Skip to main content

Recent Posts

1
Opus / Re: Opus 1.3-beta is here
Last post by KozmoNaut -
At what bitrate would you consider Opus universally transparent?

I went for 160 kbps on my whole library for that reason, didn't want to have to encode twice.

It's an individual assessment. For me it is probably fully transparent at 96kbps and certainly at 128kbps.

Meaning I've not been able to ABX any differences to lossless, even on tough problem samples, such as harpsichord and castanets. If there are differences, they're extremely subtle to my ears.

Then again, I have been accused of being a cloth-eared git by MQA and hi-res proponents, so take it with a grain of salt ;-)
2
Wow! First of all thanks very much for the quick response. Didn't expect this to get any traction at all.

I tried your first solution, but it doesn't seem to do anything that affects the size of the group, or the separation. I don't entirely understand the code so I tried changing all values with random numbers, but I'm afraid nothing did much other than putting on a grey line. Regarding the other idea, I really can't do it because I browse mostly by artist so EPs/Singles and LPs are mixed together constantly.

Beside this - any chance you could assist me with this frustrating issue that I've been fighting around would be MUCH appreciated:

I'm looking for a way to have a ❤ placed dynamically at the end of every track title with a rating of 5. I have it placed, but it's written along with the track name, so the color is shared with the text, while I want a red heart.

This is the code I'm using:

Code: [Select]
    $font(,12,)
    $if(%rating%,$ifequal($meta(rating),5,
    $drawtextex([%track artist%' - '][%title%] ❤,$add(%art_size%,115),5,$sub(%el_width%,
    $add(%art_size%,320)),%el_height%,$get(text_color),vcenter end_ellipsis)
    ,))

I really can't have it sit permanently like a column because it defeats the purpose of immediately seeing which songs I like. And there's basically no space to put it as a column without obstructing some other element either.
3
How can I make it so that all groups have equal separation between all of them?

This may or may not work if you add it to the end of the Track list script. Colors can altered too whatever you need. It essentially adds a blank row between each entry in the playlist. It's probable you would need to figure out a size for the artwork that works on albums and singles.

Another option is to create two playlist views and assign them to specific playlists. EG: albums and singles. Playlists would have to be named accordingly, but would automatically switch to whatever view was in focus at the moment. This doesn't help for a mixed playlist though.

Code: [Select]
$ifequal($add(%el_item_index2%,1),%el_direct_item_count%,
$drawrect(0,1),%el_width%,1,14-14-14-55,),
$drawrect(0,$sub(%el_height%,1),%el_width%,1,0-0-0-105,),))
4
Vinyl / Re: >20kHz content found in vinyl?
Last post by dc2bluelight -
Bias, that’s the word I was looking for! Also I don’t understand why we think that vinyl can’t have frequencies above 20KHz. It’s a plastic disc, rubbing a needle that moves a magnet. Theres not hard limit really.
Not a hard limit, as in an anti-aliasing filter is a hard limit, but there is a maximum stylus velocity curve dictated by the dimensions of the groove and length of the cutter stylus.  Causing excessive stylus velocity rams the back facet of the stylus into the groove wall it just cut.  That is a "hard limit", but it's a function of both frequency and modulation.  It happens at lower levels of higher frequencies, and higher levels of lower frequencies, but it happens, and must be accounted for.  The RIAA curve actually makes it a bit worse of a problem at very high frequencies, hence the application of high frequency limiting in disc cutting. 

I don't think there's anyone arguing that vinyl cannot record higher than 20kHz information, it's just a question of how much and how well.  Remember that CD4 records employed a pair of 30kHz carriers with a type of modified FM on them, but the result still contained sidebands.  The carriers were very low in level, though, and required a special stylus for proper recovery.  So there's no absolutely yes or no to the above 20kHz question, it's more of an "it depends" answer.

You can argue that it’s mostly distortion but there’s certainly no reason not to encode high frequencies in vinyl.
Sure there is, I just outlined it.
I realise now I can test this. I have that record from Jack White, and there is HD digital recordings of it too. Comparison would be interesting
Probably won't show much difference, though, because analog tape contains high levels of high frequency distortion of several types, and you said this was from an analog master.  The content, other than the bias signal, could still be distortion products that are generated by tape's nonlinearities. Remember that distortion in analog tape is a function of fluxivity (level) and that changes with an EQ curve making high frequencies distort and saturate before lower ones. 
5
How can I make it so that all groups have equal separation between all of them?

Attempt 1 - minimum row height: $add(%el_item_count%,6). Singles displays fine, but album separation is too big. https://i.imgur.com/PGLyoPB.png
Attempt 2 - minimum row height: $add(%el_item_count%,2). Album separation is fine, but singles get cut. https://i.imgur.com/NDildMO.png

I know it must be some simple math but I'm really bad at it.
6
Opus / Re: Opus 1.3-beta is here
Last post by maikmerten -
To me 128 Kbps opus is Transparent for 5.1 tracks and 64 Kbps is transparent for 2.0 tracks

Opus is certainly doing a great job at these bitrates, but not universally transparent at such low bitrates IMO. It depends a lot on the content. I attached an example that should certainly be ABX-able at 64 kbps and show very obvious differences at even lower bitrates, just in case you want to find out what sort of artifacts to listen for.

At what bitrate would you consider Opus universally transparent?

I went for 160 kbps on my whole library for that reason, didn't want to have to encode twice.

Difficult question. It's "easy" to prove that something is not transparent with a given sample using ABX, but it may be impossible to say "at this bitrate things will always be transparent, for any sample, for every ear".

Having said that, at 160 kbps I'd feel pretty confident that quality should be "universally really good", with no nastyness to be expected. If you find a real-life example that exhibits audible artifacting at 160 kbps, I'd guess jmvalin may be interested to investigate.
7
Sounds to me like you have a short forming somewhere between the output and ground, which disconnects at times. If you have a multimeter that can do this - and all of them should I think -  set it to short circuit detection and check for that.
8
Im very new to electronics and I built this guitar amp circuit on a breadboard:



and it was working really nicely. Now Ive decided to put the circuit on a universal pcb which i'll use in the actual amp. I soldered all the components on but no sound comes out when i play. Because of the different layout of the universal pcb the circuit's grounds are connected differently than they were on the breadboard, so maybe thats the potential problem, since its the only difference i think there is. Sadly I dont remember what it looked like on the breadboard and I didnt take any pics. Heres the layout of the circuit on the universal pcb:



Heres something I dont understand, when I measure the potential between the output and the ground with a voltmeter, it corresponds nicely to the signal from the guitar, it seems like it should work. But when I measure the potential between the wires going into the speaker (which are connected to the output and the ground) i get zero volts between them always. Why is that and how can it be fixed?

Also sometimes when I poke around with the voltmeter at different spots on the ground and output it will randomly start working and sound will come out. I cant really notice any pattern when doing so though.

Heres the pin layout for the LM386 operational amplifier:



And this is LM386 datasheet: http://www.kynix.com/uploadfiles/pdf2286/LM386M-1.pdf

Once again Im very new so Im sure Im making a ton of embarrassing mistakes and that my soldering is terrible lol
9
Opus / Re: Opus 1.3-beta is here
Last post by Trace -
To me 128 Kbps opus is Transparent for 5.1 tracks and 64 Kbps is transparent for 2.0 tracks

Opus is certainly doing a great job at these bitrates, but not universally transparent at such low bitrates IMO. It depends a lot on the content. I attached an example that should certainly be ABX-able at 64 kbps and show very obvious differences at even lower bitrates, just in case you want to find out what sort of artifacts to listen for.

At what bitrate would you consider Opus universally transparent?

I went for 160 kbps on my whole library for that reason, didn't want to have to encode twice.
10
Audio Hardware / Re: may i know your favorite headphone?
Last post by Hedon -
Denon D7000, by far. Not only are they detailed and reveal differences between, say 320 kbps MP3 and FLAC, quite easily, they are extremely musical and pleasing to the ear. When used with proper equipment (not a phone or integrated sound card), the sound is big, warm, engaging and cohesive. I use them with a Abrahamsen DAC and Vincent hybrid vacuum tube amplifier.

For listening on the go, I use Sennheiser Momentum 2. For this purpose, they are excellent phones, as they can be driven quite easily by an iPhone and the sound is still full and cohesive.

I also have Sennheiser HD650 and Beyerdynamic DT770 (80 ohm). They sound muddy and closed in comparison. As for Sennheiser HD800, they are extremely detailed and have a huge sound stage, but they sound thin, analytical and less engaging to my ears. To get any bass at all you have to play ridiculous high volume levels. They do not play music the way it's meant to be heard. They are however very useful as a tool to reveal differences in formats and bitrates.