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: foobar2000 v0.9 public beta (Read 273341 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #250 –
Quote
Is the next version to be released is 0.9 final? or beta 6?
is there expectation date\time?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=312224"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


You wouldn't try to hurry your mother when she's making your favourite dinner, would you?

foobar2000 is much the same.  Peter's making it good, and that takes time.

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #251 –
thanks
but when she's making my favourite dinner i know what im expecting to.
so is the next is beta 6 or the final?
not a question of time

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #252 –
Quote
thanks
but when she's making my favourite dinner i know what im expecting to.
so is the next is beta 6 or the final?
not a question of time
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=312346"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


The last major change at .7 went into something like 40 betas.  I wouldn't expect final for a little while yet (though given the relatively small number of bugs reported so far, I doubt it'll get to beta 40 either).

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #253 –
Just wondering, is there an estimated time for when 0.9 becomes non testing?

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #254 –
Quote
Just wondering, is there an estimated time for when 0.9 becomes non testing?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=312449"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yep, the estimated time is...when its done. 

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #255 –
I have a problem when I try to add directories to my playlist over a network share. It seems that the "Add directory" is not recursive to at least two levels.  When I try to add the root "my music", foobar gives me an error, although i can load the artist subfolders, which therein contain album subfolders.

Thanks for looking at this problem.

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #256 –
Quote
I have a problem when I try to add directories to my playlist over a network share. It seems that the "Add directory" is not recursive to at least two levels.  When I try to add the root "my music", foobar gives me an error, although i can load the artist subfolders, which therein contain album subfolders.

Thanks for looking at this problem.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=312458"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I've had a couple of problems that might be related.

Firstly - all my music is under a samba share on a linux box, but the clients have full permissions over the share. Adding the root of this share to the database doesn't work with the 0.9 betas - I have to add each child directory individually  (\\seanyserver\music\singles, \\seanyserver\music\albums etc), otherwise I get a generic error.

Second - the new function to move whole directories doesn't work all the time. It is fine with a string like this

%artist% - %album%\$num(%tracknumber,2) %title%

However it fails saying that it can't find the source files with the following string:

%artist%\%album%\$num(%tracknumber,2) %title%

???

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #257 –
I think it doesn't matter even next version is beta 6 or final, both beta or final also included new functions and its not sure 100% bugs free.

Version numbers are unlimited, if now to say 0.9 released, maybe after few weeks also have next version (0.9999) for bugfixes or new function, you just can ask "When will a stable version available?" Heheee.

I always use the latest beta version if I think it is stable for me.  If you afraid the word "beta" will cause some error, just use back 0.8.3 and wait until next stable version come out.  Beta always use for lovers to test and help author find out the bugs or give suggestions.

The word "Beta" is only means "unfinished", it doesn't mean its a "Bugs Included" or "Unstable Version ", feel free try it and use it, if you feel its useful for you, just use it as your "current stable version" for insead last version.

Feel free check the "to-do" list wrote by author, and guess those function need how many days for programming.

"It'll be done when it's (ALL FUNCTIONS IN TO-DO LIST) done." is usual really...

P.S. I just hope ID3v2's coverart will be supported in foobar2k. If not supported, even the version 0.9 is released, I think always use the word "stable" for it better then "final", if not supported all the stantard formats and contents.

"Suggestions are unlimited, but time is scared."
(from eco books: "Wants are unlimited, but resources are scared.")

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #258 –
It has been said several times that ID3v2's coverart won't be suported.

edit: I was wrong, sorry.
fb2k 0.9 beta 13.

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #259 –
Quote
It has been said several times that ID3v2's coverart won't be suported.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=312574"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That is not correct. Binary tags are currently not supported, but it has been said at least once (on IRC) that it could be supported in the future.

The next release is planned to be beta 6. Neither the release date for beta 6 nor the number of betas before v0.9 final is known at this point. Discussing this matter or musing about the nature of beta versions time after time again is futile. Such idle chatter does not advance the project; it only clogs up this thread. I can understand that people are anxious to play with new stuff, but please be patient. You will be informed when a new version is released.

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #260 –
Quote
I think it doesn't matter even next version is beta 6 or final, both beta or final also included new functions and its not sure 100% bugs free.

Version numbers are unlimited, if now to say 0.9 released, maybe after few weeks also have next version (0.9999) for bugfixes or new function, you just can ask "When will a stable version available?" Heheee.

I always use the latest beta version if I think it is stable for me.  If you afraid the word "beta" will cause some error, just use back 0.8.3 and wait until next stable version come out.  Beta always use for lovers to test and help author find out the bugs or give suggestions.

The word "Beta" is only means "unfinished", it doesn't mean its a "Bugs Included" or "Unstable Version ", feel free try it and use it, if you feel its useful for you, just use it as your "current stable version" for insead last version.

Feel free check the "to-do" list wrote by author, and guess those function need how many days for programming.

"It'll be done when it's (ALL FUNCTIONS IN TO-DO LIST) done." is usual really...

P.S. I just hope ID3v2's coverart will be supported in foobar2k. If not supported, even the version 0.9 is released, I think always use the word "stable" for it better then "final", if not supported all the stantard formats and contents.

"Suggestions are unlimited, but time is scared."
(from eco books: "Wants are unlimited, but resources are scared.")
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=312535"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


i would use 0.9 even now but if it will have all the plugins.
i should have asked when will the SDK will be released

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #261 –
The SDK will be released with 0.9

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #262 –
Quote
Quote
Also, the new volume control seems to be very exponential in its shape, perhaps a little too much so? All the volume changes from 100% back to what appears to be very close to 0% occur in the top 20% (alright lets say 40-50% instead...) of the volume slider.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=299609"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


It is very much non-exponential. It alters the gain linearly using a scale of decibels. You don't get more perceptually linear than that.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=299615"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Decibel scale is based on a logarithmic shape.

So that's not linear.

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #263 –
Quote
Quote

It is very much non-exponential. It alters the gain linearly using a scale of decibels. You don't get more perceptually linear than that.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=299615"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Decibel scale is based on a logarithmic shape.

So that's not linear.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=313132"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Please read my post and understand what I'm saying before attempting to "disprove" me in the future.

It alters decibels linearly, providing perceptual linearity. It is irrelevant what "shape" the decibel scale is based upon in reality; it provides linear response perceptually. You cannot have a more linear volume control than that.

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #264 –
Please confirm: The new masstagger appears to support slashes inside $if statements and square brackets.

I made up a string:
Code: [Select]
[%genre%\]$if(%album%,%artist%\%album%\%title%,%artist% - %title%)

and v0.9b5 didn't blow up like the 0.8.3 masstagger did.

If this is the case, I can *severely* shorten my massive script! 

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #266 –
sorry but I just couldn't bring myself up to read through all the 11 pages, so excuse possible repeated question, but does fb2k use SSRC 1.30 released recently? (either in current betas or future final) Or is the Resempler component something you guys made specifically yourselves?
The Plan Within Plans

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #267 –
As far as I am aware of, all SSRC 1.30 changes have been either already applied on our side (Spoon's patch) or didn't affect us (we don't use SSRC's dithering).
Microsoft Windows: We can't script here, this is bat country.

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #268 –
where's the author's todo?

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #269 –
I've got a problem here with the RG scanner...
I have enabled the option "skip files with RG info" and so I scan the whole database... with 0.8.3 it was quickly skipping the files with RG info and processing those few without... with 0.9 it takes ages for the scanner to skip the files containing RG...

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #270 –
Beta 6 is available for download. This is mostly a bugfix release addressing (at least) the following issues:
  • Fixed: Scanning for files would abort upon encountering an unaccessible directory, it now skips to the next directory.
  • Fixed: “Playlist/Remove duplicates” crashed when used on an empty playlist.
  • Fixed: Invoking foobar2000 with commandline options could crash other applications including Microsoft Outlook and Windows Explorer.

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #271 –
Thanks!

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #272 –
No apl support?
Any idea when that may return? My entire collection is built upon apl files.

Thanks.

Looks clean anyway.

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #273 –
Quote
No apl support?
Any idea when that may return? My entire collection is built upon apl files.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=314390"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
APL support is included in foo_input_std. It is not listed under "Components" (in preferences), but there is an APL entry in "File types" (in preferences as well).

foobar2000 v0.9 public beta

Reply #274 –
Are there any plans to incorporate directory monitoring like Winamp / WMP (and I'm sure others) provide?

I know that autoplaylists are available, however this would require fb2k to load up whole directory trees in a playlist would it not?