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 -
It looks like I'm pretty much alone with this V2 problem on Linux. This may be due to the fact that there are very few people switching from the good working version 1.6.18. This is now running in Platinum status. https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=1749. Version 2 is runnig in Silver status for the 32-bit version. Winehq does not currently have a maintainer for Foobar2000. Anything that does not work from within Foobar2000 itself will not be solved.

My dual boot system consisting of Windows 11 and Manjaro Linux (Arch) is designed in such a way that I can use both the 32-bit version 1.6.18 in the standard installation and the 64-bit version 2.25 preview with wine 10.7-1 portably identically. I can copy database edits under Windows or Linux 1:1 back and forth with my profile folder. Everything continues to run seamlessly and is just as up-to-date with a few clicks.

Under Linux, only this one current wine package 10.7-1 is selected and installed (no further winetricks or wine extras). Previously I had also experimented with bottles, playonlinux etc., but there were no better results in the arch or debian environment.

Any ideas what else I could try?

Are there any other Foobar2000V2 64-bit Linux users?

What experiences have been made?
5
Support - (fb2k) / Library rescanning like 5x slower
Last post by Squeller -
Hi,

have there been remarkable changes in the latest betas when it comes to media library full rescan? My ~4 TB collection which is on a 6 TB hard disk (not ssd) usually took ~5 minutes for full rescan. Now I observe it's 30+ minutes recently. Anyone else? Might as well be my rig, disk is full except for maybe 50 GB.

Thx
7
General - (fb2k) / Playstation PSF Component - Mute/Isolate Audio Tracks?
Last post by falconmoogle -
Hi all,
Does anyone know if there's a component for Foobar2000 that allows us to mute individual tracks within a PSF file?

My Game Boy/SNES/NES components all have that, but I can't go to GEP Control and mute tracks or change tempo when listening to PSF Playstation audio files.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance
8
Other Lossy Codecs / Re: lossyWAV 1.4.2 Development (was 1.5.0)
Last post by Nick.C -
The original has a mightily impressive bitrate of 1,396kbps - which suggests that it is practically incompressible in terms of lossless reduction.

I processed the WAV with lossyWAV 143h at five quality settings: U, D, Q, A, and X and five scale settings; 1, 0.5, 0.25, 0.125, and 0.0625

Table of bitrates attached.
X

Noting the increasing bitrates as quality decreases I suspect that the new "auto-feedback" for quality settings below X (extraportable, -q -5) is being a bit too protective. With feedback set to zero the results are as follows:
X

There are some quite significant drops in resultant FLAC bitrate for the --scale 0.5 output compared to full scale - which leads me to think that clipping is stopping bitdepth reduction to an extent (which seems hardly surprising given that the clip more resembles static than music).

I'll have another pass at the auto-feedback settings for quality settings below -5 - thanks for bringing this sample to my attention as it has uncovered a need for a bit of tuning (at least).
9
General - (fb2k) / Re: Converter - RG - Gain is transferred but peak is not
Last post by Defender -
Quote from: Case on
Gain copying is allowed and in theory the gain should remain the same for transparent encode, it is supposed to sound identical after all. Of course in practice the values can differ a little since no loudness or hearing estimation model is perfect.

But peak isn't copied for lossy targets because it could be criminally incorrect. The only use for peak is to potentially use it in clipping prevention, and if it can be several decibels off it serves absolutely no purpose.

My recommendation would be to change the RG copying to RG scanning in the options. You lose nothing and gain right values. The copying is a valid option for lossless encoding but never for lossy.
I understand that it would be better to enable the post conversion automatic RG scan in the converter setup.

The issue is however that all tags of the source are transferred (as they should). This includes the TPS tags. My skin will flag the converted files therefore as erroneous.
Which means I have to run a non-automatic TPS scan anyway. And if I have to run a non-automatic TPS scan, it makes no sense to enable the automatic RG scan upon converting.

Is there a way to enable an automatic TPS scan (instead of an automatic RG scan) upon converting?
Is there a way to transfer all tags except TPS tags upon converting? In that case I can at least easily see something extra (a non-automatic TPS scan) needs to be done.

It is not that I'm lazy but I like my tools to be efficient and idiot (me) proof.
10
General - (fb2k) / Re: Converter - RG - Gain is transferred but peak is not
Last post by Case -
Gain copying is allowed and in theory the gain should remain the same for transparent encode, it is supposed to sound identical after all. Of course in practice the values can differ a little since no loudness or hearing estimation model is perfect.

But peak isn't copied for lossy targets because it could be criminally incorrect. The only use for peak is to potentially use it in clipping prevention, and if it can be several decibels off it serves absolutely no purpose.

My recommendation would be to change the RG copying to RG scanning in the options. You lose nothing and gain right values. The copying is a valid option for lossless encoding but never for lossy.