[LAU] Decent and attractive audio player

[Arthur]

Justin Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 10:25 PM, Justin Smith <noisesmith at gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 9:54 PM, Arthur <arthura at cox.net> wrote:
>>  >
>>  > Roger E wrote:
>>  >  > Another happy Amarok user here. I always fix the tags with Easytag
>>  >  > before adding them to the collection. With proper tags the search works
>>  >  > perfectly. Easytag can fetch tags from cddb also, and rename files from
>>  >  > tags.
>>  >  > If only Amarok had a replay gain function like fb2k I reckon it would be
>>  >  > perfect. It does take over half an hour to scan my 10000 tracks, but
>>  >  > hey, you only need to do that once.
>>  >  > _______________________________________________
>>  >  > Linux-audio-user mailing list
>>  >  > Linux-audio-user at lists.linuxaudio.org
>>  >  > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
>>  >  >
>>  >  >
>>  >  I also think that amarok is great, but I have a very fast computer. I
>>  >  don't fix tags with easytag (but I do think that it's a great program),
>>  >  I rip with rubyripper and everything is ready to dump into my music
>>  >  folder as is. If you folks don't know about rubyripper, please check it
>>  >  out. I found out about it when I was running archlinux and I hope that
>>  >  there are binaries for every distro soon. No, I am not affiliated with
>>  >  rubyripper in any way.
>>  >
>>  >  Enjoy,
>>  >  Arthur
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > _______________________________________________
>>  >  Linux-audio-user mailing list
>>  >  Linux-audio-user at lists.linuxaudio.org
>>  >  http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
>>  >
>>
>>
>>  From the wikipedia page for the program:
>>
>>   One has to wonder though: can 3 bytes actually be heard in a wav file
>>  that produces 180.000 bytes per second?
>>
>>  The answer is a definitive yes, and if you are (un)lucky, they may
>>  just blow your speakers too. And I presume by 180,000 bytes per second
>>  they mean 176,400.
>>
>>  Since it is a ruby application, presumably it wouldn't even be
>>  possible to have a binary for it if you wanted one (or is it mixed
>>  ruby/c?).
>>     
Don't know, I installed from a .deb package. It works.
>>  It does look like an interesting application, but their alogorithms
>>  are either very naively implemented or the wikipedia page explains
>>  them poorly.
>>
>>     
>
> I can only say, try it. I have been very pleased. I am a composer and my ears still function. I have hafler audio equipment and I can't hear the difference between my cd's and a rubyripper rip. YMMV, but it may please you as much as it's pleased me. I have tried many other rippers.
>   
Arthur