Shoutcast vs. Icecast: Voting Poll

[rockhost]

Every day our servers provision and deploy new Centova Cast accounts, some with Icecast, some with Shoutcast. Of course from a behind the scenes technical aspect I have a completely different opinion than the average dj/station.

 

So, I would honestly like to hear more from the broadcaster's point of view. What do you guys think? Which is better? And why? Please take a moment to not only vote on the poll, but also include some brief reasoning behind your vote.

[Brutish Sailor]

If your a dummy that releys on Skinned management, go SC. If you know what your doing when building a DB, understand file extentions, and want to provide something that differentiates your service from 1000 different guys with servers that all offer the same panel under different skins, go Icecast.

 

if your offering Centovas panel (the first clue was different servers) and your a good webhost, you should know how to setup Ices, as you didnt pay 70 bucks to have Centova staff install it. So offer multi bitrate transcoding via Ices-CC 0.42, or or offer Ices 2 for that matter which is great for live source transcoding to open source encoders.

 

Hell, offer oddsocks transcoder. Its a pain in the ass to set it up the first time, but it rocks despite its age, even though i dont dig its duel transcoding and VERY NON transparency on the signal.

 

Not to mention you need to let clients know to stream flac, or their live/playlist streams will sound like a rats ass.

 

Yeah, trunk is in, and 2.3.2 Icecast and SC is old news. SC2 is 2 steps forward, 1 step back. Hows that server management working out with SC's new YP fuctions anyways?

[rockhost]

Hey Everybody, thanks for the votes, let's keep them coming. Nice response from Brutish Sailor too...

 

Our company does offer both Shoutcast and Icecast Hosting with the Centova Cast control panel and Ices Auto DJ, you are correct. We prefer Ices over the flaky Sc_trans, that's for sure. Hmm...I wonder if Sc_trans is coming out of beta mode with Shoutcast 2. No, we are not offering Shoutcast 2 yet, we would prefer to wait until it is tested, tried, and true. My hope is that when Centova Cast 3 comes out it is packaged with Shoutcast 2, I guess until then I'll cross my fingers.

 

Oh, and no, we don't offer transcoding to our customers. It is CPU grinder!

[Jinglemaster]

You missed FM Transmitters off the options.:D

 

The only way to be, still.

[Brutish Sailor]

with Icecast Trunk, you can actually connect Shoutcast source clients, such as trans as well. Still like EZstream over it, but yeah, its possible.

 

And JM, Fm transmitter is a true statement, but both will come in on the droid. just set the stream to 96khz 44.1 Mhz

[jamesdean]

A lot of people like simple, easy stuff and not to be confused with a load of bumf they don't understand (which makes them dummies?) That is why most go for shoutcast as it's easy for them.

[Jinglemaster]

I'm running for cover already! That's fighting talk (he says stirring it up).

[rockhost]

Ha ha, alright everybody be cool! Play nice.

 

Shoutcast is simple, I think that's a good point. I always refer our noobs to Shoutcast rather than Icecast until they have some experience under their belt.

 

Let's hear some more brief points like that, good fact from jamesdean.

[Jinglemaster]

I like shoutcasting. I also like Icecast. But which one is best?

 

There's ony one way to find out............

 

FIGHT!

(thanks Harry Hill)

[jamesdean]

Although I get the Harry Hill reference (and good it is) There is no fighting talk. I just assume that people who do not understand how shoutcast and Icecast work should not really be classed as dummies, some choose to learn all they can and pass on this vast information, others choose not to and get on with other things and to the majority, Shoutcast seems to be the more well known and easier choice. The more Icecast is offered, the more people may take up on it.

[Brutish Sailor]

Great site BTW Rock hosting. Very easy to navigate, a blog worth reading (I'll throw some links to your vids, a lot of people curious about your blog topics I know from the GD forums) and your plans are very different then what I expected. I know NOTHING about your services, and you didnt try to force testimonials from people I have never heard of in my face. BIG +1.

 

SC2 is no longer as easy as it used to be, and If you have ever ran Icecast Win32, you will know this is actually MUCH easier to run than SC, as everything is tied into the front end. Nice GUI tracking system as well for mounts.

 

If you use a management system? Easy either way.

 

Matter afact, Icecast is more stable, more flexable, and the only thing that REALLY separates it is it doesnt have a commercial entity like AOL screaming its name to every vendor out their like a doggie begging for a treat. Its open source universe, and if it wasnt for trans, SC wouldnt be as used as much as it is. The only reason its not as popular is because its open source nature leaves all the third party developers scratching their heads, just as SC2 will do the same.

[Jinglemaster]

Hey Brutish. I didn't know you were in Iraq. You take care out there buddy. Come back home safe - you and all the other boys too!

[rockhost]

Yeah man, thanks for the props and your service to our country. Seriously. In fact I would consider a military discount if you are ever curious enough to give RockandRollHosting.com a try. Just sayin'.

[Brutish Sailor]

Great site BTW Rock hosting. Very easy to navigate, a blog worth reading (I'll throw some links to your vids, a lot of people curious about your blog topics I know from the GD forums) and your plans are very different then what I expected. I know NOTHING about your services, and you didn't try to force testimonials from people I have never heard of in my face. BIG +1.

 

SC2 is no longer as easy as it used to be, and If you have ever ran Icecast Win32, you will know this is actually MUCH easier to run than SC, as everything is tied into the front end. Nice GUI tracking system as well for mounts.

 

If you use a management system? Easy either way.

 

Matter a fact, Icecast is more stable, more flexible, and the only thing that REALLY separates it is it doesn't have a commercial entity like AOL screaming its name to every vendor out their like a doggie begging for a treat. Its open source universe, and if it wasn't for trans, SC wouldn't be as used as much as it is. The only reason its not as popular is because its open source nature leaves all the third party developers scratching their heads, just as SC2 will do the same.

 

That and xiph still wont allow me to do A server points (correction, forbids me) of a catchy IP to their directory. Have you ever tried to tell someone dir/Xiph.org without having to grab a pen and paper? try spelling xiph without looking at the spelling.

 

But whatever, despite ego crazed members thinking without the the word Xiph their glory will be lost (despite their Iframe on the directory page). I don't side with codec junkies, I side with Karl Hayes, hes a programming genius, and hes going to save the streaming community with innovations when we are being choked out via all these semi on demand streaming services like pandora.

 

I dont mean shoutcast is for dummies, its just if your using it, WHY! SC2 was 2 steps forward, one step back. Thats AOL for you. When your server is provided by a company that runs multiple SC radio stations (AOL radio) then everyone needs to be cautious.

[SpazzRadio]

Dregging up an old post :D

 

Just switched our 3 stations to icecast.

 

We started out using Shoutcast because as many of you have stated ... EASY.

 

After setting it up and working with it for a couple weeks, The Win32 Icecast is just as easy and maybe easier ... It is definitely more powerful. Included in our reason for switching is support for large listener numbers without relaying a bunch of servers.

[erikeriksen94]

I really don't know anything about Icecast but I've had no problems using Shoutcast, at least.

[DjSef]

Shoutcast

I noticed its quite popular.. and as you know, the more people use a service, the more people seem be dragged into it and trust it..

I myself don't quite understand the difference.. haha

Voted

Sam

[djgary72]

Having tried Icecast ok yes it was stable but dont really like the /mount thingy, Got rock solid shoutcast servers on our VPS streaming a Community station with a steam ripper kick built in.

[cr08]

I think ultimately the choice, much like anything else in our line of work, all comes down to listener preference/usability. What are listeners going to be tuning in from and what is supported there?

 

Case in point: I've been looking into supporting smartphone listeners (particularly Android devices) and doing some testing I have come to learn that the best case scenario is Shoutcast with an MP3 stream. Icecast with MP3 is a little sketchy and Icecast with AAC+ is practically dead in the water. Which was a big wakeup call since my original plans have been to run Icecast with AAC+ for bandwidth, quality, and flexibility.

 

I guess one major caveat to sum it all up is to keep compatibility in mind. Not everyone is tuning in from Winamp. A lot of programs and hardware devices have their own issues with certain formats and protocols. If you want to spread out your listener 'coverage' you'll need to make sure it is all compatible.

[maaria143]

For this I would like to say Icecast.

[MechanisM]

ppl who voted for Shoutcast just too lazy to checkout powerfull Icecast2. and seems like even don't know Icecast2 power. Icecast2 rocks!