28 Apr
2008
28 Apr
'08
3:29 a.m.
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:
oops, meant to send that to the list
Roger E wrote:
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?).
It does look like an interesting application, but their alogorithms
are either very naively implemented or the wikipedia page explains
them poorly.
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(a)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(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
28 Apr
28 Apr
3:46 a.m.
New subject: Decent and attractive audio player
Justin Smith wrote:
Arthur
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.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Linux-audio-user mailing list
> > > Linux-audio-user(a)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(a)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.
4:34 a.m.
New subject: Decent and attractive audio player
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 
4:49 a.m.
New subject: Decent and attractive audio player
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)
how big is the collection youre working with.
and what is the index-rescan time?
i cant help but think the real solution is something like BeFS..
its too bad we're still stuck in 1970 on that tip..though i should check Haiku and
Reiser4 to see if either of them are close to being usable
last i tried the POSIX extended attrs stuff on reiser it didnt work. and the querying is
virtually nonexistent..
4:57 a.m.
New subject: Decent and attractive audio player
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:49 PM, cdr <_(a)whats-your.name> wrote:
on my machine if i click rebuild database amarok uses 100% of cpu time
(1 out of 4 core) for a quite a few / many hours before I give up and
kill it. It worked a while ago but broke when i last updated amarok. I
had just ripped some Bela Fleck though so maybe it has something
against the banjo. I'm not sure if it's to do with unicode. All my
tags are in unicode as i've got english, german, russian and korean
tags. The cyrillic stuff is all in the db fine though.
Loki
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)
how big is the collection youre working with.
and what is the index-rescan time?
i cant help but think the real solution is something like BeFS..
its too bad we're still stuck in 1970 on that tip..though i should check Haiku and
Reiser4 to see if either of them are close to being usable
last i tried the POSIX extended attrs stuff on reiser it didnt work. and the querying is
virtually nonexistent..
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
6054
days inactive
6054
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
4 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Arthur -
cdr -
hollunder＠gmx.at -
Justin Smith -
Loki Davison