Config6-Alpha

[Barcrest]

Album by album?

[eist1]

Spudgunman got married awhile back, so looks like we may have lost him.... Us married guys know how that goes.... I get yelled at regularly

[Barcrest]

We do have frosty but i think he's abit swamped on his own. Larrs from BYOAC has shared some album cover downloading code with us that should be in the new config 6 when/if it gets released... I have been spending every spare minute fixing up the Front End, glad to say that is now working and been tested. I need to get that working and tested version uploaded

[squirrellydw]

yes please upload it, still no email and I would like to test it out tonight

[James77]

Barcrest,
Yeah album by album when I tag.  I use the beta tagger, you need to go album by album.    It would nice to be able to pick a directory and have it tag everything under it.  I understand if people are busy, I was just wondering 

[Barcrest]

Ah betatag, i lost the source code for that you know... It's also nothing to do with a new version of config6 unless they add tagging to that app. In which case i assume you would be able to do it by going through the DB and tagging where there was missing info. Frosty or Spudgunman need to answer this really.

[James77]

I hope it is in the new config6    The original works, but has some errors and is slow ( not a fault of yours, that is why its a beta  )

[kizer]

Barcrest,
Yeah album by album when I tag.  I use the beta tagger, you need to go album by album.    It would nice to be able to pick a directory and have it tag everything under it.  I understand if people are busy, I was just wondering 

.

Have fun
http://www.magic-tagger.com/eng/index.php

[James77]

Kizer,

Thanks, but I use all .wav files.  I should have put that note.  I was using the Freebox Beta Tagger to tag all my files (it creates a .tag text type file in the directory of the album, and Freebox uses that as the tag).  I hope config 6 has a different way ( or similiar way just a little more streamlined).  Other programs I use have a pretty slick ways to tag them ( most just build a cache directory of sorts for it, like iTunes, or J River, etc..)  They do not put anything in the actual directory since it is a proprietary file for the software.

[kizer]

Wow, you use all Wav files? Aren't those files HUGE?

[Barcrest]

James i added support for orbis OGG files, i think those are lossless compression and could save you some space converting those WAV files. You can also tag those... Alternatively you could use FLAC i am hoping to have support for that as well in the next release. Just a couple of ideas to help save you some space and organise your music a little better.

[James77]

Kizer,
The files are pretty large , but hard drive space is getting cheaper, and its easier just to rip and store, not worry about compression.  I have looked into Flac, and have pondered converting, but have not yet.  I will have to look into it some more.  Thanks

[Barcrest]

That's the issue with WAV files, they are huge. For the size of one wav file you can have almost 10 tracks of MP3. Personally i don't notice the difference in quality, if it's there it's very minor.

[James77]

I agree its a minor difference, but its nice to have an exact bit for bit copy, especially on live tracks.  I am probably going to keep using .wav files, but we will see.

[bzpilot]

If your .wav files were made from CDs the current quality your looking at is a little above 1400kb/sec giving you a .wav file of about 40mb.  Converting it to "CD Quality" .mp3 format will give you 320kb/sec giving you an .mp3 file of about 9.5mb, saving you about 75% of your disk space.  The ratio between kb/sec and file size is exact the only variable is the song length.

320kb/sec .mp3 format is pretty decent.  The .mp3 format is known to start clipping audio above about 17000Hz, near the upper end of the human audible range.  It does this intentionally to reduce the audio file size to the typical human audible range.  If your 20 years old the highest you may hear is around 18,0000Hz to 20000Hz, if you are 40 years old the highest is closer to 17,000Hz, if you are 60 it is around 16,000Hz or less (of course these are just typical results, you may be different). Other than that, useing standard room audio equipment and with ever-present room background noise (i.e. not in a studio environment) can make the difference between 1400kb/sec and 320kb/sec smaller than you would think.  So unless your dog (hears up to 45,000HZ) or your cat (up to 64,000Hz) start complaining 320kb/sec is respectable audio quality.

Where you will notice the greatest degradation in sound is from 320kb/sec on down.  For instance standard music service downloads (i.e iTunes) at 128kb/sec.  Even an untrained ear with a hangover can distinguish the audio difference between 320kb/sec and 128kb/sec pretty quickly.

Some might have known this already but if may be useful to some others contemplating what format to save in and what compression rate to use or download at.