Skip to main content

Recent Posts

1
Audio Hardware / Re: Interview Time
Last post by Arnold B. Krueger -
I really don't see the point, TBH.

It seems to me pretty dificult to comment the amplifier flaws when the loudspeakers are unable to reaveal them.

Doesn't the same problem apply to actual usage of the amp and speakers?

2
Audio Hardware / Re: Interview Time
Last post by Arnold B. Krueger -
i see that adding the distortion isn't difficult at all, but how would one go about replicating the same "model" of distortion from one of his tube amps for example, how do you reverse engineer it? i guess harmonic distortion can be quite predictable, but from what i understand IMD may only enter audibility with some particular signals, and thus very individual to every amp.

You can fairly easily  measure the output of a power amp while it is amplifying a certain test signal, and find out the size of each harmonic that it generates with that signal.  You can then use software to add the same harmonics in the same quantities to music, and obtain a pretty good  approximation of what that amplifier would do in real life under the similar circumstances.
3
Audio Hardware / Re: Interview Time
Last post by silverprout -
I really don't see the point, TBH.

It seems to me pretty dificult to comment the amplifier flaws when the loudspeakers are unable to reaveal them.
4
Audio Hardware / Re: Interview Time
Last post by greynol -
I really don't see the point, TBH.
5
Support - (fb2k) / Re: Library update after file rename?
Last post by kode54 -
It uses a Windows API for monitoring changes, one which is not really perfect when it comes to network shares.
6
Audio Hardware / Re: Interview Time
Last post by silverprout -
i see that adding the distortion isn't difficult at all, but how would one go about replicating the same "model" of distortion from one of his tube amps for example, how do you reverse engineer it? i guess harmonic distortion can be quite predictable, but from what i understand IMD may only enter audibility with some particular signals, and thus very individual to every amp.

You should perhaps stay aware that the loudspeakers drivers have their own audible THD and IMD, the medley of the non-linearities of the amplifier and the loudspeakers is impossible to predict without the complete system IMHO.
7
I've seen some reports done for lossless file like this.


Code: [Select]
fooCDtect - foobar2000 + auCDtect, baralgin.

auCDtect: CD records authenticity detector, version 0.8.2
Copyright (c) 2004 Oleg Berngardt. All rights reserved.
Copyright (c) 2004 Alexander Djourik. All rights reserved.

     mode: 0

===========================================
    Track: 1-02. Manuel Tur - Es Cub

Processing file: [1-02. Manuel Tur - Es Cub.aucdtect]
Detected average hi-boundary frequency: 2.086244e+004 Hz
Detected average lo-boundary frequency: 1.481215e+004 Hz
Detected average hi-cut frequency: 2.165653e+004 Hz
Detected average lo-cut frequency: 1.543024e+004 Hz
Maximum probablis boundary frequency: 2.189100e+004 Hz
Coefficient of nonlinearity of a phase: 3.465879e-002
First order smothness: 6.474742e-001
Second order smothness: 5.896252e-001

------------------------------------------------------------
This track looks like CDDA with probability 100%

===========================================
I've downloaded foocdtect from here: http://audiophilesoft.ru/load/coders_utils/foocdtect/7-1-0-60
The only report I can get out of it is like:
Code: [Select]
fooCDtect - foobar2000 + auCDtect, baralgin.

auCDtect: CD records authenticity detector, version 0.8.2
Copyright (c) 2004 Oleg Berngardt. All rights reserved.
Copyright (c) 2004 Alexander Djourik. All rights reserved.

     mode: 0

===========================================
    Track: 009. Culoe De Song - The Dragon's End (OM)
  Quality: CDDA 100%
===========================================

So, questions:
  • I would like the similar report output as the first example.
  • Also, for it to process all selected files in foobar2000 and automatically create a fooCDtect.log file in each directory. Same as how auCDtectTaskManager does it.

Settings for the encoder are as follows --autodel --output %d --threads 12 --mode 0 --lfor 2 --lenc 3 and as attached:


Thanks.
8
Support - (fb2k) / Re: k9 + foobar = problem
Last post by glenngulda -
I have done a clean install of foobar and only loaded a wasapi component, then pressed `get updates` and it said `Could not check for updates: Connection error`, so it does not seem to result from a bad component
9
Vorbis, Opus and Ghost aren't names that I would prefer either.

Well, the names like that are usually chosen for the same reason Linux distributions have names like "Ubntu" or "Fedora". The idea is to have a nice martketable name, which also speaks to a community, etc.

However this might swing ther other way: the MPEG numbering, layering, parting and whatever becomes a complete mess, with overlapping naming schemes and naming collisions.

the ITU has a numbering scheme which works half-good, I'd say, but it's still somewhat confusing.

The On2 VPn numbering scheme for video codecs was fine, I think, though. Numbering schemes usually tend to overcomplicate things, so I'm kinda not in favor of that. I'd name it after the person or group mainly involved in its invention or development, similar to how naming works with things like RSA, LZW, Keccak, etc.
10
 Vorbis, Opus and Ghost aren't names that I would prefer either.   :)

In my opinion some generic naming like Open Audio Codec 1 (OAC1) as for Vorbis , low delay OAC2 (LD-OAC2) as for Opus are easy to understand.
Even better,  Xiph Audio I (XA1, XA2...).

The future royalty-free video codec is "AV1" (AOMedia Video 1).  More clear impossible.