Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode (Read 12234 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

[span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%']After Nullsoft updated Crossfading DirectSound output v1.37, it seems to be missing very important Gapless Mode! In new versions I didn't find a way, how to get rid of a small gap between tracks. Winamp 2.80 had DS-output 1.37. And you can download it from here:

out_ds137.dll

Am I missing something or do later versions of Winamp (including 2.95) do not support gapless mode?[/font][/b][/span]

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #1 –
No, you're not missing anything. There is a gapless option in the directsound output plugin in version 2.95. Strange that you mentioned it, yet haven't spotted it.

edit: The option is located under the "other" tab. There you should see a "Silence remover" checkbox and "Cutoff" slider. I'm using version 2.2.6 of the ds output plugin, which was installed with 2.95. Maybe you had an older version lying about that wasn't overwritten when you upgraded.

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #2 –
[span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%']Silence Remover is not it! Silence remover removes silence, which is not the gapless function at all! Gapless playback ensures, that there is no miliseconds gap between two tracks, even if they both contain silence in the beginning and at the end. So, what I'm saying, that there is no way you can play album, like, for example, Hive's "Bedlam", whithout hearing small gaps between two tracks, that supposed to sound like one track. And that's how I use DS-output 1.37.[/span]

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #3 –
There were three buffer sliders in Winamp 2.81 Directsound plugin...
The third was to be set to some amount to provide gapless playback.
ruxvilti'a

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #4 –
A possible MP3 format limit? MP3s cannot encode gapless due to file format restrictions. That could be a possible answer to why it is not working.

Cheers

AgentMil
-=MusePack... Living Audio Compression=-

Honda - The Power of Dreams

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #5 –
These can be played gapless with a buffering player skipping silence.
ruxvilti'a

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #6 –
[span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%']You're not giving any real answers. And I was not talking about the mp3 playback. If you read this and you still use mp3, then I can say you waste quality and space. Plus it adds small amounts of silence to the front and to the end, making it impossible to play stuff gapless even with a working gapless mode. At the same time, Ogg has a better psycho-acoustic model, providing the ideal quality at bitrates around 150 kb/s and very good quality at bitrates around 90 kb/s.

So what I'm saying here is:

1) Use Crossfading DirectSound Output v1.37 cause it has Gapless Mode;

2) Encode your music to Ogg Vorbis because, if compared to MP3:

Vorbis sounds better
Vorbis will give smaller file sizes
Vorbis is Open Source
Vorbis is free
Vorbis will continue to improve
Vorbis has more features[/span]

[span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%']BYE! 
[/font][/span]

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #7 –
Most people around here know why Vorbis is better
and know that MusePack is the best (most transparent and gapless too).
Vorbis doesn't produce ideal quality files around 150kbps, there is evidence to that.
But it is better (on nearly any music) than MP3.
For evidence use Search function and/or read FAQ.

(please, don't use such big and colorful fonts - they're hard to read!)
ruxvilti'a

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #9 –
Yeah, mp3splice works great, as always.  Now speaking theoretically, I've never understood why a program couldn't buffer the mp3 stream to obtain gapless everytime.  From what I understand, the last frame may not be all music, some may be silence to complete the frame.  So, if the program is buffering the music, it can analyze what it will play before it plays it, find where the silence is, remove it, and only play that last frame or so buffered on its own.  It could then do the same for the next song.  Isn't this what mp3splice does?
WARNING:  Changing of advanced parameters might degrade sound quality.  Modify them only if you are expirienced in audio compression!

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #10 –
I just wish there was a way to do it QUICKLY, i.e. write the mp3splice output to disk. There seems to be no easy, quick way of stitching mp3z together seamlessly, even to .WAV.

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #11 –
Posted by Biont:
Code: [Select]
Am I missing something or do later versions of Winamp (including 2.95) do not support gapless mode?


Well... Winamp has gapless output in both (waveOut & DirectSound) output modes. I'm using Winamp 2.81 and have played with 2.91 for a while. This is, for me, one of the most important features a sound player should have, and I always check it out. The key thing is "Buffer-ahead on track change" option - I remember I had to change it on 2.91 wavOut, but DirectSound worked fine. You should put values as on your current DirectSound output and it should be OK (at least 200ms for waveOut and 333ms for DirectSound work for me - default values).

You're welcome! 

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #12 –
That's what i've tried telling him, but he doesn't listen.

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #13 –
Quote
Vorbis doesn't produce ideal quality files around 150kbps, there is evidence to that. But it is better (on nearly any music) than MP3.


I think MP3 APS & ogg Q6 are close as far as audio quality & If you search the board you will see. Pre-echo seems to be much worse with ogg.

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #14 –
Quote
Quote
Vorbis doesn't produce ideal quality files around 150kbps, there is evidence to that. But it is better (on nearly any music) than MP3.


I think MP3 APS & ogg Q6 are close as far as audio quality & If you search the board you will see. Pre-echo seems to be much worse with ogg.

Nope, Vorbis (using GT3b1) is better and has less preecho.
Look at this thread.
ruxvilti'a

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #15 –
and this (AstralStorm's)  thread tells us really nothing. we don't talk about lame @128 kbit/s here which is known to perform bad at this bitrate, but we talk about lame ---aps instead which is supposed to be great (= transparent with music - we don't talk about rare problem samples). I don't think that vorbis can achieve transparency at lame's --aps bitrate (if ever).

and the AstralStorm  thread doesn't allow any conclusion. there are some different opinions (like here), but nothing substantial to justify any conclusion.

and beware of stating: vorbis -q6 is better than lame --aps, because --aps is considered to be transparent for many audiophile people in these forums. noone can outperform transparency, not even vorbis. There isn't any "more transparent".

EDIT: grammar

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #16 –
@biont:
if you are new to the scene, read the boards. but please stop posting things like your 6 vorbis rules. things aren't always as easy as they seem and NO codec is the SUPERduperONLYcodecOFchoice.

only because YOU can't find the gapless playback options in Peter's winamp output plugins

1) you don't have to use version 1.37
2) you still can encode your music with mp3

better solution:
1) turn on your brain
2) turn on "Buffer Ahead on Track Cange" and "Remove Silence"

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #17 –
Quote
Most people around here know why Vorbis is better
and know that MusePack is the best (most transparent and gapless too).

I cannot agree that MusePack beats Vorbis. I've made quite a few tests myself: acoustic and based on computer analysis. I would like to present one of them. The sample was taken from Hydrogen Audio's Library.

So, Ogg Vorbis vs MusePack!

OGG  MPC

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #18 –
@Biont:
Your link doesn't work (tried IE6 Sp1 and Mozilla Thunderbird). the site remains white.

[sarcasm mode]
and I would be so excited to see your conputer analysis.
[/sarcasm mode]

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #19 –
Well, there is something wrong with my ftp provider. The problem will be fixed in the next 24 hours max. Computer analysis = frequency analysis.

[span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%']EDIT:[/color][/font][/span]  Here's a working mirror with working links.

Yes, I understand that it all depends. I choose Ogg, cause it has a wonderful software support (unfortunately no hardware), it's very good at bitrates around 100 (and that is something I use for most oggs in my collection, cause even 100 gigs of hard drive are not enough). At the same time, acoustic tests I made with professional headphones showed ogg to be very good for archiving albums (@ -q5).

I would love to see some serios testing. Hopefully, rjamorim will provide.

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #20 –
No frequency analysis can tell you if a codec is good or bad. because what you see doesn't tell anything about what you actually hear.

only ABXing can give you valid information on quality.
and results can vary if you choose another bitrate. rjamorim will perform a big listening test soon, comparing different codecs @128 kbit/s. have a look at that.

EDIT: but you still cannot conclude from that test, how codecs perform at higher bitrates. eg vorbis is tuned for lower bitrates, lame for higher bitrates. so the results will vary at each bitrate and you can't tell from that which codec is  "better".

EDIT2: Just saw your new Mirror. but I couldn't find any results on this page. at these low bitrates vorbis might actually win the match, but if you compare the codecs @eg 160 kbit/s mpc should be much better.
at bitrates around 128kbit/s no codec should be transparent at all.

EDIT3: and concerning your test: results can differ from sample to sample. one sample isn't enough to judge the quality of a codec. there are samples a codec "likes" and the other not.

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #21 –
Sure, sure, mate... That is why I'm saying, that I'd love to see some serious testing. But as to my example of test - both codecs dislike background hiss. Ogg is particularly great at low bitrates when the music is more like drum'n'bass. In such cases it encodes a very decent sound @ -q1 (which is around 75 kb/s).

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #22 –
Quote
Well, there is something wrong with my ftp provider. The problem will be fixed in the next 24 hours max. Computer analysis = frequency analysis.

[span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%']EDIT:[/color][/font][/span]  Here's a working mirror with working links.

Yes, I understand that it all depends. I choose Ogg, cause it has a wonderful software support (unfortunately no hardware), it's very good at bitrates around 100 (and that is something I use for most oggs in my collection, cause even 100 gigs of hard drive are not enough). At the same time, acoustic tests I made with professional headphones showed ogg to be very good for archiving albums (@ -q5).

I would love to see some serios testing. Hopefully, rjamorim will provide.


I tested the 120kb/s~  files that were listed at the above site, these are my findings:

Hmmm I can spot the ogg file quite easily. I would have gone for more trials, but win-abx crashed


WinABX v0.23 test report
06/29/2003 21:37:15

A file: 001 guitar.wav
B file: 003 guitar-3,80.wav

21:40:17    1/1  p=50.0%
21:41:10    2/2  p=25.0%
21:42:47    3/3  p=12.5%
21:43:50    4/4  p= 6.2%
21:45:03    5/5  p= 3.1%
21:46:18    6/6  p= 1.6%
21:47:59    7/7  p= 0.8%
21:48:52    8/8  p= 0.4%

Its easy to pick out the added background hiss in during the pauses between notes



I'll try the mpc file next..however I'm sure the mpc file will sound closer to the original for me.


EDIT:

mpc results

-------------------------------------
WinABX v0.23 test report
06/29/2003 21:59:38

A file: 001 guitar.wav
B file: 002 guitar-4,00.wav

22:03:35    1/1  p=50.0%
22:04:37    2/2  p=25.0%
22:06:31    3/3  p=12.5%
22:07:16    4/4  p= 6.2%
22:08:20    5/5  p= 3.1%
22:09:39    6/6  p= 1.6%
22:11:01    7/7  p= 0.8%
22:12:54    8/8  p= 0.4%
22:14:12    9/9  p= 0.2%
22:15:04  10/10  p< 0.1%

sigh..mpc seemed harder to spot..but it seems I can still find it, again its the background hiss in-between notes


EDIT#3

I would have to say mpc sounds closer to the original..however (from my understanding) mpc is not even tuned very much at this bitrate, but  to my ears it still outperforms vorbis on this sample..I'm wondering if there are exceptions..as this is only 1 sample. I challenge you or anyone else to post a vorbis file that out performs mpc at bitrates higher then 128kB/s.

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #23 –
Quote
I challenge you or anyone else to post a vorbis file that out performs mpc at bitrates higher then 128kB/s.

That's one of the ideas of the extension test. Either destroy or confirm the notion that MPC sucks at anything less than 160kbps.

Winamp Crossfading DirectSound Output Gapless Mode

Reply #24 –
Quote
Computer analysis = frequency analysis.

Musepack below q5 is a bit too tough with the lowpassing IMO. This you can see easily from computer generated graphs. If you manually set the lowpass a bit higher and compensate with a little higher pns to reach the same bitrate it will not only look better in the frequency analysis but also sound better in most cases.