1
General Discussions / Re: Another resource for finding cover art
« on: July 01, 2025, 11:54:03 PM »But all of the sizes show as unknown.Go into the options, check "Only when size is unknown" under "Automatically download full-size images".
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
But all of the sizes show as unknown.Go into the options, check "Only when size is unknown" under "Automatically download full-size images".
The metadata would be there to make full use of.But every kind of document has specific tags that don't exist in audio tags. Right now, images and PDF are associated to audio files in MB and their multiple specific tags don't need to be supported as they would be if MB had to manage them separately.
It would 'live' in the database/library file.
(...)
Sure there are dedicated programs for managing videos, ebooks, documents, images.
They all have their own strong points, but they also have their weaknesses and limitations.
No it was accurate and there are decidedly 2 camps of thought. People who go by measurements and others who listen for differences. (blind or not)Wrong. One camp trust science and double blind listening tests to prove theories. The other camp trust whatever they perceive in subjective listening tests, then claim it as a truth.
This debate has raged for quite sometime, some people find it a clear advantage, some do not.-1
Ultimately, I prefer to trust my ears and can easily pick out a 320 mp3 next to a flac or wav file, although could be (and have been) fooled if all I'm hearing are 320 mp3'sIt's almost impossible to hear differences between a properly encoded 320 kbps MP3 and its lossless version. You can occasionnaly identify such an MP3 by its pre-echo artefacts in some instruments like castanets, but not much else. I'm talking about a controlled double-blind test, like an ABX, which is the only test you can trust (for yourself or other people).
[CUETools log; Date: 05/01/2016 00:16:18; Version: 2.1.6]
[AccurateRip ID: 000826fb-003728c0-71068c08] disk not present in database.
[CUETools log; Date: 16/01/2022 19:01:16; Version: 2.1.6]
Pregap length 00:00:33.
[AccurateRip ID: 0010e797-0092d206-89095a0b] found.
Track [ CRC | V2 ] Status
01 [d59f6fd8|19db8a5d] (0+0/3) No match
02 [19487148|207beb90] (0+0/3) No match
03 [084c706c|e2cad204] (0+0/3) No match
04 [8fcbba20|92e24646] (0+0/3) No match
05 [404bf14b|0638f188] (0+0/3) No match
06 [4a0c4d05|42e2884c] (0+0/3) No match
07 [d244f8bb|b25f4117] (0+0/3) No match
08 [7bc34679|e04ecb07] (0+0/3) No match
09 [1865b616|7e0e92ec] (0+0/3) No match
10 [bcf3ed5a|78e44ac6] (0+0/3) No match
11 [a221e222|ca0f5756] (0+0/3) No match
Offsetted by -6:
01 [8f5321ca] (0/3) No match (V2 was not tested)
02 [72840ea0] (0/3) No match (V2 was not tested)
03 [12bfccfc] (0/3) No match (V2 was not tested)
04 [c87b82f6] (0/3) No match (V2 was not tested)
05 [65fa96b5] (0/3) No match (V2 was not tested)
06 [67882f7b] (0/3) No match (V2 was not tested)
07 [cd0ae745] (0/3) No match (V2 was not tested)
08 [6c6cb3f9] (0/3) No match (V2 was not tested)
09 [29213c7e] (0/3) No match (V2 was not tested)
10 [6956ce94] (0/3) No match (V2 was not tested)
11 [ee6dbdca] (0/3) No match (V2 was not tested)
[CUETools log; Date: 13/01/2022 23:37:49; Version: 2.1.6]This one is from the 1989 edition of The Complete Capitol Recordings, Vol. 1 of Art Tatum. No doubt here: this is the real deal. More than 30 people have ripped this CD and got the exact same CRC. You don't have to worry about a possible transcoding. This is the kind of log you'll see most of the times. Even 1 or 2 matches means you don't have to worry. No transcoded rip can match a logged lossless rip in the AR database.
[AccurateRip ID: 00148b2f-00dc767c-c309930e] found.
Track [ CRC | V2 ] Status
01 [a6af0a10|37d4a747] (10+23/36) Accurately ripped
02 [0e12503b|2000c2de] (10+23/36) Accurately ripped
03 [86b307e6|f913b7d7] (11+24/38) Accurately ripped
04 [e30a6e9f|ba7067a9] (10+24/37) Accurately ripped
05 [f4fceca6|88d1b62e] (10+24/37) Accurately ripped
06 [d75cf4cb|6dc314a1] (10+24/37) Accurately ripped
07 [9230d059|7c65d3f7] (10+24/37) Accurately ripped
08 [37ffdacb|76631d5e] (10+24/36) Accurately ripped
09 [104d2651|2c3e10e1] (10+24/37) Accurately ripped
10 [fae45614|934b713a] (10+24/37) Accurately ripped
11 [b1d3552e|1e6dc70f] (10+23/35) Accurately ripped
12 [d4bec96a|50446e9e] (10+23/36) Accurately ripped
13 [b995b13a|1223f04a] (10+24/37) Accurately ripped
14 [e4bb4c10|d5e5bf6a] (10+24/37) Accurately ripped
Offsetted by -1540:
01 [1915db1e] (03/36) Accurately ripped
02 [4f4b6e8a] (03/36) Accurately ripped
03 [c17095f8] (03/38) Accurately ripped
04 [7e01b51b] (03/37) Accurately ripped
05 [5ee22f08] (00/37) No match (V2 was not tested)
06 [b911904a] (03/37) Accurately ripped
07 [04fc996a] (03/37) Accurately ripped
08 [b8e8fa7d] (02/36) Accurately ripped
09 [de757d6a] (03/37) Accurately ripped
10 [7f47797d] (00/37) No match (V2 was not tested)
11 [fede457f] (02/35) Accurately ripped
12 [3aee5f85] (03/36) Accurately ripped
13 [85e9e706] (03/37) Accurately ripped
14 [566f4672] (03/37) Accurately ripped
[CUETools log; Date: 16/03/2022 17:44:38; Version: 2.1.6]
Padded some input files to a frame boundary.
[AccurateRip ID: 0046f85a-052d641a-7412071a] disk not present in database.
This is again not true. Foobar and other software aren't more popular specifically because they're too old. An old piece of software usually (not always, but usually) means that it has an old design has well (not talking about the UI but the overall system itself). Also, the most important developers of most open-source projects are the top contributor, which are usually the creators of the said projects.You're not answering my rhetorical question and your "not true" is followed by a lot of nonsense (Foobar not popular because it's too old? lol). Why is 13 years old MB better than any open source audio player, whatever its age? According to your open source zealotry, the "community" should have coded a much better player. Here's a list of the supposed "best" 25: https://listoffreeware.com/free-open-source-music-player-software-windows/ . Here's a not rhetorical question: why don't you contribute to one or several of them to improve them and add missing features that you love in MB?
If a system is well-designed from the start and appeals many users, and suceeds in maintaining this position for years, then it's not a matter of being open-source or not ; it's just a question of being a software that keeps itself up-to-date with the current users' expectations.I'm not into the broad generalizations you're using to avert the questions, I'm talking about people coming to a forum and saying first : "your software is the best, I love it" (which I, too, think of MB) then "you should free your code".
You also say "The other irony is that asking for this or that on open source forums will expose you to the dreaded answer "if you're not happy, code it yourself, you know where is our repo, right?"."So if it was true (which is not), you make my question even more relevant: why using MB and asking Steven to free his code instead of having contributed to one of the hundreds of open source audio players with the help of a whole world-wide community? Which according to your open sourcing arguments should have produced a much better player than MB for years, isn't it?
No, this is not how it happens on most forums. I've contributed to dozens of open-source projects in the past, and if you want a feature usually there will be people willing to implement them - notably because most people asking for features aren't developers. In fact it's harder to find a project that does what you say than the opposite.
Now about the question of "To be honest, that last paragraph was mainly me taking out my frustration because it is highly unlikely that there is an open-source alternative that is anywhere near being anywhere near as good as musicbee. It is truly a shame."No, it only happens with some open-source projects. We're talking about a hobbyist program, a Windows desktop audio player in which no corporation or administration has any interest. Most hobbyist open-source progs are a one-man operation and they become abandonware the day the dev lose interest.
As I have already said multiple times before, closed-source has its advantages: you don't have to deal with other people making pull requests to your code, you don't have to look into that, you gain a lot of time from this, and you can focus on what you actually want to do: develop your own software. You also miss a lot of things, like code review by other people, contribution by other talented developers, refactoring and optimization and bugfixes from other people without having to do anything - because yes, that's also what happens with open-source projects.
There are tons of huge and successful open-source projects in the community, and the bigger a project is, the more it usually gains from being open-source (do you know about Linux?)
This is more of an insult that a constructive argument. How can you even know those people are useless? Many of us are asking for the program to be open-source because it can benefit the community without costing anything to the main developers as long as he doesn't accept PR - now I can still understand he doesn't want to do that, but it doesn't make us "whiners" or "bossy" as we are actively trying to improve the software as well.
Also, I have a side question: what would happen if something would come to happen to Steve? Does anyone else here have an access to the source code? Or will the project suddenly die because no one can access it? It's another problematic with closed-source software which I hope has already been solved.
Now I'll conclude this by thanking again Steve for his amazing work on MusicBee, telling again for people who don't seem to understand that that we aren't trying to make up his mind on the subject -
To be honest, that last paragraph was mainly me taking out my frustration because it is highly unlikely that there is an open-source alternative that is anywhere near being anywhere near as good as musicbee. It is truly a shame.
(...)in combination with JPlay and Fidelizer.Thanks, you made my day.