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.
Topic: 0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended? (Read 12176 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

i'm confused, should i stay at 0.9 or should i go to 0.9.1?

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #1 –
You should only be concerned when moving to alpha or beta versions.  As 0.9.1 is final it will be the recommended version.  It has replaced 0.9 on the foobar homepage.
I'm on a horse.

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #2 –
Quote from: Synthetic Soul on
You should only be concerned when moving to alpha or beta versions.  As 0.9.1 is final it will be the recommended version.  It has replaced 0.9 on the foobar homepage.



I know, but the previous 0.9 on the page was not alpha/beta, was it?

Another thing, the plugins from the request topic( http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=42730 ) will run fine in this 0.9.1?

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #3 –
Quote from: peleyer on
I know, but the previous 0.9 on the page was not alpha/beta, was it?
No, the beta was on the beta page.  Only full versions are present on the home page. I'm not sure what your point is.

Quote from: peleyer on
Another thing, the plugins from the request topic( http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=42730 ) will run fine in this 0.9.1?
One way to find out...  I can't possibly answer that as I don't have all those components.  All the components I have appear to be working fine; foobar did not complain about compatibility issues on startup as it did between some beta versions.
I'm on a horse.

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #4 –
The only 0.9 plugin that won't work with 0.9.1 is the KS output plugin, AFAIK; there's a new plugin for 0.9.1.

Other than that, I guess you'll be fine.

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #5 –
Quote from: kjoonlee on
The only 0.9 plugin that won't work with 0.9.1 is the KS output plugin, AFAIK; there's a new plugin for 0.9.1.

Other than that, I guess you'll be fine.

I have downloaded both 0.9.1 and the KS plug in from the foobar2000.org site. It is the KS output plugin with file size of 154,624 bytes and date of 12 April. Is this for 0.9.1 or 0.9?

Also how do I install 0.9.1? Do I uninstall 0.9 first or just install over it? If I uninstall 0.9, copying back the AppData foobar 200 folder and other plugins into the components folder will be adequate for me to get my ui_columns, etc. customisations back?

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #6 –
Just install 0.9.1 over your existing 0.9.

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #7 –
Quote from: foosion on
Just install 0.9.1 over your existing 0.9.


Works fine this way, i dont even lost my previous configuration... But the KS from 0.9 really didnt worked, have to pick the new one...

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #8 –
Quote from: peleyer on
... But the KS from 0.9 really didnt worked, have to pick the new one...


can someone help me find the KS for 0.9.1 please.

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #9 –
All 0.9 components except for output components are compatible with 0.9.1. The kernel streaming plugin for 0.9.1 can be found on the additional components page on the fb2k homepage.

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #11 –
hm, ok. i thought the version on the components page is the old one (it's dated 2006-04-12). it doesn't work for me in 0.9.1. so i thought there would be an newer one. thanx anyway. 

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #12 –
Try changing the bitrate settings in the output preferences and see if that helps.

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #13 –
Quote from: picmixer on
Try changing the bitrate settings in the output preferences and see if that helps.


i tried different settings already, it won't work. but i never used ks before with my terratec aureon firewire, so i don't know if it works at all. thought it would be of good use after i read this:
Quote from: Zoom on
Kernel streaming bypasses the Windows Mixer, so the sound output from foobar2000 goes directly to the soundcard. I use it, but mostly just because I don't want annoying popup/internet advertisement noises. I just turn kernel streaming on and mute the Wave output in the system mixer and no more annoying random noise.

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #14 –
terratec aureon firewire - Does that support KS? You could try ASIO instead, the terratec page says it does that. ASIO will avoid the volume mixer as well.

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #15 –
thanks for the hint! works perfect 

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #16 –
Quote from: peleyer on
Quote from: foosion on

Just install 0.9.1 over your existing 0.9.


Works fine this way, i dont even lost my previous configuration... But the KS from 0.9 really didnt worked, have to pick the new one...


You know what, I did install 0.9.1 over 0.9 but lost all my configs for all of my plugins (albumart, browser, sort strings, columns layouts, etc).

I didn't mind too much as I a am a foobar nerd who loves to customize and tweak every chance I get!
- FLAC/200GB external
- AAC 128 vbr/local
- iPod Nano 2G 8GB

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #17 –
the same happened to me. but because i turned off user profile support. that causes foobar to store the cfg in the install folder. after turning profile support on again i had all my configs back 

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #18 –
Quote from: solarlag on
the same happened to me. but because i turned off user profile support. that causes foobar to store the cfg in the install folder. after turning profile support on again i had all my configs back 


Ah.  I wish I knew that sooner!
In any case I ended up changing my look again anyway.

- FLAC/200GB external
- AAC 128 vbr/local
- iPod Nano 2G 8GB

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #19 –
Quote from: solarlag on
the same happened to me. but because i turned off user profile support. that causes foobar to store the cfg in the install folder. after turning profile support on again i had all my configs back 


Thanx
When I installed the beta version I ran into that and didn't want to make the switch just to get WMA support

Also all my plugins work fine too

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #20 –
Can anyone confirm that 0.9.1 has the option to sort by display name ??

Cus Im still using 0.9RC just for that feature
 

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #21 –
It has been removed because it's inherently problematic with colour codes.

Just construct a custom sort string that resembles what your playlist actually displays.

(And no, it's not gonna be back in the foreseeable future)
A riddle is a short sword attached to the next 2000 years.

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #22 –
Quote from: ssamadhi97 on
It has been removed because it's inherently problematic with colour codes.

Just construct a custom sort string that resembles what your playlist actually displays.

(And no, it's not gonna be back in the foreseeable future)



       

Mmm, i think i will keep using the RC for a long time then...

Btw, do you know what string can I use ?

I just want to order my playlist just like "sort by display name" does:

"artist" - ["album" "#"] "song name"

all following a logical order from the artists, album and then the track.
And then all the songs from each artist that aren't tagged to be just at the end of each artist "tree".

I couldn't find any way to "simulate" that feature in 0.9 so i had to install the rc

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #23 –
Why not just use Sort by ... with a formatting pattern like
%album artist% - %album% - %discnumber% - %tracknumber% - %title%

*fails to see your problem*
A riddle is a short sword attached to the next 2000 years.

0.9 or 0.9.1? Is 0.9.1 recommended?

Reply #24 –
edit: my mistake