Skip to main content
Topic: Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o (Read 29763 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #1
Thank you, good news! 

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #2
ogg & acc ripping support (not that i would use it but still)
Chaintech AV-710

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #3
Interesting, where did the AAC encoder came from? Because it's CBR only, it seems to me like some incarnation of FhG/Dolby? How possible that winamp is going to include AAC encoder at all? Is it going to cost money? (Not that this matters too much for me, the only file type that associated with winamp in my computer after foobar2000 was born is MIDI        )

EDIT: Typos...

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #4
Hrm... I can't tell really, but if you followed the news recently, you can guess where Nullsoft (actually AOL  ) licensed their encoder from.

If this encoder has the extensions I expect it has, it is a killer encoder only comparable to HE AAC.

And I don't think it'll cost money. Again, check out the recent news.


BTW: "Nullsoft knows what's good ™"

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #5
ahh, i still have to reshack the winamp3 icons into it... 
Chaintech AV-710

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #6
well tried out the acc encoding, its ABR, at least it seems, does not move much though, uses both idv1 and idv2 tags as well
Chaintech AV-710

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #7
Why has Winamp become an audio encoder?  I thought the idea was to not make the bloat related mistakes of Winamp 3?
< w o g o n e . c o m / l o l >

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #8
Quote
well tried out the acc encoding, its ABR, at least it seems, does not move much though, uses both idv1 and idv2 tags as well

Gah. These $&%#! are already borking the format.

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #9
Looks like improved Dolby Consumer encoder, very similar to QT6.1 (not 6.3)

And it says so in the DLL file

At 64 kbps it sounds exactly like QT6.1, so I would refrain from naming it "killer encoder", considering the HE-AAC, mp3Pro and Ogg at that bit rate.

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #10
Quote
At 64 kbps it sounds exactly like QT6.1, so I would refrain from naming it "killer encoder"

Read my post again. >_<

"If this encoder has the extensions I expect it has, it is a killer encoder..."

Obviously, the extensions aren't present.

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #11
its about a 2 kbps abr mode, i only get 157 to 159 (where it stays locked at) on the 160 settings

does not even go down during silence as both ogg and mpc do
Chaintech AV-710

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #12
This alpha version is pretty decent, they have Vorbis 1.35 and MPEG Audio Decoder 2.96+ACC that Winamp 2.95b have


I'm going to try MMD skin with this thing.



:edit


w00t, MMD3 on WInamp 2, but there are so much thing to do to reduce CPU useage (20-30%
still LAME 3.96.1 --preset extreme -q 0 -V 0 -m s at least until 2005.

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #13
Quote
Why has Winamp become an audio encoder?  I thought the idea was to not make the bloat related mistakes of Winamp 3?

Well, don't install the encoder plugin(s) then.

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #14
And what happened to Winamp 4??? Why version 5?

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #15
Quote
Why version 5?

Winamp 5 = Winamp 2 + Winamp 3

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #16
Quote
Quote
well tried out the acc encoding, its ABR, at least it seems, does not move much though, uses both idv1 and idv2 tags as well

Gah. These $&%#! are already borking the format.

Too bad they decided to use AAC bitstream format instead of MP4.  MP4 is much more flexible and allows many advanced things like easy streaming, etc...

Also, putting ID3 tags is a very stupid thing  IMHO.  Now we could end up in dozens of quasi-standards attached to an AAC file, and a confusion what AAC actually is.

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #17
Yes, that's sad... I was very happy when id3v2 support was removed from faad... And now it seems to be something widely accepted, because "Nullsoft knows what's good  " mantra... Seriously, it'll be hard to explain to avg Joe why it's bad to tag his freshly made AACs in winamp... (If we assume that he'll rip to AAC at all, of course). May be it's still possible to try and convice Justin to change this - at least not to use id3v* tags? May be PP is the right person for this task, if they'll ever speak one with other once again 

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #18
hsds  we

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #19
Quote
hsds  we

Huh? Maybe n68 could translate this for us

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #20
I just glanced at the Winamp forums (a place I seldom visit) and could not find any obvious thread about Winamp 5 development. Of course, since I seldom visit there I might just not have figured out where it would be... but has anyone knowledgeable bothered to send Justin & Co. a detailed explanation of the MP4 vs. AAC argument, why there is a need to standardize AAC/MP4 tagging, and the benefits of certain encoders over others?

    - M.

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #21
Quote
Too bad they decided to use AAC bitstream format instead of MP4.  MP4 is much more flexible and allows many advanced things like easy streaming, etc...

Also, putting ID3 tags is a very stupid thing  IMHO.  Now we could end up in dozens of quasi-standards attached to an AAC file, and a confusion what AAC actually is.

Yeah, I find it quite amazing they would do such a thing. The entire idea with using standardised formats is interoperability, and the only thing they're gaining is 100% incompatibility with QuickTime/iTunes. Aren't there all sorts of seeking problems with raw AAC files anyway?

Just a wild guess, but aren't ID tags in an AAC bit stream in violation of the standard?

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #22
It's me or the log shows 2.95 then 5?

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #23
Quote
Yeah, I find it quite amazing they would do such a thing. The entire idea with using standardised formats is interoperability, and the only thing they're gaining is 100% incompatibility with QuickTime/iTunes. Aren't there all sorts of seeking problems with raw AAC files anyway?

Yes. They are using ADTS AAC, but still, the only way to reliably seek such files is reading the entire file first.

As I understand it, they don't use MP4 because it's a competitor to their own borky container format, NSV :B

Quote
Just a wild guess, but aren't ID tags in an AAC bit stream in violation of the standard?


Of course they are.

Winamp 5 Alpha 1! :o

Reply #24
Quote
I just glanced at the Winamp forums (a place I seldom visit) and could not find any obvious thread about Winamp 5 development. Of course, since I seldom visit there I might just not have figured out where it would be... but has anyone knowledgeable bothered to send Justin & Co. a detailed explanation of the MP4 vs. AAC argument, why there is a need to standardize AAC/MP4 tagging, and the benefits of certain encoders over others?

    - M.

Yeah, you have a good point here, may be it's really worth to just try to talk with him, but I still think that it'll be better if the person who'll try to educate him about aac/mp4 will be someone known to Justin and someone whose knowledge he already trusts. Anyway, it seems to me that Roberto rights and the real reason is not a lack of knowledge, but ridiculus competition between mp4 and nsv...

BTW: You can use winamp3 skins with this release. Slow as hell, but still fun 

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019