back to article Google casts about for wireless audio

Google casts about for wireless audio Google in your speakers – what could possibly go wrong with that? Google’s Chromecast legitimised the market for small HDMI nubbins that stream content from mobile devices into tellies. Now the company’s making the same technology a platform for audio equipment makers to embed in speakers …

  1. Frenchie Lad

    Concept OK, Execution Weak

    Only problem is that the current Chromecast stick is weak technically and the software not much use for continuous use as still in "beta".

    1. Jim Lewis

      Re: Concept OK, Execution Weak

      And this is needed why? don't Bluetooth enabled speakers already address this use case?

      1. Gotno iShit Wantno iShit

        Re: Concept OK, Execution Weak

        If it's only any good for one source & one speaker set then yes Bluetooth does that just fine. If OTOH they've achieved multi room sync without the complete walletectomy associated with existing players, including the recent new players in the field, then it is novel.

        Personally, since it says Google on the tin it is certain not to work if your router blocks it reaching the mothership so it's not the multi room solution I'm looking for.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Concept OK, Execution Weak

        Not really similar to Bluetooth. Bluetooth, like Airplay, streams the sound from your device (i.e. it is just a wireless speaker). The cast concept is more like using your device as an advanced wireless remote control. You can tell a device to start or continue playing video or audio from a server. You can also move the casted content to different devices as you move around your home/office. STart playing a video from iplayer in the lounge and then continue it in the bedroom for instance.

        The advantage being, you can start watching on a phone or tablet and then cast it over to your TV, or see details about the thing you are playing on your tv/speaker via your phone. Others can also control the same video or audio from their phone or take over it if you leave the building.

        With just audio, for instance you could set up a jukebox system where a speaker system could have a playlist that others can add to or view (if you so choose).

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

          Re: Concept OK, Execution Weak

          I have a Chromecast and it's great for certain things. As described above. So I'd guess the audio-equivalent would be too. The downside is that it's much harder to point it at content that I own - so I'd find it much more hassle to set things up to play the music on my tablet. Now if I subscribed to an online streaming service, or had my stuff stored in the cloud, that would be fine. It does seem a hell of a waste of still scarce network resources though for people to upload stuff from their home to server farms somewhere, then bring it all back via their broadband every single time they want to use it. Also I currently have a data limit on my broadband which has saved me a few quid a month for the last few years.

          The other doewnside of the Chromecast system is that it's bloody slow. You tell your device to move within a video and it takes absolutely ages for the Chromecast to get that message and do the same move within it's own videostream, and because there's no proper feedback between the two devices you try to move a few seconds on the progress bar and find you've moved by half an hour. Even pressing pause takes a good long time to do anything. That's going to be even more annoying with music. No one cares about a 30 second gap between a couple of TV episodes. But if you get that every time you change 3 minute pop songs, it's a bit more of an embuggerance.

          I've found it a great, cheap, way to get BBC iPlayer content on my TV plus the odd American footie game, or YouTube video. If I did much of this though, I'd want to spend more money, and have something that's a bit more polished.

          1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

            Re: Concept OK, Execution Weak

            I'd love to know why my downvoter did so, as if I've got something factually wrong, then there's an easy way round a couple of problems I've had with Chromecast and it would be nice to know it. Plus it's much nicer to have a discussion than to try to guess what people think from counting votes...

            I've thought of another problem with Chromecast that I intended to mention. Well actually it's a problem of corporate egos clashing, rather than technical. Amazon gave me a free month of Prime when ordering my presents. Which I took, thinking I could also watch some online stuff over the holidays, and decide whether they were worth an anual subscription. Turns out they're incompatible with Google. Not only have they not got a Chromecast button on their iPad app, but they seem to have taken deliberate steps to stop me from Chromecasting even when I fired up the PC and tried to view the video in the Chrome browser. Which worked perfectly fine as a workaround before the NFL updated their app to allow for Chromecast.

            It's odd, as Amazon made a lot of effort to make Kindle a cross-platform way to buy books, and read them on most major platforms. But if they've fallen out with Google, then that might mean that there's no way to use Amazon's Cloud Player with Google's music cast.

            Which isn't going to do what Amazon hope and make me buy one of their bits of kit to use their servvices. It's a message to me that their services aren't to be trusted, if they're going to refuse to play nicely with other peoples' hardware. So my recent thought of dipping my toes into ebooks is gone, and because CD's seem to be getting dearer, I've been thinking of starting to buy music online - but I now won't be doing that business with Amazon.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Concept OK, Execution Weak

            I didn't downvote you btw, however I don't seem to have the big delays you are mentioning and compared to the iPlayer app on a lot of STBs navigating a program is a lot easier (I use the Chromecast rather than the built in app).

            The Amazon thing is ridiculous - it is totally about Amazon's own hardware - they didn't even have a video streaming app on Android for ages (I think they launched it in the US recently but I don't have lovefilm/prime video anymore so not sure).

            The lack of an android app for streaming video was why I cancelled my lovefilm subscription and went with Netflix.

            As for streaming from your device, a number of NAS units support Chromecast, as does and android phone or streaming from a PC, although your results may vary.

            1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

              Re: Concept OK, Execution Weak

              I don't seem to have the big delays you are mentioning

              Interesting. My internet connection quality seems to have dipped of late. I'm still getting the data, but sometimes stuff is launching slower. I suspect it may be the upload speed - and now every webpage you load seems to require 17 different links to advertising servers, 12 videos, 10 images (and a partridge in a pear tree) - so many requests for the browsers to send. So it could be that it's that. I'm considering going to BT Inifinity (only just available).

              However, even a small delay is significant in listening to music, where the track duration is short. Not a problem if it's easy to build a playlist, but that's harder if you've got more than one device talking to your Chromecast, and often people wait til the end of the track then want to pick theirs.

              I could set up the PC as a server, but then it's got to be permanently turned on. I suppose a NAS box might be the answer. As well as being able to deal with backups.

              Amazon have surprised me though. I thought they wanted to be a content provider, and did hardware in order to sell more content. If they want to turn profits on their hardware, and become a walled garden like Apple, they need to make their hardware a lot more attractive.

              You'd have thought the failure of the Fire phone might persuade them that this hardware malarkey is difficult, and the profit is in continuing to do what they do best. And keep the hardware cheap and cheerful, like the Fire tablets have been. Those also wouldn't have sold at premium prices, as they just weren't good enough.

              I'm still a paper books and CDs man. And up til very recently a fan of Amazon. But I've already mostly stopped buying DVDs, as streaming got so much cheaper. CDs seem to be going up on Amazon, but I still want decent quality, uncompressed audio. And Amazon seemed the sensible place to start looking to buy ebooks. After my experience with Amazon Prime video, I now have serious doubts. And I've put a lot of money their way over the last ten years.

              1. Alan_Peery

                Re: Concept OK, Execution Weak

                Perhaps you're having the IPv6 issue where your devices are told by your local DHCP service that they can have an IPv6 address and traffic, but there's nothing available past your ADSL/whatever and you get timeouts?

    2. Irongut Silver badge

      Re: Concept OK, Execution Weak

      My ChromeCast has been in continual use since they were released. Technically it is brilliant and easy enough for non-techies to use. I haven't had any issues apart from the usual stupid devs dumbing down their apps but that's the fault of the BBC, etc not Google.

  2. Jean Le PHARMACIEN
    Joke

    Audio Wireless??

    Thought we had had audio over wireless since the 1920s? aka "Radio"

    [OK OK there was non-speech/music 'wireless before then]

  3. mp3michael

    Wonder how this compares with Airplay and AllPlay

    This seems to be a direct competitor to Qualcomm's AllPlay for which several new speaker vendors are debuting at CES this week.

    AllPlay is a more open version of Apple's AirPlay.

    Google's effort would seem to similar in many regards to AllPlay. Their control of Android would seem to give them a huge market forcing function to compel adoption.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "Apple, notably, isn’t doing similar things".

    so, what are all those AirPlay speakers then?

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: "Apple, notably, isn’t doing similar things".

      AirPlay uses bluetooth, and so is much less complicated/capable. And a lot of speakers only allow you to pair one device with them at a time, so you can't have several people at a party play their music.

      Also you have to pair and unpair with different devices, so it's not so easy to move between rooms.

      1. Colin Wilson 2

        Re: "Apple, notably, isn’t doing similar things".

        >> AirPlay uses bluetooth, and so is much less complicated/capable.

        Huh?

        This is The Register - not Stack Exchange - you can't just make up random 'facts' here:)

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

          Re: "Apple, notably, isn’t doing similar things".

          Colin Wilson 2,

          Oh sorry, you're right. AirPlay is for sending to Apple TV and the like.

          I was thinking of whatever funny name Apple were giving to their version of bluetooth with decent sound quality for music. Back in the days when iPhones only seemed to do bluetooth for headsets, and wouldn't pair with ordinary speakers. Maybe that was AirPlay - and my memory is playing tricks on me?

      2. This post has been deleted by its author

      3. JeffyPoooh
        Pint

        Re: "Apple, notably, isn’t doing similar things".

        Apple Airplay

        Internet -> Router -(wifi)-> iPhone -(wifi)-> Back to Router -(wifi)-> Apple TV -> consumption

        Three wifi back-and-forths. Kinda uses up a good fraction of one wifi G (30Mbps) router.

  5. batfastad

    Bluetooth

    Bought a bluetooth to optical dongle about a year ago to plug in to my receiver. Works great and sounds great. I'd always totally written bluetooth off as having the sound quality of an underwater potato but things have moved on.

    Streaming local media, spotify, google play music etc from phones, tablets and laptop is really good. So much so, the missus actually uses it, consistently and deliberately!

    Have never had to re-pair the bluetooth connections to phones/tablets either which means it's really quick to connect and go.

    1. Joe Harrison

      Re: Bluetooth

      Bluetooth audio normally does sound like an underwater potato yes. However when you are using the APTX codec it is much better and sounds like a high quality MP3. The trouble is that Bluetooth stacks so complex that getting APTX to work is elven wizardry. It works on one of my W7 PCs with a cheap dongle, but doesn't work on my other W7 PC with an identical cheap dongle.

  6. batfastad

    Lol. The NEET adaptor I bought supports APTX but my phone (Moto G original (which is excellent btw)) doesn't. Still sounds really good without IMO.

    When buying new laptops I always format and re-install everything manually. The bluetooth driver package was always the biggest of the lot, often in the 150MB+ range.

  7. dave 93

    Could be excellent for Google Music

    If it works like the other Google stuff, you could start a playlist/mix on your phone, and then use your phone for something else (or even turn it off) while Google streams your music direct to the Chromecast. Just sayin'

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like