Last post by lender1257 -
yeah, double-click on panel changes from "bio %artist%" to "album-review %artist% + %album%" and reverse.
if not possible, then an extra script
first, a way to overwrite %artist% (remap %artist%) would be very good. with this you could correct different spellings.
Scientific Discussion / Re: Have a working 'expander' based on DolbyA (not same design) -- works well.Last post by jsdyson -
Learned something new about the 4 band expander (pseudo-DolbyA) expander design. I had noticed a certain harshness in the decoded output -- heard that problem before, but didn't add two and two together. Whenever one does an expand or AGC compress, there are interesting (and often unpleasant) modulation products produced. First note, I don't have an entire DolbyA scehmatic, and simply assumed that the outputs of each band were just summed together) which they might still be. However, whenever doing a compression (especially something close to a 2:1 type compression or more with moderatly fast attack/release times), there are significant intermod products produced. So, if you have two signals -- perhaps at 1000Hz and 1030Hz -- youll get 30Hz in the output. Normally, in my compressors and expanders, I tend to remove as much of those products as possible. I didn't do so in my 4 band expander, because I had assumed that there might be no 'high pass filter' after each band IN THE ENCODER/COMPRESSOR to remove those products. I suspect that there is indeed SOME high pass filtering that might help to remove some of the products. Alas -- in my expander I had NO removal of the products except for a rather rough 12Hz type HPF (to basically remove most stuff below 20Hz.) I was using only a singular HPF in the previous version of the code for the total/full/wideband output.
So, I kept on hearing this 'rough' sound (esp in groups like ABBA -- where the voices do tend to intermodulate) and using that group as source material has been one of my personal audio tests. This 'rough' sound has been worse than what I desire -- then finally eureka -- I suspect that it is possible that DolbyA (or other compressors used in the source material) is definitely doing a least a minor amount of HPF on each channel.
So, as a gross experiment, I added a 2 stage each of single pole HPF of approx 12Hz, 60Hz, 1kHz, 3kHz for each of the 0-80Hz, 80-3k, 3k-20k (or 3k-9k -- depending on where it is in the circuit) and 9k-20k directly on the outputs of each of the bands individually. This will help to keep most of the intermod that is created below each of the above bands attenuated to some extent. The worst intermod appears in the 0-100Hz range, and that is obliterated in the two higher bands, and MUCH of the intermod produced by expanding the 80-3k range is also removed. I am doing nothing about the intra band intermod for this case (that is a more difficult problem, and less of an audible issue, but still can be important), but that intermod would definitely exist also in the compressed (encoded) version and some amount of cancellation can be beneficial (alas -- tape might have too many phase prolbems for the cancellation to be complete.)
Anyway -- some of the additional intermodulation artifacts have indeed been removed, and there seems to be a noticeable improvement. In the past, I have definitely measured the artifacts, but would be of minimal benefit in this case since I don't have a DolbyA to experiment with -- but that is not important right now since I am not selling anything. All I can definitely say is that there is now an improvement, and the 4 band expander DOES improve some (most) commercial material that I have processed. (I do NOT attribute that to DolbyA encoding, but rather a lot of compression being left in commercial music.) I have a much more flexible expander that shows the DolbyA parameters for expansion to be helpful, but do NOT do all possible to improve most commercial materials.
So -- the good & useful news -- especially for those in the future who are developing (esp mutliband) compressors/expanders -- make sure that you have mitigated the LF side of the intermod produced by any gain control mixing with the audio signal. Even I have just got caught by that issue -- and I have been aware of that problem for years!!!
Last post by Makaki -
I second A_Man_Eating_Duck's opinion.
Mostly CD Rot:
Last post by kgena_ua -
You mean to add a search for an %artist% - %album% that is playing or currently selected
I'm mixing the two because mobile is only version of foobar2000 I have access to. I do not have a Microsoft Windows system. I am strictly CentOS 7 and Android.
I get that the Android version of Foobar2000 can not have plugins, that's okay - I still am very appreciative that it plays .mka out of the box and correctly interprets the tags.
With the desktop version that I can not try, since it seems that plugins for timed lyrics handle .SRT streams in a .mka file - then the feature I am asking for is already available via a plugin.
As such, nothing needs to be done.
Thank you for your time and I apologize for the confusion.
If it is possible to mark this topic solved, how do I do so?
CD Hardware/Software / Re: EAC: Is It OK To Recreate CUE Sheets For Existing Rips Using another Drive?Last post by MinorKey -
Mike, thanks for posting your findings. I guess the EAC veterans already know this, but finding something out for your self is always different. I think I can be happy with my settings then.
Last post by polemon -
Is Nero aac inferior than fdk aac. Which of opus, aac(m4a) produce smallest file size for music.When it comes to file sizes, it's impossible to answer. You'd have to create a test sample, such that it is transparent for your setup, use-case, etc.
Then, you can have a look at the file size. On average, file sizes between Apple AAC and Opus seem to be similar for a stereo track. At least in my cases.
As for Nero AAC vs. Fdk AAC, here are some listening tests by other users: http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Hydrogenaudio_Listening_Tests
I'm not sure whether Nero AAC still sees maintenance, though. However, I'd simply make a short ABX test yourself if I were you, etc.
I'd give yourself a margin, when it comes to size differences, though. When the difference in file sizes is in the single digits percent wise, I'd deem them equal.
Also note, that it's down to the settings, you can actually make very large files, which sound horrible, by using a rather unfortunate combination of settings. So be wary of that, should you try to tweak them, etc.
Reproduced, thanks. Subsongs (playable_location::get_subsong) in MP4 are zero-based, when in MKV they are 1-based, so we have one chapter behind. With that said, there seems to be no reliable approach to get correct offset. But anyway, some ugly fix is doable.
UPD: removed incorrect observation.