I do agree with you in that indexing allows a much 'richer' experience in terms of browsing and searching and categorising content. At least there does not seem to be the same limit on size that appears to be the case for the bluesound speakers. (Bluesound currently does seem to have to do that).įurther, there is no real limit to the size of a media library index if it is done on the nas/pc via a server like plex. And - in the case of Plex and many other media servers, they update their indexes on the fly when new media is added and do not have to re-index the entire library just to account for a few new albums or tracks. Searching and certainly Indexing is more efficient and the speakers do not have to wait for an index to be finished before accessing and playing at least some of the content. I believe that other wifi speaker sysstems do operate as upnp/dlna clients and have the advantage that they can access whatever media server the user has on their nas/pc, and thus can display the categories the way that the server intended. These all do indexing on the nas or pc so that the speaker system does not have to do the heavy lifting of indexing and categorisation etc. Many devices I have used seem to be able to recognise all of these servers. Then there is emby, minimServer, twonky, minidlna, etc. It manages classical music and audio books quite well. That is, if the bluesound speakers were a dlna/upnp client, they could access content from a range of different media servers.įor example, Asset UPNP is a great media server for audio. I would go a bit further to say that this could be for any dlna/upnp server, not jus tplex. I would also add my support to this feature request.

Plex for mac vs plex media player