linuxaudio.org

> Justin Smith wrote:

quoted text
> > On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 10:25 PM, Justin Smith

> >  wrote:

> >> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 9:54 PM, Arthur  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

quoted text
> >>  > 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.

> >>

Try this page for a hopefully better explanation, and if it doesn't

help, the forum surely will:

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Rubyripper
> >

quoted text
> > 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

>From what I read some years ago, cdparanoias concept or implementation

is flawed, and rubyripper tries to make a highlevel-workaround.

That may be not as good as writing a better cdparanoia, but it's better

than just using it as-is. It's the only 'secure'-ripper I know of in

linux.
Regards,

	Philipp

_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-user mailing list

Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user