Last post by Coreda -
foobar would be perfect for that, if only there was an EASY solution for tagging all kinds of video formats without some of them becoming unplayable (so without writing tags to the video files). The proposed foo_tags component doesn't look easy and I can see some potential problems. A centralized tag database handled by foobar would be better, don't you think ?
Yeah the thing to watch out for is trying to tag the video files themselves since after doing some encoding myself any videos encoded with 'faststart' (or non-Mp4 equivalent) for browser/streaming optimization would require re-encoding since it places the metadata/subs at the beginning of the file. Hence why some files 'break' when tagging them (there could be other causes but that's the one I know of).
Haven't looked at doing the foo_tags method since I prefer tagging the files directly for important tags and often rename files. I suppose wrapping the videos in another container could work, though I have so many of them :p
Currently I still just name the files in my usual method which keeps almost 4,000 of them all organized in a single directory, and search for them using Everything. Oh, and for looking at recent videos I also use File Explorer's Sort By and Group By to group them (eg: Today, Yesterday, Last Week, etc).
Foobar movies manager? Yeah I did that, didn't pursue it any further as I saw no real use in it to warrant further effort.
However, what do you recommend? Do I reencode my whole collection to -ccx6 or, do you think only these high-resolution files are worth reencoding? What is the probability that a normal CD-quality file will get huge benefits from using the -cc option?I recommend this for only the high sampling rate material. You might see a little improvement with the regular stuff but, like I said, normally it won't make much difference. With the 96 kHz stuff and the low bitrate, the difference will be huge.
Of course, you can always try a few albums and see what happens, that's the advantage of lossless!
You could certainly be justified in paying a bit extra for a better UI, larger storage and/or compatibility with more file formats.
I always see reviewers point out they have "increases details, heightened soundstage and better instrument seperation" than other players.You are right to be skeptical... There's a lot of nonsense in the "audiophile" community.
Last post by eahm -
I must be one of those old-fashioned people who still uses a line-out from my iPod to my car's stereo.I have an old Mustang and I still use this: and I love it I don't like technology like I used to, I like invisible and convenient technology, not necessarily new technology. This is funny because I moved to USA from Italy to work in IT and I have two IT companies that provide new technologies of backup/networking for companies and new ideas of apps for mobile devices.
Last post by Zarggg -
People don't seem to use media with their cars anymore. Or at least, much less than it was the case even three years ago.I must be one of those old-fashioned people who still uses a line-out from my iPod to my car's stereo.
Last post by YOGAM -
Does someone know if there's a way to generate a playlist including only 1 song for each artist in the library (including artists which appear only in a compilation) ?
I couldn't find a way to do so, and it drives me nuts.
Maybe I tried to tag too much files at once (6000+). I tried again with "only" 2000 files and it seems to work this time.
Thank you Before reading your reply I setted "Show video frame to Manually", which solved this annoying problem.with last version foo_youtube_2.0.1_preconf.fb2k, when I click on radio stream link I have a Pop windows with message :Yes. Until it is fixed, use option 'Allow video playback only for supported URLs' (preferences Advanced -> Tools -> Youtube Source -> Video). Or you can set 'Show video frame' to 'Manually' (preferences Tools -> Youtube Source -> Video).
Well... i tried you're script and though it succeeded to tag few files, I had that error message :
"Quantificateur inattendu (= "unexpected quantifier")
Line: 902, Col: 37
<source text only available at compile time>".
Is there any information I can provide in order to find out what went wrong ?