I don't want to share it publicly, but I'll write you a private message.
Thank you for the link. Actually, that's also the only guide I found that seemed interesting. But I find it complex for the moment, and I struggle to understand Eole skin with it (I must admit I have not read much of it in fact).
As far as I can remember the eole skin is almost entirely based on jscript panel, that guide is about panel stack splitter.
Last post by IgorC -
AAC is a family of formats (LC-AAC, HE-AAC, HE-AACv2)
It's not clear when AAC patents expire.
But some estimations can be done.
LC-AAC's patents will expire first. MPEG2 video format will have its patents expired in 2018. LC-AAC's patents are 1 year younger.
So it's a reasonable estimation that LC-AAC's patents will expire somewhere in 2019.
HE-AAC and HE-AACv2 have more recent dates (+6-7 years comparing to LC-AAC) so don't expect to see them patent free until 2025-2026
PS. Related topic https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,94049.msg789998.html#msg789998
And is it possible to run a software too?
You need to add the file path :
"C:\Program Files (x86)\MixMeister BPM Analyzer\BpmAnalyzer.exe" "%path%"
I assume you're not building a woofer (driver) and to the end-user, this is all fairly meaningless... Manufacturers like to tout their design choices but to us it comes down to performance - Sensitivity/efficiency, frequency response, power handling, size, cost, probably the Thiele-Small parameters, etc. "There's more than one way to build a bridge" but there is no "best way".
The one thing I'd avoid is foam surround. I've seen too many rotten/disintegrated foam-surrounds. There are probably acceptable foam materials/compounds but I'd have be sure before I'd take a chance. I've seen paper cones deteriorate when used as deck speakers in a car (where the sun hits them) but I've got some paper-cone speakers at home that are probably 40 years old, and they are still OK.
I am still wondering, how to design a woofer that gives a good result in the sensitivity area of speaker operation. I'm sure the strength of the magnetic field in the gap is essential, but there must also be other areas of the speaker motor design that effect the sensitivity.One thing I've noticed is that "pro" woofers have higher efficiency and higher resonant frequency (which implies less mass) when compared to "home theater" woofers.
And of course, the cabinet makes a big difference. A horn gives the best efficiency but a low-frequency horn is very large and generally impractical.
Last post by Bert -
Thank you. That made things clear.
Last post by ajinfla -
Lossy codecs can smear vinyl ticks.So no MQA either then?
Wanting to make another try, I switched to "Use Track Gain" back. And now v.1.3.17 (latest) player behaves without strange.Curious. If you had a backup of the config from that time it could be verified. Or Peter could read the code to see if it's possible.
What do you mean by "old ReplayGain tags"? Are they non-R128-conformed RG tags, which were used in Opus long time ago, but some software may still use them?I mean the ReplayGain tags used pretty much everywhere, REPLAYGAIN_TRACK_GAIN and the other three similar tags. They have never been used in Opus by programs that respect Opus specs, foobar2000 for example has not written them there. Opus wants people to use R128_TRACK_GAIN tag.
I meant that I don't experience the problem you described. When I had RG in use and I played three Opus files tagged with the three different header setting they all had identical loudness.
Just guessing: Can the bug be related to Media Library somehow? But, I mainly stick to the preferences corruption cause.Were your files located on the harddrive of your machine and not on some network storage? Media Library shouldn't affect things but some weird storage that doesn't report file changes perhaps might.
And is it possible to run a software too?
"C:\Program Files (x86)\MixMeister BPM Analyzer\BpmAnalyzer.exe"
This is the code of the program but when I right click on the file the program does not run.
Did you use something else than foobar2000 to ReplayGain scan the Opus files?Nope, the Opus files were coded using foobar2000 including its RG scanner. As much as I can remember, it was all right before the last software update. Several plug-ins were installed/updated too.
Wanting to make another try, I switched to "Use Track Gain" back. And now v.1.3.17 (latest) player behaves without strange.
Guessing: Could it be any preferences corruption?
Opus specs forbid the use of old ReplayGain tags as it has its own R128 gain tags. Header gain adjustment is also part of the specifications. Decoders are supposed to always apply the header gain and optionally R128 Gain from tags as an additional adjustment. Since not all players support tag based ReplayGain foobar2000 allows writing the desired RG info to header. That feature is supposed to give ReplayGain with Opus everywhere where the format can be decoded.Thank you for verbose explanation. What do you mean by "old ReplayGain tags"? Are they non-R128-conformed RG tags, which were used in Opus long time ago, but some software may still use them?
That said I get the same ReplayGained loudness with Opus with all header writing options when I use foobar2000 to do the tagging and playback.Sorry, it's difficult for me to sense this sentence. Should I leave "Use Track Gain" option checked? =)
When the mentioned bug was acting, foobar2000 failed to get ReplayGain info from Opus files as if they had none:
- playback volume changed when I adjusted "Preamp for files w/o RG info" value but not of "Preamp for files with RG info";
- file properties didn't show any RG info.
But strange result of scanning "+5 dB" on every second time. When I applied the "+5" result, volume level became higher. Now, knowing amplification algorithm, I suppose that header gain-related part of playback code was acting.
Just guessing: Can the bug be related to Media Library somehow? But, I mainly stick to the preferences corruption cause.