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.
Recent Posts
1
Support - (fb2k) / Re: Very long image search (only with Linux / Foobar2000V2)
Last post by AldiMp3 -
To find the cause, I upgraded my 32-bit standard version from 1.6.18 to 2.25 32-bit. All personal settings were adjusted so that the visual and functional settings are the same as in 1.6.18 or 2.24 64-bit.

Result: even the 32-bit version 2.25 does not create the image in an acceptable time.

Then I checked whether it only affects the album art elements front artist back or disc or also the playlist view

Result: The playlist does not deliver any images in a reasonable time either.

To narrow down the problem even further, I only selected front.

Result: The front images are there immediately when scrolling and all album art elements now also show 4 x front immediately.

Conclusion: The problem only arises when other images and not just the front cover are to be viewed.

The next attempt to attach the pictures with batch attach picture confirms the linux time problem. After 5 minutes only 8 pictures were inserted. After a short switch to Windows 1.6.18 more than 1500 pictures were embedded within a few seconds.

After starting Linux preview 2.25 32-bit and 64-bit, these images fly into Linux at high speed.
2
Other Lossy Codecs / Re: lossyWAV 1.4.2 Development (was 1.5.0)
Last post by C.R.Helmrich -
After the block-size correction in the command-line above (see also the update in my previous post), I've now finished a comparative evaluation of lossyWAV and FSLAC as well as other codecs at comparable average bitrates. The motivation was to find out "where we stand" regarding lossy perceptual preprocessing for lossless codecs, especially compared to transform codecs like AAC (and exhale, in particular). I'll probably publish more details with more contestants in a separate thread later, but here are already the specific results for lossyWAV -q U and FSLAC -2.

As test content, the following four CD audio (44.1-kHz 16-bit stereo) datasets were selected so as to cover a wide range of waveform material familiar to the HydrogenAudio community:

  • IgorC's transform codec set (12 files, total audio duration 3:31 min) from here
  • Kamedo2's audio codec set (20 files, total audio duration 7:49 min) from here
  • guruboolez's LPC codec set (15 files, total audio duration 3:40 min) from here
  • high-rate audio: Merzbow, annoyingloudsong, SQAM triangle (51 s), as above.

Note that guruboolez's set turns out to be very useful beyond improving or testing WavPack: it's a highly versatile and challenging set of samples to any codec, I'd say, not just WavPack.

All codec candidates chosen for evaluation were configured for maximum coding efficiency, thereby accepting slowdowns during encoding, and with default perceptual optimizations on unless noted otherwise. The chosen target bitrate in all cases was roughly 320 kbps stereo, since this is the lowest average bitrate supported by all candidates being tested. The decoded transform coded streams were stored as 24-bit PCM, and for the computations of the SNR, segmental SNR, DI, and ODG metrics, all decodings were resampled to 48 kHz and saved as 16-bit PCM (with proper rounding but no dither). Resampling and metric calculation was done per-file using the AFsp v9 r0 toolset, except for the PSNR results, which were determined per-file via Matlab/Octave on the non-resampled waveforms.

CodecAvg. Bitrate*Highest RateAvg. SNRAvg. opt. SNRAvg. Seg SNRAvg. PSNRAvg. Dist. IndexAvg. ODGWorst ODGs
LossyWAV beta 1.4.3h, b512325 kbps722 kbps36.09236.10636.24960.6152.1311-0.3110-1.924, -1.209, -1.061
LossyWAV feedback 0, b512292 kbps609 kbps32.11032.13032.89756.6401.6850-0.5234-2.350, -1.738, -1.209
FSLAC, lower-rate -2, b1024351 kbps505 kbps38.02538.08341.36762.5901.6765-0.5045-2.027, -1.475, -1.130
.
All SNR related results in dB, *: as reported by foobar2000, excluding files of highest and lowest rate and all files of rates < 90 kbps

As you can see from the objective difference grade (ODG) and, to some extent, distortion index (DI) averages, modelling subjective impression of audio coding quality, lossyWAV performs roughly as well as FSLAC - in terms of average ODG for the "--feedback 0" version, and in terms of worst-case ODG for the "default feedback" version - but requires a lower bitrate than FSLAC. So well done :) and with some more tweaking of Merzbow/applause-like content, you could reduce the rate even further without (probably) affecting the audio quality much. FSLAC seems to have the best rate-performance tradeoff with FLAC block-size 1024. Note that the SNR related values do not correlate with subjective audio quality - the table shows this quite clearly - and are only listed for completeness.

If you want, I can send you the detailed analysis logs, allowing you to link the data to the individual test samples.

Chris
3
Audio Hardware / Re: Question in-ears magnetic driver
Last post by Porcus -
Ask yourself:
How can a loudspeaker have a treble unit close to a bass unit without the bigger one demagnetizing the smaller?

Here they tried to ruin data on hard drives with quite strong magnets: https://www.kjmagnetics.com/blog/erasing-hard-drive-with-magnets . They failed. Not saying it is safe if you want to keep your data, but it is useless if you want to erase data.
This is the magnet: https://www.kjmagnetics.com/dx0x8-neodymium-cylinder-magnet . Takes a 30 kg pull to get it off a steel plate.
5
Audio Hardware / Re: Question in-ears magnetic driver
Last post by classicaran88 -
What is the main explanation for a dual magnetic dynamic driver of the In-Ear KZ EDC Pro or KZ EDX Pro not being damaged and demagnetic if it is located very close storage to a few centimeters of a 29" CRT TV or 2.5" HDD turned on (both have magnets and coils)?
8
General - (fb2k) / Re: Album Information Genre drop down list
Last post by kajero -
Paregistrase and Case
Thank you for all your help.  I now have "clean" lists.  I have your replies bookmarked for reference so I can fix the lists when I mess them up again.  Thanks again. 

One more question:  How do I mark this question as "solved"?
10
Other Lossy Codecs / Re: lossyWAV 1.4.2 Development (was 1.5.0)
Last post by Porcus -
Quote from: Nick.C on
The original has a mightily impressive bitrate of 1,396kbps - which suggests that it is practically incompressible in terms of lossless reduction.

1278 with flac -0b512 -r8   ;)
Replacing the "0" by "8pe" is only going to save 67 bytes - just highlighting that the magic is in flac's option to partition in short chunks with each their own 4-bit Rice parameter.
This is maybe as remarkable as the 71.6 percent ratio of a .wav.xz that sees the entire file at once. (30 seconds is not much more than Monkey's "Insane" frame size, but Monkey's exceeds uncompressed size on this signal.)

If you are willing to sacrifice both subset and LossyFLAC-ability, you can get bitrate 1270 using -b8192 -r13 --lax