Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Recent Posts
2
FLAC / Re: FLAC v1.4.x Performance Tests
Last post by Replica9000 -
I did some limited testing.  FLAC built with gcc 12 seems to beat gcc 13 & 14 builds for 16-bit audio, but FLAC built with gcc 14 does better with 24-bit audio.
3
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: Dynamic Range plugin
Last post by francesco -
Hi
even it's very old topic
I would like too have this plugins in 64bit architetture
i'm using on 32bit , but in v2 it doesn't write in the tag , even in the advance settings i have enable to write to the tag
I will try on v1 ,last 32bit vesion
the last version i have is foo_dynamic_range_1.1.12
foo_dynamic_range.dll
Code: [Select]
SHA-256: A432405F4D7367246A43B4CAE6C766FD223D96A2BF8C38A3BB5AAF45B0C05248
is a bug?
thanks
5
Lossless / Other Codecs / Re: HALAC (High Availability Lossless Audio Compression)
Last post by Porcus -
https://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=LossyWAV ;  IDK if HALAC could (easily) be adapted to 512 bytes per block.

My idea was more, if one wants to throw a bone to those who want a lossy version of HALAC - then making for it to work with LossyWAV would enable those users to work out settings at their preferred bit rates and see how it compares to other compressors.
Since the compression part is lossless (the lossiness is in the LossyWAV pre-processor), there would be no considerations about audio quality between compressors - speed and size would still be comparable in an apples to apples way.
6
Site Related Discussion / Re: Please remove my account
Last post by Porcus -
This forum does have a practice for guest-ifying an account, and I think they must have one. How that must be to comply with whatever legal regulations are applicable given server location blah blah blah, is way above my paygrade.

I would suggest that users rather put effort into constructively rectify whatever "disinformation propaganda" be posted, rather than this ritual whining - after all, @mycroft being present on the forum has led to fast code fixes that would otherwise be subject to a bigger bureaucracy - but that is just another opinion of mine, that is pretty much orthogonal to whatever rights a user has to divorce the forum.
7
Lossless / Other Codecs / Re: HALAC (High Availability Lossless Audio Compression)
Last post by Hakan Abbas -
HALAC can only compress WAV files at the moment. I just heard about the LossyWAV format a few days ago. This is happening because of the shift in header information. No problem, it can be easily handled.

X
As far as I have seen and understood, LossyWAV does not do direct compression. I think he's preparing the data by making it lossy so that it can be compressed better. Because the data obtained at the end of the process are in the same dimensions. However, their content is different and can be compressed better afterwards. However, the processing speed was below 10 MB/s even in standard mode(i7 3770k). This period does not include the subsequent compression process load.
8
Support - (fb2k) / [MAC] Problems with file operations on SMB share
Last post by ongaku -
I'm using the latest foobar2000 version (2.7 preview 2024-05-06) and have encountered a problem with file operations. My music resides on an SMB share. If I use file operations to move files inside my media library, then foobar2000 doesn't recognize that files are already present and match the pattern.

Here are the files on the share:

X

Here's foobar2000 wanting to move them although they're already there:

X

And here's foobar2000 not exhibiting this behaviour (as expected) when the media library is on a local disk:

X