If the shoutcast-server needs to receive a samplerate of 44.1, you could
resample the audio in the stream-encoder.
Marius
On 01/18/2018 11:49 PM, jorge soto wrote:
No. I use Rivendell with jack. If i set jack at 44.1k songs play at
the wrong pitch.
On Jan 18, 2018 9:41 AM, "Fred Gleason"
If it were me I'd set Jack to 48 and have the streaming encoder resample
to my streaming bitrate. Actually I'd generate several streams at
different bitrates using Liquidsoap to send to the streaming server so
that I could have a "super low bandwidth" for smartphones on 3G or folks
on dialup, and
On Jan 18, 2018, at 17:49, jorge soto wrote:
> No. I use Rivendell with jack. If i set jack at 44.1k songs play at the wrong
> pitch.
You might want to try GlassCoder, which let’s you have your cake and eat it too:
From the glasscoder(1) man page:
*** snip snip ***
No. I use Rivendell with jack. If i set jack at 44.1k songs play at the
wrong pitch.
On Jan 18, 2018 9:41 AM, "Fred Gleason" wrote:
> On Jan 18, 2018, at 12:33, jorge soto wrote:
>
> I stream through shoutcast and they require 44.1k in order to
On Jan 18, 2018, at 14:56, Rob Landry <41001...@interpring.com> wrote:
> When you run rdadmin after an upgrade, it compares the database version with
> the desired one and then upgrades if necessary. Why not have it check the
> database engine and modify rd.conf accordingly?
So what would be
On Wed, 17 Jan 2018, Fred Gleason wrote:
That was indeed the default when the feature was first implemented. It was
changed in the course of pre-release testing because of a similar
interaction that broke compatibility with the Aman Rivendell server manager,
which requires MyISAM tables. The
On Jan 18, 2018, at 12:33, jorge soto wrote:
> I stream through shoutcast and they require 44.1k in order to trigger some
> features.
So you’re somehow streaming these files directly, rather than playing them
through Rivendell?
Cheers!
I stream through shoutcast and they require 44.1k in order to trigger some
features.
On Jan 18, 2018 8:57 AM, "Fred Gleason" wrote:
> On Jan 18, 2018, at 09:58, Lorne Tyndale wrote:
>
> Maybe I'm missing some part of the discussion, but is
On Jan 18, 2018, at 09:58, Lorne Tyndale wrote:
> Maybe I'm missing some part of the discussion, but is there any real
> need to resample to 44.1?
You make a good point. With CD-based distribution fading into the sunset, the
pro-audio world is increasingly moving in
Maybe I'm missing some part of the discussion, but is there any real
need to resample to 44.1?
For sure 48 takes a little bit more storage space, but if you're already
running mpeg compression you've already reduced your storage space
needed. And storage is cheap.
Most sound cards can play
On Wednesday 17 January 2018 06:14:53 pm Fred Gleason wrote:
> So, unfortunately, whatever we do it appears that *someone* is going to be
> ‘astonished’ after an upgrade to 2.18.x. Not ideal, but I don’t see any way
> around it.
Re-invent the Slackware practice of moving the old file to
11 matches
Mail list logo