28 Apr
2008
28 Apr
'08
4:34 a.m.
Justin Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 10:25 PM, Justin Smith
> <noisesmith(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 9:54 PM, Arthur <arthura(a)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.
>> > >
Oh yes, I experienced this Problem as well. 10k tracks may still work,
but at a certain point amarok(as most audioplayers) just get unusable.
I know that amarok supports different database backends, but I honestly
just don't know how to administrate such a beast.
mpd is the only one I know that can handle huge collections out of the
box and creates the library a lot faster than amarok(with standard db).
> > 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
>
> 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