[LAU] amarok's phonon-vlc claimed to "simply sound awesome" ... why?

[Ray Rashif]

On 14 June 2010 13:38, Niels Mayer <nielsmayer at gmail.com> wrote:
> KDE's "amarok" media player seems to have been improved a lot; I might
> even replace 'rhythmbox' with it, now that I've gone KDE....
>
> Looking at http://amarok.kde.org/blog/archives/1171-Rapid-Progress-in-KDE-Multimedia.html
> I notice the following statement:
>> Let me sum up why exactly this new Phonon backend is so important to us:
>> Phonon-VLC is fully cross-platform, so we don't need special backends for Windows and Mac any more
>> It's already far more stable than most other existing Phonon backends
>> We can now focus on creating one good backend, instead of having 10 more or less broken ones
>> It simply sounds awesome. I'm not sure why that is, but the sound quality is notably better than with xine
>
> What exactly about  http://gitorious.org/phonon/phonon-vlc would make
> it "sound awesome" ?
> Or is there a problem with Xine that would make it sound less awesome??
>
> Also, what's the preferred KDE backend for multimedia? In "System
> Settings"->Multimedia->Backend, my system has "Phonon Xine Backend"  (
> http://www.xinehq.de/ ) as preferred, and "Phonon GStreamer backend" (
> http://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/ ) as secondary. Is that the correct
> configuration, or should I be using Phonon GStreamer backend instead?

There is no "preferred" - there is just a "default". That is Xine, and
that is fine.

Technically, there _can_ be a difference. As we all know, the mixing
matters. But I don't know enough about all of these engines to be able
to tell a practical difference.


--
GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD