Skip to main content

Notice

Please be aware that much of the software linked to or mentioned on this forum is niche and therefore infrequently downloaded. Lots of anti-virus scanners and so-called malware detectors like to flag infrequently downloaded software as bad until it is either downloaded enough times, or its developer actually bothers with getting each individual release allow listed by every single AV vendor. You can do many people a great favor when encountering such a "problem" example by submitting them to your AV vendor for examination. For almost everything on this forum, it is a false positive.
Recent Posts
1
General - (fb2k) / Re: Monophonic Files are -6dB
Last post by kode54 -
They are playing to the "center" speaker mapping, and the system is downmixing them to stereo somehow. If you don't like this, add a DSP which upmixes mono to stereo, one is provided with the player.
2
Listening Tests / Re: Personal blind listening test – MultiCodec at ~192 VBR kbps
Last post by synclagz -
It isnt clear if it was a one off or could be repeated.
A single 5/5 isn't always something to be concerned with.
If the artifact is really bad it is enough, but when more subtle and
combined with very high settings you want better score / repeat result (IMO).
Yes, It's hard to say is it serious or something like very rare case.
However, Joni Mitchell "Cool Water" is not a problem sample (at least I'm considering it as normal cd music),
and when someone notice a problem on normal listening using extreme mpc setting Q7 that is slightly worrying.
But it's probably very rare case and difference should be very subtle on Q7.
btw, nice to hear from you @shadowking ;)
3
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_musicbrainz
Last post by MordredKLB -
I might have gotten it wrong: Is this about searching, i.e. making queries MusicBrainz, or is it about what is written back to files after a search proved fruitful?
It's just searching to get results back. Very rarely will musicbrainz ever have "Limited Edition" or whatever in the album titles.

Quote
Both 0.4.7.b3 and 0.4.7.b4 as posted here, cause immediate crashes, so I cannot test. However. 0.4.6 gives zero hits when searching for my Master of Puppets using artist "Metallica" and album "Master of puppets ("
That's not good. Did beta 1 or 2 (not sure I posted 2) cause any crashes? What version of foobar are you on?

Are you able to debug using the pdb file (beta4)?
5
Support - (fb2k) / Re: m3u8 extension
Last post by christopher -
Trying to open m3u8 links as in here

https://hifiwigwam.com/forum/topic/127134-high-quality-320kbps-streams-for-all-bbc-radio-stations/

w
ith no lack.

Drag-n-drop them in foobar playlist, which seems populated fine, but no play. There is always a popup
Unable to open item for playback (Unsupported format or corrupted file):
"http://a.files.bbci.co.uk/media/live/manifesto/audio/simulcast/hls/uk/sbr_high/ak/bbc_6music.m3u8"

foo_input_ffmpeg is installed and configured.
Any ideas on this?



I know this is a necrothread, but it may still be useful for people Googling the problem.

BBC publishes its streaming URLs at "https://bbc.co.uk/radio/imda/imda_transports.xml". Some streams are geofenced to the UK, you can tell by the "relevance" variable for each stream entry in the XML.

Recently some of the URLs changed (different CDNs), in particular the unicast stream URLs changed recently as they migrated to a new platform for 'legacy' unicast streams.

An upshot of this is that the codec quality is better, and the sample rate is now 48 kHz which matches their playout systems so there's no additional sample rate conversion. The BBC almost entirely uses 48 kHz for its radio networks, for various reasons beyond the scope of this reply.

Back to HLS streams -- for example, as of May 2021, BBC 6 Music's 'entry' HLS URL is "http://open.live.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/6/redir/version/2.0/mediaset/audio-syndication-high/proto/http/transferformat/hls/vpid/bbc_6music". Mediaselector in turn 307 redirects to the actual URL, "http://a.files.bbci.co.uk/media/live/manifesto/audio/simulcast/hls/uk/sbr_high/cf/bbc_6music.m3u8" (in my case). This plays fine with foo_input_ffmpeg.

You can obtain this 'true' link by using Chrome, opening a new tab & hitting F12, request the 'entry' URL from imda_transports and watch the Network tab as you request the URL. Make sure the "Preserve Log" option is checked, look for the 307 response m3u8 URL.

Some stations' HLS streams are only available in the UK due to geofencing, but give the new 128 kbps MP3 streams a try. For example, 6 Music's MP3 unicast stream is at "http://open.live.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/5/select/mediaset/http-icy-mp3-a/format/pls/proto/http/vpid/bbc_6music.pls".
6
Other Lossy Codecs / Re: exhale - Open Source xHE-AAC encoder
Last post by soundping -
I have an AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 12-core
32 GB ram at 3200 MHz
ASUS ROG Strix B450-F
970 EVO Plus SSD 1TB - M.2 NVMe
That's the hardware I'm working with.

The encoder set 108kbps / Preset g
Processing: None.
Other: When finished:
* Transfer tags and attached pictures.

Flac and Opus files no problem.
9
Other Lossy Codecs / Re: exhale - Open Source xHE-AAC encoder
Last post by C.R.Helmrich -
I faced conversion foobar2000 issue several times but considered as Jupiter is not in the right triangle if u understand my humor.
Same problem with accb67be
I haven't fixed that issue yet, you'll have to rely on the last executable that worked for you. Like I mentioned before (I think), I do not observe this issue on my own PC when e.g. converting my FLACs to xHE-AAC, which makes it hard to debug. It really seems to depend on the hardware/driver/software configuration.

But can you two check if things get any better if you disable the metadata transfer during conversion? See this old Wiki entry for instructions.

Chris
10
Listening Tests / Re: How are the listeners selected for a Listening Test?
Last post by C.R.Helmrich -
All of your comments are perfectly valid points requiring consideration. Which is why some formal listening test methodologies require things like

  • only so-called "othologically normal" subjects as participants (age 18-25 IIRC, without any hearing disorders; this part is called pre-screening)
  • pretraining of the test subjects qualified to participate - the more experience, the better usually (incl. handout of instructions before the test)
  • exclusion of test results based on criteria like "mistaken hidden reference condition for a codec condition" (this part is called post-screening)
  • listening in a controlled environment (listening with specific loudspeakers or headphones, with background noise below a certain threshold).

Plus what Kamedo2 said about anchors. The reasoning behind the training and those anchors is that they help the test participants understand the quality scale they are judging stimuli on. That, in turn, makes the judgments more consistent and, therefore, facilitates identification of quality differences between codecs (or encoders) after the test since the confidence intervals usually stay smaller than without training and anchors.

Unfortunately, most of these things can only be realized in a lab, like the ones available to companies developing codecs. On this forum, some compomises have to be made, especially regarding controlled environment of course, since it can't be controlled by the test coordinator. Btw, there actually are formal test methodologies explicitly focusing on untrained listeners, especially in the speech coding area (e.g. for VoIP communication, see, e.g., section A.4 of ITU-T Rec. P.800).

Chris
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2021