Skip to main content
Recent Posts
1
Support - (fb2k) / Re: Pioneer u-05 DSD issue
Last post by Case -
You do understand that DSD is inferior to PCM in every way? You don't even have gapless playback with the format using separate files. Even JRiver recommends converting it to PCM for playback, but since they are a commercial company they want to please even audiophiles and offer inferior pass-through options.

foobar2000 wants to offer superior experience regardless of format. Fast seeking, gapless playback, working volume control, ReplayGain and all other DSPs work with everything. Peter has been adamant about this part and I don't expect it to change.

Do yourself a favor and try foo_input_sacd with the default PCM conversion mode and see how much better the usability is. Also you'll notice that the audio quality is 100% identical.
2
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: Biography Discussion
Last post by tinkerer2015 -
Overall thanks for the awesome biography/review solution!

One question: Is there a way to have image-only mode for biography, and Auto (image + text) for the review? Right now, Image-only/Text-only/Auto-display applies to both bio and review, as far as I can see.

I've experimented with custom layout styles – a text+image one for the reviews:


... and one with mostly image for the bio; the problem is that I cannot completely remove the text box in a custom style (or at least I don't see how to do it). Also, image auto-fill (=auto zoom&crop to fill the panel space) doesn't seem to work in quite the same way in Auto Display mode (there's a space left empty on the left and right, maybe for the text scrollbars?):


I'd want the bio to look the way it does in the Image-only mode:


Do you have an idea for me how to do this combo – image-only mode for bio, custom style for review? Any help appreciated!

4
Support - (fb2k) / Re: Pioneer u-05 DSD issue
Last post by dejanm -
Architecture in foobar2000 hasn't changed. DSD is a hack and all attempts to play it in foobar2000 other than converting it to sane PCM are hacks. Everything in foobar2000 only deals with PCM samples and trying to pass DSD through the pipeline requires bypassing the player entirely. Custom input, bypassing DSPs, custom output. That's not what foobar2000 is about.
Architecture in foobar2000 hasn't changed. DSD is a hack and all attempts to play it in foobar2000 other than converting it to sane PCM are hacks. Everything in foobar2000 only deals with PCM samples and trying to pass DSD through the pipeline requires bypassing the player entirely. Custom input, bypassing DSPs, custom output. That's not what foobar2000 is about.

But the time has come to move on and build a proper support for DSD, too. Just like it has been done in JRiver.
5
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_input_dvda
Last post by GeSomeone -
foobar2000 and foo_input_dvda plug-in works fine in my Windows 8 PC.  I can play 6 channel tracks from a ripped DVD-A.
I installed a similar arrangement on a Vista laptop, with HDMI out.  2 channel 24/96 plays fine.  I cannot get the full 6 channels to play.

Should I be using ASIO and WASAPI on the Vista laptop?
Either use WASAPI output or check that your Windows sound device (might be Display Audio) is properly configured with 5.1 channels. Then using Direct Sound should give 6 channel output all the time (even if you play stereo). Vista is very well capable to play 6 channel audio.
If that doesn't work it might be a (video?) driver issue.
7
AAC - General / Re: Is there any difference between AAC and MP3 for wireless use today?
Last post by Von -
Most devices will still transcode AAC, because they support mixing system sounds, or sounds from other sources on the device, all at the same time.

Thank you. So if the source will probably be transcoded either way, is there any consensus on which formats are the most transparent in such cases? I believe I have seen information somewhere that high bitrate AAC transcode well to lower bitrates, but I guess high bitrate MP3 to AAC might be just as transparent, depending on how low the resulting AAC bitrate is.

Will Bluetooth transfer always use either AAC or aptX, or could other codecs be used as well?
10
AAC - General / Re: Is there any difference between AAC and MP3 for wireless use today?
Last post by Von -
Aptx is an audio codec used by some Bluetooth hardware. AAC is a different audio codec sometimes used by Bluetooth.

OK, thanks for explaining this.

If you had hardware that could do AAC, and your files were the right bitrate, and your software could be configured to not transcode, then AAC might be preferred.

Information like this, such as what "the right bitrate" might be, does not seem to be easy to find for most hardware.

If you're just using aptx it doesn't matter what the source is.

Is this because it will be transcoded to aptX anyway? If so, would it not be a good idea to use the best quality source available, even lossless? At least from a theoretical point of view, if you can't hear any obvious difference between the different formats.

SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2018