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.
Recent Posts
2
Audio Hardware / Replacing HEOS with Foobar2000
Last post by GordRocks -
I have a Denon AVR-X4500H which I like a lot except for the 300 track limit with HEOS. I have been trying to find a way to use Foobar2000 on my cell phone to play through the Denon. Is this possible? I am definitely not well versed on this and would appreciate any help. Thank you so much!
.....Gord
3
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_truepeak True Peak Scanner
Last post by ngs428 -
Quote from: Case on
Would you be interested in more statistics in the output? Just knowing that samples clip doesn't yet tell how bad it is. Exceeding the full scale by 0.1 dB would not matter at all, but exceeding it by 3 dB could be a problem.
I could for example log how large percentage of clipping exceeded full scale by 1 dB, how much by 2 dB, etc.

After reading this, it got me thinking of what the "Clipping Samples" or "Album Clipping" actually tells us.  I have some tracks that show thousands of clips and I have only scanned a handful of tracks, are the clips only 0.1 dB over, hard to say...  Understanding how far the clip exceeds full scale by % of clips makes sense.  Similar to what you described.  % clips >1dB, % clips >2dB, % clips >3dB, etc., would give a user an understating of the impact of the clipping.

Thanks for your continued work on this component!  I'm working to digest what all the terms mean! 
4
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: JScript Panel
Last post by mexx -
Hallo,

I use Jscrip3/Album Art. When I move the cursor over the image I always get an information field about the cover (see appendix).

How do I get rid of this info field?

P.S. THX. Solved it myself.
6
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: Dynamic Range plugin
Last post by darkflame23 -
Quote from: omasciarotte on
Quote from: darkflame23 on
We now have DR built into Foobar natively, with this component (and the True Peak Scanner), so can use what we need. It's brilliant for mastering as I can get an instant readout of many different variables, track to track.

Since you’re a mastering engineer, I have to remind you that foobar’s “DR” plug–in is an approximation.

Yeah, it's not a problem for me as I've never taken much notice of DR. I mostly use LUFS-I and peak LUFS-S to give me a quick idea of how loud a track is likely to be before listening. As I said above, those figures have documentation and standardisation, and are widely used in the audio industry, unlike DR which I've rarely heard an engineer refer to.
7
Support - (fb2k) / Re: Newer foobar2000 Versions and 'fact' Chunks
Last post by Porcus -
Yeah, so Microsoft being Microsoft being unclear, but just indicating that if it is there, you got to have the sample count and currently they haven't thought of more ... but no definite MUST, and not even specifying completely clearly whether it is sample count per channel although it doesn't make sense otherwise.

Checked the BWF spec from 2011. It doesn't say anything more.
9
Lossless / Other Codecs / Re: HALAC (High Availability Lossless Audio Compression)
Last post by Hakan Abbas -
Thank you for the valuable information you gave, Porcus.
Since Flac or some other codecs act according to Rice encoding, there may be such exceptions based on block size. however, HALAC may act structurally more flexible. Rice coding definitely has strengths on audio data. Actually, I was thinking of partially using Rice coding in the next versions, but right now I'm trying to complete the DLL and Player issue in detail with 0.2.8 (as long as I can find the opportunity and concentrate).
10
Support - (fb2k) / Re: Newer foobar2000 Versions and 'fact' Chunks
Last post by Nick.C -
Thanks *very* much for a link to that specification, as I've never encountered it before and have relied on the Wikipedia pages.

From the same document:

"This chunk is required for all WAVE formats other than WAVE_FORMAT_PCM. It stores file
dependent information about the contents of the WAVE data. It currently specifies the time length of the
data in samples."

Which, to my reading, can be read as the chunk not being needed for PCM at all and that its contents are not fixed (noting the use of "currently" in relation to what is contained in the chunk).