Rockbox.org home
release
dev builds
extras
themes manual
wiki
device status forums
mailing lists
IRC bugs
patches
dev guide



Rockbox mail archive

Subject: Re: More Responsive Track Switching

Re: More Responsive Track Switching

From: blaou <blaou_at_gmx.net>
Date: 2005-02-17

Lame with --nogaps doesn't work, since the hardware has to support LAME
tags (where the real tracklength would be stored). apparently, only the
rio karma does...
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=27517
only the bladeenc supports true compatible gapless support, but the
quality sucks..
the only solution is cuesheet support!

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 23:03:04 +0100
"Ronald Teune" <rtwolf@gmx.net> wrote:

> Lame has a --nogaps option IIRC, perhaps that'll help. I'm not annoyed
> by the microsecond gaps, though, so never tried. I also recall that
> the nogaps option caused some trouble... *searches e-mails
>
> [quote]
> I have seen that Rockbox have problem buffering with some MP3's.
> Specifically, MP3's encoded in VBR with the Lame encoder and the No
> gap option active.
> The play back stops for about a half second every two minutes,
> actually when the hard drive spin down.
> [/quote]
>
> vbrfix was the solution here.
>
> Ronald
>
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 14:20:15 -0500, Ray Lambert
> <listlizard@interthingy.net> wrote:
> > I think the more important use for this is when listening to live
> > music recordings or other material where there isn't supposed to
> > be any gap between tracks. I listen to live recordings a lot and
> > the gap is often times jarring to some degree. I've thought
> > numerous times about trying to implement seamless track switching
> > myself. The obvious way to fix it is to begin loading the next
> > song before the current one ends, preferably before the disc spins
> > down, probably reading it immediately after reading the final
> > chunk of the currently playing file. I haven't looked at the code
> > yet myself though so I'm not sure what the best way to implement
> > this would be; but I have no doubt that it CAN be done.
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand why this would be valuable when track
> > skipping though. I would think that you would WANT a gap then, to
> > create an aural boundary between the two tracks (I know I do).
> > Then again, maybe I've just misunderstood the whole discussion??
> > :)
> >
> > ~ray
> _______________________________________________
> http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockbox
>
_______________________________________________
http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockbox
Received on Thu Feb 17 03:02:40 2005


Page was last modified "Jan 10 2012" The Rockbox Crew
aaa