Skip to main content
Recent Posts
1
Support - (fb2k) / Re: %CONTENT GROUP% mapping error
Last post by Scaramouche -
In Beta 17, the GROUPING metadata field is not addressed correctly, writing the information to the "CONTENT GROUP" field instead. Is this issue going to be addressed, or will I have to change my metadata structure from "GROUPING" to "CONTENT GROUP"?
2
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: Columns UI
Last post by Sergey77 -
filter by filesize works strange. For "KB" followed by "MB" then again "KB", while it should be in series (see attached pic)
Do you mean sorting? The standard sorting doesn't understand file size units (also the inconsistent number of decimal places doesn't help). Custom sorting scripts exist to handle that situation, so if you enable 'Use custom sort script' for that column and use %filesize% for it (the file size in bytes) it should work. (Also make sure you're using NG playlist if you happen to be using Columns playlist, as I don't think the latter does the natural sorting that will still be required.)
song, the answer to a similar question about sorting by filesize was earlier in this thread.
3
CD Hardware/Software / Re: CD's with pre-emphasis: Cddeemph vs SoX vs Foobar2000
Last post by Rollin -
WavEmph, SoX and foobar2000 are good enough for de-emphasizing, but also that cddemph is slightly better than the others based on the expression "audiophile quality filter". Is this true or am I just reading too much into those words?
Expression "audiophile quality filter" is meaningless. Actually, any expression with words "audiophile quality" is meaningless.
Also, reading from the russian download link for cddemph it seems that it uses dithering after the 16-bit filter, or alternately 64 bit-floating point raw pcm at the output for further Noise Shaping and conversion to 16 bit (Adobe Audition seems to be recommended by the cddeemph developer for the latter task).
Is cddeemph unique in using these techniques, or does SoX / Foobar2000 also use them or similar techniques? I can't find any info on this on the SoX site or in the manual.
In SoX and foobar2000 you also can do dithering and noise-shaping. In fb2k it is called simply  "Dither", but actually it is dithering+noise shaping. In SoX you can do dithering without noise-shaping or select different kinds of noise-shaping.
fb2k and SoX do processing in 32 bit floating point. Author of cddeemp claims that it uses 80 bit floating point for processing.
5
CD Hardware/Software / Re: CD's with pre-emphasis: Cddeemph vs SoX vs Foobar2000
Last post by magicgoose -
For playback it doesn't matter as you'll be unable to hear any difference. 
SoX and foobar2000 plugin don't force conversion to 16 bits at any step, it's up to you to choose (and foobar2000 can apply noise-shaped dithering when converting to 16 bits) 

But for archival it's better to just keep the original. Any kind of *filtering* is irreversible loss of data (because computers don't work with infinite precision numbers, etc.) There are only so much things that are possible to do with audio without losing precision (integer multiplication, integer addition) and they are rarely needed and most regular wave editors can't do this (easily) anyway.
6
CD Hardware/Software / Re: CD's with pre-emphasis: Cddeemph vs SoX vs Foobar2000
Last post by DVDdoug -
I really wouldn't worry about it unless "something doesn't sound right".   There is no mathematically perfect analog or digital filter/EQ...  There is no "bit perfect" filter.  But, they can be darn-good and audibly perfect.   I'd use whatever is convenient for you.  And if  one or two rips don't sound right, maybe the pre-emphasis flag is wrong and they don't really need de-emphasis, or maybe they need a little EQ to fix 'em up.

I assume these are older masters so the pre-emphasis was probably an analog filter.   There's a good chance that the de-emphasis filter on your CD player is also analog.
7
CD Hardware/Software / CD's with pre-emphasis: Cddeemph vs SoX vs Foobar2000
Last post by vilsen -
Hi, this is my first post here.

Being in the process of finally ripping my CD's with pre-emphasis, I have some questions.

In the wiki - http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Pre-emphasis - the following is stated:

"WaveEmph, SoX, and all of the foobar2000 plug-ins have been tested and produce nearly identical output. The differences are minuscule and inaudible."

In the same wiki it is also stated that "cddeemph (Windows) - processes multiple WAV files with audiophile quality filter."

I tend to interpret these quotes as if WaveEmph, SoX and foobar2000 are good enough for de-emphasizing, but also that cddemph is slightly better than the others based on the expression "audiophile quality filter". Is this true or am I just reading too much into those words?

Also, reading from the russian download link for cddemph it seems that it uses dithering after the 16-bit filter, or alternately 64 bit-floating point raw pcm at the output for further Noise Shaping and conversion to 16 bit (Adobe Audition seems to be recommended by the cddeemph developer for the latter task).

Is cddeemph unique in using these techniques, or does SoX / Foobar2000 also use them or similar techniques? I can't find any info on this on the SoX site or in the manual.
8
FLAC / Re: playing FLAC files ripped by EaC in a DLNA network
Last post by greynol -
Sigh.

EAC uses the flac command line executable with perfectly normal compression settings and tagging arguments. However, these settings are user configurable, which is where problems will arise.

"Dodgy" implementation?  Pfft.
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2018