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.
Topic: foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta (Read 24170 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #25 –
Visualisations look sweet.

Looking forward to see more native DUI elements. Sadly a track-info element doesn't seem to be on the to-do list...

Quote
... with two bug fixes ...


Any infos about what has been fixed? Does foo_fileops now "see" empty flash-drives?
( http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....st&p=548050 )

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #27 –
beta1 + beta2: Spectrum showing 160 bands in full screen mode the visualization is strangely stretched vertically so that the bottom axis with the frequencies is beyond the screens edge and thus invisible.

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #28 –
Quote from: Fandango on
(...) the bottom axis with the frequencies is beyond the screens edge and thus invisible.

It is not displayed because there is not enough horizontal space for all frequency numbers.

This happens for any number of bands if the width of the element is small enough.

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #29 –
So lowering the screen resolution would give the same effect for less bands?

Maybe you could just ommit every n-th frequency number in such cases?

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #30 –
I noticed a WMA Pro file in Beta 1 that showed up as "WMA 9" under properties.  Perhaps this could be changed to "WMA Pro 9"?  It caused me no end of trouble debugging the rockbox WMA Std decoder looking to figure out why it wouldn't play the file properly.

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #31 –
Finally, finally, FINALLY an oscilloscope! Thank you!

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #32 –
no problems with the beta so far! it's greaaattt

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #33 –
I must admit that following suggestion is very pedantic, however: when bottom axis dissappears because of too much bands the display of "-60db" is cutted - could it be hidden completetly?

And a request for spectrum visualization: bars mode and maybe custom colors like in spectrogram.

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #34 –
Quote from: Frank Bicking on
foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta has been released.


  • Ability to auto-resize playlist columns to match playlist view size.
    Right-click on the column headers and enable the option in the "Columns" submenu.

does foobar remember the playlist that has been auto-resized ? if i switch to a different playlist or facet selection does that have the same width etc as the auto sized playlist? 

Quote from: smok3 on
q: is there a way to do thinner lines between framed windows?

i'd like to see this as well 

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #37 –
Context sub-menus get "swooshed" away in the oscilloscope visual.

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #39 –
Quote from: Fandango on
So lowering the screen resolution would give the same effect for less bands?

Maybe you could just ommit every n-th frequency number in such cases?

Yea, as of now it just looks poor:

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #40 –
@Redoubts: Wrong visualization. I meant the descriptions for the bands in "spectrum". But yeah the 16384 point FFT looks odd in linear scaling, but much better than 8192 in logarithmic scaling.

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #41 –
do the new visualisations work in ther UI than DUI ?

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #42 –
You can access them from the menu. UI independent.

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #43 –
Quote from: Fandango on
@Redoubts: Wrong visualization. I meant the descriptions for the bands in "spectrum". But yeah the 16384 point FFT looks odd in linear scaling, but much better than 8192 in logarithmic scaling.


Quite, although there is currently a nicer plugin for foobar, if you can't wait.

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #45 –
I recently noticed that last beta takes much more time to write tags, but ONLY if tagging files (FLAC), which were added to the database.

Example:
My database is on path: D:\Music\Song.flac
(this path is specified in Media Library Music Folders: D:\Music)

- Writing tags to the file Song.flac OUTSIDE this directory (D:\Song.flac) is immediate and without any delay.
- Writing tags to the same file Song.flac INSIDE this Media Library folder takes much more time (sometimes about 10 seconds, but sometimes even more).

I can't remember that I experienced such behavior with previous versions.
My database is broad, but it is all the time the same.
Anyone have the same problem or am I missing something?

Thanks for the response!
Is there a difference between yes and no?

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #46 –
Quote from: Squeller on
You can access them from the menu. UI independent.


that's cool, what about if i wanted to use oscilloscope instead of spectrum analyser in my layout ?

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #47 –
No, Squeller was ambiguous.

You can't integrate them into a columnsUI or panelsUI layout, they can only be integrated into the DUI.

You can however look at them in their own window, UI independent.
elevatorladylevitateme

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #48 –
Quote from: Josef K. on
I recently noticed that last beta takes much more time to write tags, but ONLY if tagging files (FLAC), which were added to the database.
Do you use autoplaylists, Facets, album list or similar components that display the media library contents in one way or another and update automatically?

foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta

Reply #49 –
Quote from: foosion on
Quote from: Josef K. on
I recently noticed that last beta takes much more time to write tags, but ONLY if tagging files (FLAC), which were added to the database.
Do you use autoplaylists, Facets, album list or similar components that display the media library contents in one way or another and update automatically?
Yes, I use facets and album list. But I used them with previous versions too.

And new observation (but I think it refers to the same problem): using "remove dead entries" command from right click drop-down list in Facets have significant delay too.
Is there a difference between yes and no?