Slashdot Mirror


Hydrogenaudio Closes Doors For Now

verloren writes "The Admins at Hydrogenaudio, the community site discussing audio compression and related issues, have temporarily closed the site. They've posted a notice stating that they're rethinking the standards of the community, and how they're enforced. It seems to have been sparked most recently by a debate over what media players to use, but has been brewing for some time as the objective standards required at the site have been overlooked by many posters. The sister sites Foobar2000 and Rarewares are still available."

56 of 118 comments (clear)

  1. You Fools! by tangent3 · · Score: 2, Funny

    New problems, such as the rising cost of reliable high speed hosting...

    I think that has just became an even bigger problem!

  2. $slackdot-joke by palad1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    echo $close($site)+$slashdoting($site->server) +" very effective"

    or am I too late already?

  3. Re:The name is everything by tangent3 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm not sure why parent wasn't modded as Off-Topic but Hydrogenaudio != Ogg Vorbis. Hydrogenaudio is a forum for discussion of audio compression, and isn't affiliated, although Ogg Vorbis is one of the favoured codecs (along with MPC, AAC and of course, MP3) and has its own dedicated forums.

    However, recently Ogg Vorbis has been falling out of favour because of some questions beinr brought up and currently still unanswered about the truth of the statement that Ogg Vorbis is "patent-free" because of a few patents uncovered recently which Ogg Vorbis may have infringed on. So far Xiph has not answered the questions to the satisfaction of the administrators of the forums... but I doubt all this is the main cause of the forum to suspend service, but maybe one of many. *shrug*

  4. Re:The name is everything by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    AAC wins on the name front if you call it MPEG-4 audio (or `mp4' for short), since people know about `mp3' already and will assume that an `mp4' is like an `mp3' only better.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  5. foobar2000 by Compact+Dick · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    One of the finest multi-format audio players, its simple looks belie its power, extensibility and ease of use. Give foobar2000 a whirl.

    Developed at Hydrogenaudio by Peter Pawlowski [of former Winamp fame] et al.

    1. Re:foobar2000 by millette · · Score: 1

      Sure... post right before I do so I get marked as redundant! Maybe next time you'll think about others before acting.

  6. some clarification about HA by technology+is+sexy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just a couple of things to make some things clear to the slashdot crowd:

    1. HydrogenAudio is/was the No. 1 place on the net regarding the development of audio codecs and other audio related tools. Think of it as "the bugtraq of audio". Several developers of open- and closedsource codecs participated regularly in the discussions and the community helped by providing blind test results (some of them appeared on slashdot even), problem-samples and ideas/general input. It was the center of development of the widely used lame --alt-presets, which brought a new level of quality to MP3 and the foobar2000 audio player.

    2. No legal problems whatsoever are connected to the closing down.

    3. HA is going to come back shortly (= some days).

  7. Re:Decent media players? by millette · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Maybe you should give foobar2000 a try - it's from one of the winamp2 developpers, it's very unbloated, and supports all kinds of plugins and looks.

  8. Re:Forced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There was always one big issue: (unintentional) bias

    When testing audio codecs it's important to do a double blind test. (On HA they would call it "ABX", I think that was because that's the name of the program)
    The easiest way to do it is to give a program the source file and the encoded version.
    (Or two encoded files with diffrent codecs, depending on what you wanted to accomplish.
    For transparency, ie can you tell the diffrence between a MP3 encoded with X options and the source file?, you would give source and encoded.
    For comparison between 64 K Vorbis and WMA youi give two of those files)
    The program would play them 8 times (or so), first one then the other, but you can't know which file is which since it would alternate.
    You listen carefully and give it a score.

    At the end the program tells you which file you preferred.

    With psychoacoustic encoding that's the whole deal: you want to encode the file in such a way that for a human it seems as close to the original as possible.
    Because of bias, a double blind test is THE ONLY way to accurately rate lossy encoders

    But the newbies would come and say:
    Hey this codec is better then that codec.
    How do you know?
    It sounds better
    Have you done a ABX?
    No, but my ears are golden

    Or they would come:
    I compared a graph of the source with the encoded file and this codec produces files that seem the most identical.

    Both of these are totally wrong, and sometimes you would have dudes that would insist that one of these methods are good, no matter how much you try to talk some sense into them.

    And another problem: misinformed audiophiles
    "Oh no the stereo image is holy, joint-stereo is from the devil!"
    Never mind that LAME has an excellent joint-stereo system.
    And they would come with other crazy theories, for example challenging Shannon's theory that to encode a X Hz signal you only need 2X of bandiwdth.

    So that's a part of it

  9. Re:The name is everything by millette · · Score: 1

    Yeah, like "Media Player Classic" for example :)

  10. Re:Its the same old story. by millette · · Score: 1

    Could you explain a little more? It's not like slashdot is getting any real work done, yet we all agree we couldn't live without it, right?

    Seriously, sometimes it's time to think, and sometimes it's time for action. You mean now is definately not a time to think? (Pardon the messed up quote from Candy, I think..)

  11. Re:never heard of it/standards rant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    So let me get this straight, a web site with no code or corporate involvement was hoping to create a standard for audio?

    No. Hydrogenaudio is an audio discussion board where development and testing of various audio formats/encoders and the foobar2000 player takes place, but this is not the main aspect of the board. It's just an informed community (well, mostly) that maintains a high standard of discussion (unlike this place).

    Which is why I wish this had never been posted here, now look at the mess and all the misinformation flowing here already... >:(

  12. Re:The name is everything by rillian · · Score: 5, Informative

    However, recently Ogg Vorbis has been falling out of favour because of some questions beinr brought up and currently still unanswered about the truth of the statement that Ogg Vorbis is "patent-free" because of a few patents uncovered recently which Ogg Vorbis may have infringed on.

    To give air to the otherside of that flamewar, the 'unanswered' questions had more to do with a misunderstanding on the part of some forum members about how the patent system works in the US. "Patent-free" does not mean no one will sue you ever, because anyone can sue you anytime for anything. It's all about the negotiation of expectation for who would win at what cost in a potential legal action.

    In that context, and because we feel Xiph.org the organization is a likely target of punitive legal action, we unfortunately feel the less said about what we think about specific patents, the better, to avoid advertising routes of legal attack. Hardly the usual values of openness, but that's what the US legal system argues for.

    What Vorbis needs is independent defenders who understand the issues, not demands for justification from groups that should mostly be on the same side.

  13. common among many OSS projects by asv108 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Its really quite simple, developers tend to not understand basic principles of marketing, or in many cases understand that their names are obfuscated but want to keep with tradition of using obscure "geeky" project titles and acronyms. The best example is GNU, which hardly anyone can pronounce the first time anyway but then Stallman's insistence on using GNU/Linux. How many consumer products do you know with a / in their name? There is reason for tha to you know :) How many consumer products do you know of that use strage/recursive acronyms?

    Now many people will argue that if you code an OSS project you can name it whatever the fuck you want. This is very true and it suits me just fine but developers should start to consider their potential user base before naming a good software product with a title that most people can't understand or at least partially derive from product name what it does. Here is just a small list of products with bad names:

    • OGG, OGG Vorbis, or whatever you want to call it
    • MP3 (is this video?)
    • GNOME
    • Kanyhting
    • GNU/Linux

    Here are some names that are good or partially good:

    • FLAC (you can derive the purpose from the name)
    • Linux (Sounds like UNIX)
    • Audacity
    • X-Chat
    • Evolution
    1. Re:common among many OSS projects by Fermier+de+Pomme+de · · Score: 1
      MP3- MPEG Layer 3 - Motion Picture Experts Group. When this was coined it was not meant to a a product name for mass consumption, it was a spec and you can derive the purpose from the name. As with any acronym, you need to know what it stands for to have a chance. FLAC is clearer if you know the acronym but if not it is equally obscure.

      MP3 came into use partly because the format became the 'Kleenex' or 'Xerox' or 'Coke' of this space. I wouldn't be surprised if people keep calling their electronic music MP3's even after newer formats have taken a more substantial chunk of the pie. A once geeky acronym is now a household word. Not a good name? Maybe not a few years ago but today is a different story. If something has MP3 in its name is there a doubt about what it does? And as for marketing how about MP3 eXtreme! Is that better?

      Kanything, how about Ksomething - for the target audience this works. It integrates with/uses KDE widgets/services and does "something". I agreee that sometimes the "something" isn't very descriptive.

      Evolution - This is a good name? Why? What does this thing do? Gene splicing maybe.... This one is definitely out of the pages of some marketing cookbook - vaugue and sonorous.

    2. Re:common among many OSS projects by pimij · · Score: 1

      'FLAC' is a good name?? I'm not up on my acronyms but what is it - I get a lot of flack for the work I do - does it help me with that? Does it take the heat? I think it makes no more sense than OGG Vorbis.

    3. Re:common among many OSS projects by LPetrazickis · · Score: 1

      FLAC (you can derive the purpose from the name)

      Are you saying that FLAC shoots down airplanes and unpopular individuals?:)

      --
      Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
    4. Re:common among many OSS projects by LPetrazickis · · Score: 1

      Evolution - This is a good name? Why? What does this thing do? Gene splicing maybe.... This one is definitely out of the pages of some marketing cookbook - vaugue and sonorous.

      Well, it does sound cooler than Outlook. What does Outlook do? Sell binoculars over the web?:)

      --
      Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
    5. Re:common among many OSS projects by Josh+Coalson · · Score: 1
      Are you saying that FLAC shoots down airplanes and unpopular individuals?:)

      Only occasionally. Flak works better for that.

      Josh

      P.S. m-w.com says:
      Etymology: German, from Fliegerabwehrkanonen, from Flieger (flyer) + Abwehr (defense) + Kanonen (cannons)

    6. Re:common among many OSS projects by lrucker · · Score: 1
      FLAC (you can derive the purpose from the name)

      Um, no, I can't

      Linux (Sounds like UNIX)

      And this is good because? By your rules, UNIX is not a good name - anyone who doesn't know what GNU is isn't likely to know what UNIX is either. So why is sounding like it good?

      As for "Audacity" or "Evolution" - what's good about them? And "X-Chat" sounds like a place where extreme sports fans hang out.

    7. Re:common among many OSS projects by yerricde · · Score: 1

      As for "Audacity" or "Evolution" - what's good about them?

      I don't know about "Evolution", but "Audacity" shares the first three letters with "audio", which it edits.

      --
      Will I retire or break 10K?
  14. Re:The name is everything by Sumocide · · Score: 1

    '.MP3' is not a format, it's the usual file extension for the 'Motion Picture Experts Group Audio Layer 3' format. 'Ogg Vorbis' is certainly less descriptive.

  15. Re:The name is everything by krilli · · Score: 1
    ... to avoid advertising routes of legal attack ...
    That sentence is beautiful and scary.
    --
    Jag pratar lite svenska.
  16. Re:The name is everything by pizza_milkshake · · Score: 1

    that'll be in v2.0

  17. Wrong. by Compact+Dick · · Score: 1

    Ogg Vorbis was mostly criticised for its lack of development - for over a year, nothing had happened since libVorbis 1.0 [20020717] was released. Other codecs such as HE-AAC and WMA9 were catching up, even beating it at lower bitrates which is Vorbis' forte.

    Patent issues are a real concern if you build and sell the Ogg Vorbis portables we all clamour for.

  18. Hope it comes back by Goo.cc · · Score: 2

    I have been a member of Hydrogenaudio for a while and I have to say that I have throughly enjoyed it. Even though I didn't post that often, it was an awesome resource.

    I hope that it returns soon.

  19. Re:Its the same old story. by torpor · · Score: 1

    Ermm... comparing slashdot to this situation is a little oblique. slashdot members aren't trying to accomodate a public need for open media formats.

    What I mean is, code is what counts.

    If any of the competing factions had actually gotten working code *done*, and being used by actual humans to solve the media file-format problems, then there probably wouldn't have been this demise to report ...

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  20. Re:Its the same old story. by Compact+Dick · · Score: 1

    If I am parsing your cryptic comments right, it is your comments that are misplaced. Hydrogenaudio is not a company developing an audio codec, but they test, evaluate and compare various codecs for quality.

  21. Re:Dysfunctional organization by AndroidCat · · Score: 1
    all their incompatible ideas they keep having to reject over and over

    So what is the Hydrogenaudio equivalent of goatse posters? (Or should I ask?)

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  22. Re:some clarification about HA by jam244 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That is all nice and well... however, I don't see how a non-profit community intends to create a new audio standards.

    To my knowledge, we haven't seen an audio format or codec that has reached tier 1 status (RedBook, MP3, WAV, MIDI, etc.) that did not have major corporate involvement in its development. Even with DivX, we often see industry-standard audio codecs used... I don't see a community-based codec group inventing a new codec that gets used for anything more than illegally ripping DVDs and posting them on KaZaA.

  23. Re:some clarification about HA by technology+is+sexy · · Score: 1

    HydrogenAudio is not trying to create new standards. It's merely a place to discuss the current formats and help the developers by providing listening tests and input.
    A lot of developers hang out there and discuss their ideas with the users (e.g. Ivan Dimkovic and Menno Baker - Ahead Nero AAC codec; Josh Coalson - FLAC; J.M. Valin - Speex; G. Bouvigne - LAME).

  24. Re:Dysfunctional organization by Pathwalker · · Score: 1

    So what is the Hydrogenaudio equivalent of goatse posters?

    I would guess it would be people who post links to something like this.

    (If you want more audio monstrosities, look in that directory - I'm testing how different codecs respond at extremely low bit rates )

  25. Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    HydrogenAudio only did what Slashdot would have done had Slashdot not become a business. If you ran HA (or this site for that matter) and had watched it become a pit of uninformed discussion, social posturing, and pointless debate, wouldn't YOU also think about closing it down?

  26. Re:Forced? by orthogonal · · Score: 1

    And another problem: misinformed audiophiles
    "Oh no the stereo image is holy, joint-stereo is from the devil!"


    Maybe I'm misinformed too, but I thought stereo meant recording seperate numbers for each channel, and joint stereo meant recording a number for one channel and a delta for the other channel(s), and that one could be trivially converted to the other.

    The benefit (as I understood it) of joint stereo was that the delta was usually of smaller magnitude, and thus had a smaller range and more repeats of the same numbers, making Huffman encoding of the deltas more efficient.

    What am I missing? Are stereo and joint-stereo not simple isomorphisms?

  27. Re:You are mistaken. by orthogonal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    MP3 is an evolutionary dead end

    So are sharks and lichens.

    But they're not going to disappear anytime soon, and I doubt MP3 will either. Other formats may be technically superior, but (like technically superior primate brains) also require superior resources to support them; superior processor speed (OGG) or superior storage space (FLACC or Monkey).

    MP3 also probably has the largest share of the compressed audio formats, and there are definite drawbacks to transcoding: loss of fidelity, time to transcode, need to store both the old format and the new during the transition phase. So a significant portion of the corpus in MP3 will likely not be replaced with newer, better formats.

    And just as plenty of music has been compressed with MP3, plenty of players play MP3 -- and only MP3. Players like my 60GB portable. I've invested quite a bit in my portable, and that locks me into MP3. MP3 will stay around, because people with MP3 (only) players will still want music.

    Since MP3 is sufficient unto my needs, I certainly won't abandon it until and unless my portable breaks down (it's an Archos, so that might be soon). Even after my portable breaks down, I'll still have over 7000 MP3s, many of which were purchased through emusic.com, so I can't re-rip them. Unless transcoding to $next_format sounds better than a MP3, I won't be transcoding those files, which means when my portable MP3 player breaks down, I'll insist that the replacement play MP3. Only if my next portable plays both MP3s and $next_format will $next_format begin to interest me at all.

    So MP3 may well be an evolutionary dead end, but evolutionary dead end and species extinction are two very differnt things that don't necesarily correlate.

  28. Re:Forced? by CaptainPhong · · Score: 1

    Yes you are right, that is the benefit of joint-stereo and they are (in theory) equivalent. On some sections (were there , it turns out to not be an advantage, so a smart encoder uses a mix of joint stereo and full L/R frames. This is what Lame does.

    In practice, it also lets you can also quantize channels differently (whether they're left/right or mid/side) to improve compression/quality so in a lossy codec so the two versions aren't guaranteed to be bit-for-bit identical. In a really crappy/bugged encoder, doing this badly can damage a file audibly, but that's true of many things in crappy encoders. Lame uses joint-stereo correctly and doesn't damage the audio. The result is that joint-stereo in Lame produces smaller files and/or better quality.

    --
    ... "Give me a woman who loves beer and I will conquer the w
  29. Re:Its the same old story. by Sj0 · · Score: 1

    Actually, I'd be much better off without it. Probably'd get more work done, drive a nicer car, AND be better in bed. I'd taste great and be less filling without slashdot, too!

    Actually, I've been here less and less lately. This place is too aggressive, and I'm finding that when I DO go to get real work done on other message boards, I end up thrashing someone with a slashdot-style diatrabe(diatribe? Diettrade? Sally Struthers?), and nobody wants that.

    Maybe the trolls.

    --
    It's been a long time.
  30. Re:some clarification about HA by Zathrus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm rather amazed at how people are misreading the topic.

    The site is closed temporarily to rethink the standards of the community -- of the HydrogenAudio community, not of the music encoding community as a whole. They're not trying to create new audio compression standards while closed -- they're trying to formulate new rules to reduce flamage on the forums (which is pretty much all that HA is). If /. closed down for a week or two and said "we're rethinking the standards of the community" (which, btw, is not what their page says) would you think that they're trying to change OSS/Linux/geek standards, or just doing some serious rethinking of how the posting/moderation/meta-mod system works?

  31. Re:Its the same old story. by millette · · Score: 1
    "What I mean is, code is what counts."
    That reminds me - I'm reading Extreme Programming Refactored (I probably shouldn't open that door) and it made me realize how that attitude is primordial to XP.
  32. Re:Dysfunctional organization by wynlyndd · · Score: 1

    People who claim "VQF is teh best format EVAR!"

    --
    "Dogs and cats, living together...it's mass hysteria!"
  33. Nevertheless by rkuris · · Score: 2, Interesting
    One does not take down a community on no notice, just because there's some heated discussion. They spend all this time building a community, people probably have friends there, and POOF! Suddenly, everyone else has to scramble to find someplace else to meet.

    Corporate sponsors or not, if there is a large community (as they claim), plans must be made to shut it down.

    Gee, what would happen if /. did that?

    --
    Get rid of everything Micro and Soft: Buy Viagra and/or Linux
    1. Re:Nevertheless by Zathrus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One does not take down a community on no notice, just because there's some heated discussion.

      If it's a flamewar on a previously quiet board you may.

      Corporate sponsors or not

      HA has no corporate sponsors. Foobar2000 is a free program (not OSS IIRC, but no money to use).

      Gee, what would happen if /. did that?

      People would bitch and whine and find something else to do with their time. Subscribers would be the only ones with a valid issue.

      Free online forums have no obligation to their users to remain available. If the costs get too high, if the site becomes too much of a chore, or if things just aren't working as the site owners want them to they have every right to close up shop either temporarily or permanently.

    2. Re:Nevertheless by djefferies · · Score: 1

      One does not take down a community on no notice, just because there's some heated discussion.

      For god's sake, they didn't! The "heated discussion" is not the reason for the closure, the article submitted by verloren totally mispresents this (in fact the whole thing never should have been posted here, because it's quite irrelevant news here, and it was bound to be twisted by the uninformed crowd).

      Also, for the umpteenth time, HA is not closing for good, they will re-open within the next few days. Suppose they were updating the forum or server software and encountered complications, causing the site to be down for a few days, without any message or explanation at all. Nobody would say a word. Yet, in this case, despite there being a definitive notice stating that the site is not closed permanently , people make a hell of a fuss about it even though they have absolutely no reason to. What is it with you guys?

  34. Well, I'm glad to see this story... by lumpenprole · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...even though I'm really sorry to see they're having problems. As somebody who is forced to use a Win box at work, I've found foobar to be the best audio player hands down. It's really small footprint means I can work using three open memory hogging programs at once and still listen to music. If only it did streaming windows media, I'd never use anything else.

    I'm really hoping that this story leads to more attention being paid to foobar, as I think it's a real gem.

    --
    Disclaimer: MINAA (Mummy! I'm Not An Animal!)
  35. Re:never heard of it/standards rant by Senior+Frac · · Score: 1

    The main article here was either so badly written, or so badly mangled by the editor, that I don't think the original point they were trying to make is salvagable. Give up folks. You'll never stop the Slashdot horde from righteous indignation at a corporate-type "controlling audio standards" on this one. To many post-only accounts, not enough read.

  36. Yes, AAC is like MP3 only better by porky_pig_jr · · Score: 1

    AAC essentially starts with improvement MP3 such as 100% MDCT (whereas MP3 is a hybrid solution), increased length of windows, all those things which should have been in MP3 in a first place, and now they can't be implemented because of incompatibility issues. So it is perfectly all right to think of AAC is like MP3 only better. It *is* better.

  37. I'll add to that by bradasch · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Other formats may be technically superior...

    You are right, but I guess that for a lot of people, a MP3 encoded at 128k sounds the same as the original. That can happen for several reasons: you may have a low-quality output device (bad speakers, cheap and lousy headphones), a bad sound card, you may have some kind of hearing disability (you may be deaf for some high or low frequecies).

    So, agreeing with you, why should these people reencode their files using a better audio format? Like you mentioned, they already have several MP3 files, so it's kinda pointless to do so.

    1. Re:I'll add to that by Admiral+Burrito · · Score: 1
      I guess that for a lot of people, a MP3 encoded at 128k sounds the same as the original.

      I think those people just haven't done the side-by-side comparison. 128k sounds "good enough" so they don't really care. For most stuff it's pretty easy to tell 128k from 192k when given the same recording at the two bitrates playing one after the other; the 128k usually sounds louder (noisier).

  38. Re:Forced? by Gumshoe · · Score: 1
    And they would come with other crazy theories, for example challenging Shannon's theory that to encode a X Hz signal you only need 2X of bandiwdth.


    Isn't that Nyquist's Theorum rather than Shannon's?
  39. I found the same thing in my test by tentimestwenty · · Score: 1

    http://www.recordstorereview.com/misc/aacmp3.shtml

    AAC vs. MP3 vs. OGG vs. AIF

  40. You're both right by yerricde · · Score: 1

    Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem. Nyquist formulated it; Shannon proved it formally.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  41. descriptive? by yerricde · · Score: 1

    it's the usual file extension for the 'Motion Picture Experts Group Audio Layer 3' format. 'Ogg Vorbis' is certainly less descriptive.

    .mp3: "Motion Picture Experts Group" container; "Audio Layer 3" codec.

    .ogg: "Ogg" container; "Vorbis" codec.

    How is the description of .ogg "certainly less descriptive"?

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  42. Re:Foobar 2000 by mysta · · Score: 1
    I'd just like to add some weight to the parent's claim that Foobar is a real gem. I wholeheartedly agree.

    Foobar 2000 is now at a 0.71 release and is by far the most full featured and elegant media player I've seen on Windows. First time users might it a little sparse as the interface is very bland and not skinnable like Winamp or Sonique. However, under the hood is an amazing plugin architecture that is very well designed.

    Some highlights for me:

    • Oggs, Mp3s, MODs, FLACs, AACs, and heaps more are all playable.
    • Keypresses for every single action the player can perform are configurable either as local or global (ie, you can control F2K while in another application)
    • The masstagger. This is amazing for reorganising your audio collection. It can guess album titles, song titles and artists from filenames, add arbitrary tags and store all this information is AWE2 within each file.
    • The album list. Once you've tagged all your files, you can heavily customise the way your files are organised and displayed in the album list.
    • The search facilities. These are second to none. Very fast and very powerful.

    If you are using Windows and are listening to mp3s or oggs through WinAmp or Media Play I thoroughly recommend giving Foobar2000 a go.

    Kudos to the F2K team!

    --

    "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge, and where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"-T.S.Eliot
  43. Re:Decent media players? by mantera · · Score: 1

    you retard; winamp 5 is already out in beta release

  44. Re:Forced? by JebusIsLord · · Score: 1

    ABX is called thusly because you are comparing samples A and B to randomly selected sample X, to see if you can really blindly tell the difference between the two.

    --
    Jeremy
  45. Re:Forced? by JebusIsLord · · Score: 1

    LAME still doesn't do intensity stereo, actually. Only joint. That's why even the LAME devs suggest using FhG for really low bitrates in stereo.

    --
    Jeremy