Andrej,
I had to look up ''SBS/LMS" to see what it meant! I gather SBS is Squeezebox Server, and LMS is Logitech Media Server. As far as I know, neither of those run under Windows 2000. In fact the most stable version of SqueezeCenter that I've found for 2000 is version 7.2, which I therefore run. All versions of SqueezeCenter (before and after) have numerous bugs, and no-one seems very interested in fixing them, so I stick with the one that works most of the time.
Perhaps when I get my new Linux/Wine box, I might be able to move to something later, if anything later works as well (or, heaven forbid, better :-) than SC7.2! Hopefully soon.
And thanks for your explanations about replay-gain and shuffling. I totally agree the gain should be 'standardised' at the mastering stage. With the ready availability of ReplayGain-type software, there's really no excuse for studios not to do this, and save us all the hassle of having to post-process the playback gain for each track. Of course the common replaygain algorithm is not perfect, but it is considerably better than the seemingly random levels used by different studios/engineers.
Daniel
-- I had to look up ''SBS/LMS" to see what it meant! I gather SBS is Squeezebox Server, and LMS is Logitech Media Server. As far as I know, neither of those run under Windows 2000. In fact the most stable version of SqueezeCenter that I've found for 2000 is version 7.2, which I therefore run. All versions of SqueezeCenter (before and after) have numerous bugs, and no-one seems very interested in fixing them, so I stick with the one that works most of the time.
Perhaps when I get my new Linux/Wine box, I might be able to move to something later, if anything later works as well (or, heaven forbid, better :-) than SC7.2! Hopefully soon.
And thanks for your explanations about replay-gain and shuffling. I totally agree the gain should be 'standardised' at the mastering stage. With the ready availability of ReplayGain-type software, there's really no excuse for studios not to do this, and save us all the hassle of having to post-process the playback gain for each track. Of course the common replaygain algorithm is not perfect, but it is considerably better than the seemingly random levels used by different studios/engineers.
Daniel
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SurroundSound" group.
To post to this group, send email to SurroundSound@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to SurroundSound-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SurroundSound
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SurroundSound" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to surroundsound+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
No comments:
Post a Comment