themselves?) * Any idea how AAC+ streaming will affect iTunes listing? Can you direct me to somewhere to read more about AAC+ (suggestions more specific than just "check out orban.com" would be greatly appreciated)? To All: Also, please continue your comments on Icecast as well. Thank you much, rg.

2nd June 2005, 08:31	#4
CraigF Passionately Apathetic Administrator Join Date: May 2000 Location: Hell Posts: 5,435	could always try out ultravox. anyone up and running that yet?

2nd June 2005, 18:23	#8
rgATL Major Dude Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: ATL, of course. Posts: 724	Jay, does Steamcast work with Flash and IE? Thanks, rg.

2nd June 2005, 18:36	#9
Jay Moderator Alumni Join Date: May 2000 Location: Next Door Posts: 8,942	I plan on adding a mechnism to steamcast to allow clients who puke on ICY responses a way in. For now steamcast uses the codec to determine the correct response. -Jay \| Radio Toolbox.com

3rd June 2005, 18:41	#11
bored_womble Winamp's Womble Join Date: May 2004 Location: Wimbledon Common Posts: 1,100	well that got my attention ... cheers BW ps. the source code compiles lovely tooo ... cor ... its gonna be a long night .... Without open minds the world will die. Open yours and correct the mistakes you are making right now.

6th June 2005, 16:59	#12
bored_womble Winamp's Womble Join Date: May 2004 Location: Wimbledon Common Posts: 1,100	i have it working ... which was a challenge ... and to get winamp to play it was an even bigger challenge .... and it seems to work quite well ( duh! ) now all i have to figure out ... how to use all the rest of the functionality ... i'll be moving my stuff to it ... ASAP BW Without open minds the world will die. Open yours and correct the mistakes you are making right now.

6th June 2005, 17:07	#13
rgATL Major Dude Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: ATL, of course. Posts: 724	bored_womble: What exactly are you doing? What are the advantages? Thanks, rg.

6th June 2005, 17:51	#14
bored_womble Winamp's Womble Join Date: May 2004 Location: Wimbledon Common Posts: 1,100	well according to the release notes it is 3 versions above Shoutcast (at least), so has loads more features ... but for the general Shoutcaster wont make tooo much difference, ... BW Without open minds the world will die. Open yours and correct the mistakes you are making right now.

7th June 2005, 00:35	#15
rgATL Major Dude Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: ATL, of course. Posts: 724	it acts as the DNAS? rg.

7th June 2005, 02:01	#16
bored_womble Winamp's Womble Join Date: May 2004 Location: Wimbledon Common Posts: 1,100	yep, effectively .. an extract from the docs Protocol Development • Shoutcast: Justin Frankel & Tom Pepper • Ultravox1: Tom Pepper, Stephen Loomis, David Biderman • Ultravox2: Stephen Loomis & David Biderman, Tom Pepper, Lance Richardson • Ultravox3: David Pare, Art Howarth, Stephen Loomis BW Without open minds the world will die. Open yours and correct the mistakes you are making right now.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode