2eleven;407350 Wrote:
> Do you happen to remember what the bug id was for that? I have that
> exact problem with a 24/96 flac track compressed with --best (same as
> -8). Based on what I read here, I recompressed using the default (-5),
> and have no problems. You mention that the bug got fixed,
You guys are my heros! I have been looking for some time with no luck on
how to add I2S to my device. Its not actually a squeezebox though. If
your still around and can help please reply! I read the post, but I dont
really understand. Just need some tips.
let me know if your still around!!
JR
Mnyb;413971 Wrote:
> Any other flac options used ? This forum is full of people using using
> flac files in 24/96 i suppose ?
Personally, I don't use flac on any of my 24/96 files I had
nothing but problems when I tried, so I gave up, and have left them all
uncompressed. For the 30-40 albu
Phil Leigh;421144 Wrote:
>
> That's exactly why I'd like to be able to use this software in a
> non-destructive way (like SOX). Then I could just pipe everthing through
> it and let it decide what to do on a track by track basis.
I am using shell scripts to process albums.
Some random things
Sure enough, dropping the compression level on the FLAC compression
fixed my problem. I'm using FLAC at the command line right now with the
binary off the FLAC sourceforge site (1.2.1). I dropped it to 0 and the
file plays fine. I then ran it again at 5 and that plays fine as well.
I'm a littl
That makes perfect sense, thanks Phil :)
--
radish
radish's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=77
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=57872
__
Shouldnt flac be level 5? Seem to recall I read that
somewhereotherwise go back to SC 7.1, or another, that should work.
An upgrade is not always an upgrade.
--
Anne
Squeezebox 3 > Stereovox XV2 > Bryston B100-DA SST > Martin Logan Aeon I
---
Celeritas;421163 Wrote:
> I have a similar problem with running SC 7.3.2. I purchased a 24/96
> file from Blue Coast Records. They sell their songs as wav files. I
> can listen to the wav file with no issues on my Transporter. If I put
> the wav file into a FLAC container (at -8), I get stutt
I have a similar problem. I purchased a 24/96 file from Blue Coast
Records. They sell their songs as wav files. I can listen to the wav
file with no issues on my Transporter. If I put the wav file into a
FLAC container (at -8), I get stuttering audio. No rebuffering problem,
as the buffer dis
radish;421134 Wrote:
> I'm not sure that follows - I'm no audio engineer but when I'm mastering
> tracks I always set it to normalize so the peak is 1, but obviously with
> no clipping. In fact, I can't think why you'd ever master a track with
> the peak < 1 unless it's a quiet track on an album
Phil Leigh;421115 Wrote:
> I think it is safe to say that tracks with Peak of 1.000 are
> clipped... (20% of my tracks!)
>
I'm not sure that follows - I'm no audio engineer but when I'm
mastering tracks I always set it to normalize so the peak is 1, but
obviously with no clipping. In fact,
callesoroe;421114 Wrote:
> I have written to the devolpers, and they in fact do consider writing a
> version, that works with squeezecenter. It's is already possible to run
> a streaming version with I-tunes. I have not tried that because I am not
> using I-tunes. So if more people write to them,
callesoroe;421114 Wrote:
> I have written to the devolpers, and they in fact do consider writing a
> version, that works with squeezecenter. It's is already possible to run
> a streaming version with I-tunes. I have not tried that because I am not
> using I-tunes. So if more people write to them,
cliveb;421105 Wrote:
> A large replaygain value does not necessarily imply there is clipping.
> It is possible to hypercompress without actually clipping the signal.
> And conversely, a low replaygain value does not necessarily mean there
> is no clipping.
Yes Clive - I just figured that out by
Phil Leigh;421074 Wrote:
> a-ha ... I have the EC one...
> This is definitely clipped - album replaygain of -8.3 (that's hot!).
> I tried the demo version of the software... obviously the gain change
> is quite dramatic, so I stuck the before and after versions into Audio
> DiffMaker - fascinati
Phil Leigh;421074 Wrote:
> I foresee a horrendous workflow... find all albums with clipping (ie
> large replaygain adjustments) convert to WAV, declip, reconvert to FLAC,
> reapply replaygain, reapply tags (oh God...) - can this software not
> work on FLAC files? Otw this is going to be a real la
Phil Leigh;421074 Wrote:
> I foresee a horrendous workflow... find all albums with clipping (ie
> large replaygain adjustments) [...]
A large replaygain value does not necessarily imply there is clipping.
It is possible to hypercompress without actually clipping the signal.
And conversely, a low
darrenyeats;420810 Wrote:
> When given the option, I am more interested in pursuing better original
> recordings e.g. MoFi rather than being fixated on a higher-rez delivery
> format.
>
I think that's the more sensible option, if recordings were mastered
properly in the first place people might
callesoroe;421041 Wrote:
> Red hot Chilli Peppers: Stadium Arcadium
> AC-DC: Black Ice
> Daughtry: Daugtry
> Runrig: Proterra, Everything you see, In search of angels
> Tom Petty: Highway Companion
> Eric Clapton: Me and Mr. Johnson, Back home
> + a lot of compilation albums
>
> just to mention
Phil Leigh;420829 Wrote:
> can you give us the names of some of your albums that are made
> listenable?
Red hot Chilli Peppers: Stadium Arcadium
AC-DC: Black Ice
Daughtry: Daugtry
Runrig: Proterra, Everything you see, In search of angels
Tom Petty: Highway Companion
Eric Clapton: Me and Mr. John
20 matches
Mail list logo
