Skip to main content

Topic: mpc, rest in peace (Read 44701 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • Squeller
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
mpc, rest in peace
The last article in the mpc forums  is from July 1st. This is more than dead.

Isn't it time to remove the direct links to mpc forums? mpc is like a dead limb in ha.
  • Last Edit: 09 August, 2006, 02:12:47 AM by Squeller

  • halb27
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #1
...Isn't it time to remove the direct links to mpc forums? mpc is like a dead limb in ha. ...

Well, I'm not a mpc fan, but as it's still a very good codec: why bury it?

If mpc doesn't produce a lot of interest any more: it's like that, just natural not to see a lot of posts about it. Shouldn't bother people with other interests. Much better than those situations we see from time to time here on HA where a lot of posts are coming out for more popular codecs but on issues and with a quality which are quite questionable sometimes.
lame3995o -Q1

  • seanyseansean
  • [*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #2

...Isn't it time to remove the direct links to mpc forums? mpc is like a dead limb in ha. ...

Well, I'm not a mpc fan, but as it's still a very good codec: why bury it?

If mpc doesn't produce a lot of interest any more: it's like that, just natural not to see a lot of posts about it. Shouldn't bother people with other interests. Much better than those situations we see from time to time here on HA where a lot of posts are coming out for more popular codecs but on issues and with a quality which are quite questionable sometimes.


Yeah I agree. Maybe the lack of comments isn't just due to lack of support, but also due to the fact it just works. I don't have any incompatibility between different MPC decoders like AAC does for example. I've been hoarding single file FLAC CD rips for ages waiting to find a more modern codec to encode them with but i'm going to use MPC instead as it just works.

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #3
I guess that the original demand isn't to forbid any discussion about muepack but to remove two forums that are now totally deserted. MPC format was very active in the beginning of HA.org, with heavy development (thanks to Frank Klemm) and a growing community of users. Activity on forums about MPC was very intense, on par with MP3, Vorbis and even bigger than for AAC.

Nowadays it's very different. MPC has no developer anymore, less and less users on this board (from 35% of HA community in the first poll to 12% in the most recent one) and no reactivity at all. Posting an issue with the format becomes pointless because nothing changes in fact.

The situation has therefore completely change since HA.org beginning and the original organisation of the different forums. In this new context having two forums dedicated to this format looks overkill. There are more questions and threads about flac or wavpack in one week than threads posted on HA about MPC in 6 months. But there's only one forum for all lossless formats but two for the lone MPC. How relevant is this?

I'm also partisan to reorganize a bit the forums organisation. The place for new MPC discussions belongs to "other audio codecs", among atrac, wma and other less-popular formats on HA.org.
The lossless forum could eventually be divided into three categories: two for the most popular ones in this board (FLAC and WAVPACK) and a third one for all other lossless formats.


@halb27> MPC debates are not very always high quality ones. Ad the part of "questionable" threads is proportionaly as big for mpc than for other formats (look on first page of each mpc forums and count the "moved topics", and the productive ones like "amazing speed", "no more MPC", "after the PC donation", various transcoding questions, etc...
  • Last Edit: 08 August, 2006, 06:33:47 AM by guruboolez

  • stephanV
  • [*][*][*][*]
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #4
I'm not sure if one month of inactivity is enough to warrant removal of a forum. What is the rush to proclaim it dead? If it remains inactive till the end of the year, perhaps that is the time to start thinking about such measures.
"We cannot win against obsession. They care, we don't. They win."

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #5
I'm not sure if one month of inactivity is enough to warrant removal of a forum. What is the rush to proclaim it dead? If it remains inactive till the end of the year, perhaps that is the time to start thinking about such measures.

The problem is old. Look on MPC-TECH forum for example. On the first page you can see all messages from year 2006, plus all ones from year 2005, plus few months of 2004. The twenty last months are present in the first page... Now go on the beginning of MPC-TECH forums and count how many pages you must browse to see the twenty first months of activity. Answer is... seven pages.
The situation is only slightly less dramatic for the second MPC forum. Recent (understand: the two last years) activity about MPC on this board is strongly less intense compared to the beginning (which should be characterized by much less users than in 2006, no?). This situation is unique to MPC; all other formats having dedicated forum(s) know a much intense activity.

For comparison, take a look on the amount of new threads in the LOSSLESS forum. 1st  page = 10 days of activity. MPC-TECH: 1st page = 600 days of activity (or 20 months).
FLAC has now two developing branchs (CVS and flake) but no dedicated forum whereas MPC has no development branch anymore but two forums


This situation is not new; it simply going worse months after months (musepack.net is exactly in the same situation).
  • Last Edit: 08 August, 2006, 07:04:31 AM by guruboolez

  • stephanV
  • [*][*][*][*]
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #6
I'm not against Flac and Wavpack getting their own forums.

But if the forums get a clean-up I suggest looking at the Digital A/V forums too, there the situation is worse than for MPC.
"We cannot win against obsession. They care, we don't. They win."

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #7
But if the forums get a clean-up I suggest looking at the Digital A/V forums too, there the situation is worse than for MPC.

I was about to post this argument too, but I verified it first and the A/V section appeared to know a decent activity. At least the GENERAL forum:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....amp;s=&f=53

It's definitely much more active than MPC forums.


N.B. But I wouldn't cry if all the A/V forums would be merged into a unique one (or maybe two).
  • Last Edit: 08 August, 2006, 07:08:38 AM by guruboolez

  • smok3
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Moderator
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #8
yes, well it seems like HA video section is a place for refugees from doom9 or from people who didnt find doom9 yet, so i agree, merging is in place imho.
PANIC: CPU 1: Cache Error (unrecoverable - dcache data) Eframe = 0x90000000208cf3b8
NOTICE - cpu 0 didn't dump TLB, may be hung

  • halb27
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #9
... MPC has no developer anymore, ... and no reactivity at all. Posting an issue with the format becomes pointless because nothing changes in fact. ....

I see. That's a good point.
So maybe it's the best option to have mpc related posters use the 'other codec section' as you proposed.
  • Last Edit: 08 August, 2006, 08:46:39 AM by halb27
lame3995o -Q1

  • CiTay
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Administrator
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #10
The MPC forum will stay, it's a good resource or... archive?  However, i merged the two subsections into one general section.

I also merged some of the video forums into General A/V.
  • Last Edit: 08 August, 2006, 09:08:48 AM by CiTay

  • Squeller
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #11
I would even think about (maybe by the end of the year) merging mpc to the "other codecs" section, leaving the two stickied topics intact...
  • Last Edit: 08 August, 2006, 10:20:43 AM by Squeller

  • flipik
  • [*][*]
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #12
there's no need for any sentiment

mpc is good, was usable, lacks development, is dead

easy, don't make it complicated

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #13
mpc (...) is dead

Booo... a primitive anti-musepack zealot!! Don't you know that "Musepack use and support hasn't been declining, but only rising. People that have so "articulately" been arguing that Musepack is bad because of this and that, can today do flips and flops when they hear things like you can play MPC files on iRiver, iPod, and various platforms." ?

It comes from a "developer", posted recently on a zealot-free forum (by opposition to HA.org which is "filled by trolls").
Source (and full reply): here.
It contains the most priceless nostradamus-like claim I ever read from a self-proclaimed "developer":

"Musepack will always come first, because it is as good and better than the others." (author: Shy).

  Anyway, he gave a good argument against including MPC in any future listening tests: if it will always be the best, what's the point of testing it

Finally, it's not the MPC forums that should be closed but all other ones because competition is doomed to stay behind a format which isn't developed since 2003. Logic, no?

  • skelly831
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #14
there's no need for any sentiment

mpc is good, was usable, lacks development, is dead

easy, don't make it complicated

I completely agree.

I like what CiTay did with the MPC section, and yes the Lossless codecs section needs subsections for the big players, with stickys and FAQ's and recommendations and the like.
we was young an' full of beans

  • flipik
  • [*][*]
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #15

mpc (...) is dead

Booo... a primitive anti-musepack zealot!! Don't you know that "Musepack use and support hasn't been declining, but only rising." ?


as usually, you let my knowladge grow

  • vinnie97
  • [*][*][*][*]
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #16
LOL @ Guru.  I received quite the beating in that thread.

  • DARcode
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #17
I subscribe to the WavPack and FLAC forums idea.
WavPack 4.80.0 -b384hx6cmv / qaac 2.59 -V 100

  • Muzzy^F8
  • [*]
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #18
You can do what you want with the forum.

But sayin' that MPC is dead???
I encode all my music in MPC since 2002.
First in q5 quality then q6.

Many people use this codec because it's the best choice to quality/bitrate.
Maybe development is dead but not the format.

That's all I wanted to say. 
Fear my anger. fear my power.
I'm Dark Angel undercover.

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #19
I encode all my music in MPC since 2002.
(...)
Many people use this codec because it's the best choice to quality/bitrate.

I hope that since 2002 you took the time to read hydrogenaudio TOS, especially the 8th one. Or if you have your own interesting listening tests, do forget to share them

  • Gabriel
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #20
Quote
But sayin' that MPC is dead???
I encode all my music in MPC since 2002.
First in q5 quality then q6.

If there is no development done inside or around a format, no new users, then of course the format is dying. There are still people using it, but those are old users, not new ones.

(there are probably a few people still using vqf)

  • Muzzy^F8
  • [*]
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #21
I hope that since 2002 you took the time to read hydrogenaudio TOS, especially the 8th one. Or if you have your own interesting listening tests, do forget to share them


I look at the forum once a day. So I read all I want to read.

Tests?
Comparing MPC q5, MPC q6, Lame MP3 standard done in 2004:
MP3 - Too much bass in headphones, speakers make strange noises when deep bass is played.
MPC q5 - Everything beautiful but...
MPC q6 - Stereo effect is wider, compared to WAV I couldn't see the differences.

Tested on trance music and Clannad - Herne.
If this codes suits me why search other. 

//End of my OT
Fear my anger. fear my power.
I'm Dark Angel undercover.

  • beto
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #22
Tests?
Comparing MPC q5, MPC q6, Lame MP3 standard done in 2004:
MP3 - Too much bass in headphones, speakers make strange noises when deep bass is played.
MPC q5 - Everything beautiful but...
MPC q6 - Stereo effect is wider, compared to WAV I couldn't see the differences.

Tested on trance music and Clannad - Herne.
If this codes suits me why search other. 

//End of my OT


You are not a new member so you know that your personal opinion (including wider stereo, colourful frequency range and the like) means nothing without ABX results. Got any to share? If not, refrain from posting and stick to whatever fits you best. thankyou.
  • Last Edit: 08 August, 2006, 03:09:16 PM by beto

  • kwanbis
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer (Donating)
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #23
MPC q6 - Stereo effect is wider, compared to WAV I couldn't see the differences.

well, probably you would "hear" the differences

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
mpc, rest in peace
Reply #24
So if q6 have a "wider stereo effect" it logically implies that q5 (aka --preset standard, reputed as fully transparent) has a limited stereo coding. It's a unusually rare artefact for 180 kbps encodings, and the most weird thing is that "the best" lossy format is concerned by this. I wonder how horrible must sound Vorbis or AAC which both have poorer "quality/bitrate performance"; they probably turn everything into mono...

Another interesting point is that LAME have too much bass. It changes from people complaining about lack of bass of MP3 or any various coding formats.

Last interesting point is that someone obviously interested to find out the best lossy format missed to perform fresh listening in the last two years and even more strangely forgot to include AAC and Vorbis in the comparison. So to sum up: you compared in 2004 LAME and MPC and two years after (after several LAME updates) you're claiming that MPC is still the best thing.

May I advice you to perform again a comparison, including this time AAC, Vorbis, latest LAME, maybe WMAPro, with ABC/HR in order to make blind evaluation - and then to come back on this board to confirm that MPC is still on top? Thanks
  • Last Edit: 08 August, 2006, 03:22:19 PM by guruboolez