mcw;273009 Wrote:
> Personal preference? Or maybe you haven't experienced the winamp-style
> crossfade? When it's done well most - maybe all - of the annoyance
> fades (grin) away.
>
Personally I can't stand auto-faded stuff, done by winamp or anything
else. Hearing the off phase beats running
I voted for it, there is not enough eye candy or audio tricks from the
Squeezebox, the current strange fade technique isnt high end enough.
Obviously its personal preference, but I want the expensive box to woo
people, otherwise I would use an ipod plugged into a hifi!
Beyond the basics this i
mcw;273009 Wrote:
> Personal preference? Or maybe you haven't experienced the winamp-style
> crossfade? When it's done well most - maybe all - of the annoyance
> fades (grin) away.
>
> A really good cross-fader, combined with replaygain to fix the levels,
> plus a large music collection results
morris_minor;273006 Wrote:
> What's wrong with a little bit of silence between tracks?
>
> I did a crossfade CDR compilation a few years ago and stopped playing
> it after the novelty value wore off 'cos it annoyed the hell out of me.
Personal preference? Or maybe you haven't experienced the wi
What's wrong with a little bit of silence between tracks?
I did a crossfade CDR compilation a few years ago and stopped playing
it after the novelty value wore off 'cos it annoyed the hell out of
me.
I also get cross (being a grumpy old git) when jazz tracks fade out
because the producer's laz
Whoops, yes I DID mean that I had voted for the bug, nothing more, hence
the lack of fanfare. Sorry, I thought I have quoted the previous comment
in my reply.
Trying to do too many things at once; sorry for raising hopes. I would
LOVE this to happen myself.
Apologies,
-_Richard E
--
relen
-
mcw;272997 Wrote:
> Done? Done?! You can't just say "done" - where's the fanfare? Where's
> the glitz :-)
>
> Great stuff. Presumably that'll be in the current code fork, so version
> 7 rather than 6? Or are you adding it to 6.5.x as well?
>
> Wonderful.
>
> Mark
I think he means "done" as it
relen;272996 Wrote:
> Done!
> --Richard E
Done? Done?! You can't just say "done" - where's the fanfare? Where's
the glitz :-)
Great stuff. Presumably that'll be in the current code fork, so version
7 rather than 6? Or are you adding it to 6.5.x as well?
Wonderful.
Mark
--
mcw
-
Done!
--Richard E
--
relen
relen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=30
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=19735
___
discuss
If this feature is of interest to you, please take a moment to vote:
http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1403
--
studley
The Guide is definitive. Reality is often inaccurate.
Save Internet Radio
http://www.savenetradio.org/
Know me... know my music...
http://www.last.fm/listen/user/d
eeckhoj;221126 Wrote:
> Never used the winamp plugin, but sounds like it pretty much does what
> I'm looking for on my squeezebox : decent song mixes based on the
> volume level of a track outro.
>
> Basically, what I would like is to have the next song start (full
> volume, no fade in)
This is
Never used the winamp plugin, but sounds like it pretty much does what
I'm looking for on my squeezebox : decent song mixes based on the
volume level of a track outro.
Basically, what I would like is to have the next song start (full
volume, no fade in) when the volume of the previous song drops
oreillymj;220729 Wrote:
> in the current Slimserver model track 2 of a playlist does not start
> streaming to the SB until track 1 has finished playing.
Sorry, that's incorrect. Or rather, it was correct for SB1s (and
probably SLiMP3s) but is not correct for SB2 or above. You can
cross-fade up to
It could in some cases - with songs that end cold, for example, or in
the case of joined tracks - but if applied judiciously (by not
overdoing the number of seconds of overlap, say) I think it could sound
pretty good most of the time.
Fading a song with a cold end sounds pretty weird too.
andyg;
andyg;220794 Wrote:
> Won't that result in some pretty unpleasant train wrecks?
The overlap? I think winamp does it by overlaying the next track as the
first starts to lose energy, and very rapidly fading the first track
once the next is playing. Luckily it's easy to demonstrate - just play
a bu
Won't that result in some pretty unpleasant train wrecks?
--
andyg
andyg's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3292
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=19735
_
I'm an ex-DJ (old-school radio type) and that's exactly the way I used
to do it. Maybe "overlap" would be a better description than
"crossfade" - it would be nice to have that as an added option. No
volume reduction at the beginning of the next track, just an adjustable
overlap.
vacaboca;90402
oreillymj;220729 Wrote:
> Another reason for not doing Sqrsoft x-fading is that in the current
> Slimserver model track 2 of a playlist does not start streaming to the
> SB until track 1 has finished playing. So you can't overlay the start
> of track 2 over the end of track 1 as you don't have th
I think this discussion has come up several times with no real movement
on it.
Part of the reason for not implementing the Sqtsoft type fading is
mentioned here http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=4442
Vote for this bug if you want some movement on it.
Another reason for not doing Sqrsof
Just to say, as the originator of this request, that more than a year on
I still miss the crossfade in winamp. I used it again the other day (on
holiday, so no squeezebox :-) and it's a completely different animal to
the squeezebox's crossfade. Much, much better :-(
Mark
--
mcw
---
Hi - any chance of you doing some work on the crossfade to make it a
little more sophisticated?
Most tracks start suddenly then end in a slow fade - in those cases a
good crossfade doesn't play with the faders much at all - the first
track is rapidly faded at (say) 8 seconds from the end whilst t
21 matches
Mail list logo
