Skip to main content
Recent Posts
1
General Audio / Re: What lossy format to use for Bluetooth transfer?
Last post by molnart -
i am aware of aptx, but to me it still just proves how shitty today‚Äôs standars are. we already have opus. if aptx is better than opus then i want to encode my audio to aptx and listen to in even on my phone with wired headphones AND bluetooth devices WHITHOUT trancoding. if opus is better than it should be supported in a2dp. afaik opus was created especially with low latency streaming in mind.  bringing in aptx which is also heavily patented (i suppose) is pointless from technical point of view and is just a way of making money by qualcomm
2
General Audio / Re: What lossy format to use for Bluetooth transfer?
Last post by Aldem -
AFAIK the only codec used both for music and BT A2DP in any significant way is AAC. Usually speakers and headphone manufacturers will advertise it if they use a non-SBC codec, it's selling point. Most modern Sony speakers and headphones use AAC at the very least, with higher tier ones using also LDAC. I know MP3 also can be used for BT, but no one that I know uses it, especially not any mainstream devices. In contrast, AAC over A2DP is supported in AOSP since Android 8.0, so probably all devices with 8.0 and above will support it. I think Apple also supports AAC on Bluetooth. Now if the devices will or won't reencode the AAC stream is up in the air, who knows.

Don't forget aptX and aptX-LL
8
Support - (fb2k) / Re: Files could not be written (bad allocation) ERRORs
Last post by davideleo -
If you have a huge number of files I suggest trying to lower the numbers in the LargeFieldsConfig.txt file. You could try for example
basicMetaMax=256
defaultMetaMax=128
infoMax=64

I tried halving all the values in the LargeFieldsConfig.txt file and now foobar2000 is using over 3000 MB of memory (5 times more than usual). Does that make sense?
9
Support - (fb2k) / Re: Files could not be written (bad allocation) ERRORs
Last post by davideleo -
I'm seeing the same warning often, since I installed beta version 17, a few days ago. My library is much smaller than Andrea's, though: 2TB and 220.000 tracks, and memory usage is within the usual values (5-600 MB) when this happens.



I'm sorry to disappoint you but foobar2000's library is not designed to handle this amount of files and will inevitably give you trouble.

Peter, what is the maximum library size foobar2000 can handle comfortably?


SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2018