Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › J.River Media Center plays bit-perfect 24Bit/192Khz
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

J.River Media Center plays bit-perfect 24Bit/192Khz - Page 2

post #16 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hybrys View Post
My Winamp and Foobar both do gapless.

Sorry for the dumb question, but what do you mean by gapless, please? I want to make sure I didn't miss something in my Foobar settings and also I'm going to take this player for a spin and compare.
post #17 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hybrys View Post
My Winamp and Foobar both do gapless.
Winamp doesn't do gapless properly for all file types, especially mp3. I've tried. Cross-fade with zero overlap is not how you do proper gapless.

Foobar does do gapless properly. Even for LAME encoded mp3.

The point is that many players do not do gapless properly. Especially ones that have to use reclock to do bit-perfect playback. Reclock is inherently not capable of gapless.

Some players that do gapless: iTunes, Foobar, J River
Some players that do not do gapless properly (to my standard): Winamp, Media Monkey, lots of others
post #18 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonci View Post
Yes, but you won`t check your eyes to a general physician, yo`d go to an oculist..
Then why are you using a general purpose OS to play audio?
You'd best be looking for a specialized real-time OS that runs a specialized audio player. Better yet, use a nice CD or SACD player.
post #19 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Thorsen View Post
Sorry for the dumb question, but what do you mean by gapless, please? I want to make sure I didn't miss something in my Foobar settings and also I'm going to take this player for a spin and compare.
Gapless playback is the uninterrupted playback of consecutive audio tracks without intervening silence or clicks at the point of the track change. Here's the Wikipedia article that explains it in fair detail: Gapless playback

Gapless playback is very important for classical music, Pink Floyd's DSotM, live concert recordings, and similar albums/music.

Gapless playback is difficult to do, especially with formats that don't inherently support gapless playback like the MP3 format. That's why many players fail to do it properly.

Foobar does gapless by default unless you enable DSPs like "Skip Silence" or "Crossfader" that undo gapless playback. Foobar does gapless perfectly even with LAME MP3.

J River can do gapless perfectly (even with LAME MP3) but you may need to adjust the default playback settings. I believe that by default it will play sequential album tracks gapless. There is an option for "Switch tracks: Gapless" if you want all track changes to be done gapless. Don't enable "Do not play silence (leading and trailing)" cause that undoes gapless.

Winamp claims to do gapless since version 5.3. But it doesn't. I've tried. It doesn't do proper gapless with LAME encoded MP3.
post #20 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by niCe99 View Post
anyone have a guide to setup J.River...for the best possible sound?
You can find them on my website:
WASAPI
Memory playback
post #21 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ham Sandwich View Post
Winamp doesn't do gapless properly for all file types, especially mp3. I've tried. Cross-fade with zero overlap is not how you do proper gapless.

Foobar does do gapless properly. Even for LAME encoded mp3.

The point is that many players do not do gapless properly. Especially ones that have to use reclock to do bit-perfect playback. Reclock is inherently not capable of gapless.

Some players that do gapless: iTunes, Foobar, J River
Some players that do not do gapless properly (to my standard): Winamp, Media Monkey, lots of others
You are right in that it doesn't do it with MP3s. But, I use mostly FLAC, and have never had a problem with overlap. And that's without using a crossfade 'cheat'.

Reclock is capable of gapless, as long as the player is. Through this point, you can find and use a player that does gapless without doing bitperfect playback, and make it do bitperfect. (IIRC how Reclock works.)
post #22 of 55
Okay, since this thread came up and I have always wondered about J. River, I have been messing with it for a while now. I have to admit, it's pretty solid. In reference to the gapless playback, you have to change the default (cross-feed). It does gapless perfect. I gave up Winamp because the only gapless that was working was with DS. ASIO did not work, even though the box was checked.

It has many options and features and navigating is pretty straight-forward. The theater display is awesome. Will it replace my Foobar with all the bells and whistles (configs, components etc.) I have come to love through the years? We shall see.

Thanks for the heads up with this thread.
post #23 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonci View Post
Yes, but you won`t check your eyes to a general physician, yo`d go to an oculist..
Irrelevant!

You have established that you are a rabid Foobar fanboy. Do you have anything else to contribute to this thread?

Bill
post #24 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by FasterThanEver View Post
Irrelevant!

You have established that you are a rabid Foobar fanboy. Do you have anything else to contribute to this thread?

Bill
No, this is irrelevant, and YOU contributed nothing to this thread.

By the by, I'm going to try out J.River in a little bit. And to think, I just got my Foobar where I'd like it.

Edit: Well, I've been fiddling with it for a while now. It's been bugging me a little bit, in the way it arbitrarily tags some things (Can't seem to find a place to change the 'Album Artist' field by which things are tagged in 'by artist' view.)

Things I like: Visually impressive. Offers a good media server. Easy to get your music from nothing to playing. Extensive options; might sound better than Foobar with tweaking. If it can host VSTs, then that last statement is absolutely true.

Things I dislike: HUGE footprint (50-100 MBs). Bogged down by large amount of features. Working with .cue files aswell as single tracks is a giant pain. Tagging system is more complicated than it needs to be.
post #25 of 55
YES I AM A FOOBAR FANBOY,
since I`m admitting this, imagine how good it is..
post #26 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ham Sandwich View Post
Then why are you using a general purpose OS to play audio?
You'd best be looking for a specialized real-time OS that runs a specialized audio player. Better yet, use a nice CD or SACD player.
In fact I do, I cracked xp with the tricks on cm play site, they recommend CMPlay, but foobar is working good,
I managed to get it go buffer length to 100ms, without pops and clicks,

Nothing against JRiver, is good for theatre view and Zen transfer, but its not audiophille,
It doesn`t have the GUI to be audiophille
post #27 of 55
> No, this is irrelevant, and YOU contributed nothing to this thread.

I have contributed to threads about JR MC in the past. I write about what I know from experience and from reading credible reports.

You seem to feel that any mention of JR MC needs to be beaten down so that everyone else accepts that Foobar is the greatest. It is quite clear that you don't know much about JR MC 14. You should allow the people who want to talk about MC to do so without trying to discredit that software.

You have established that you think Foobar is the greatest. You have also established that you don't actually know anything about JR MC 14. Start a thread about Foobar and tell everyone why you think it is the greatest.

> By the by, I'm going to try out J.River in a little bit.

Give it more than 30 seconds.

In the future, don't trash any product without having some actual knowledge to go on.

> And to think, I just got my Foobar where I'd like it.

Nothing wrong with your continuing to use Foobar.

> Things I dislike: HUGE footprint (50-100 MBs). Bogged down by large amount of features.

I've monitored Foobar and MC14 using task manager with the same set of files in their libraries. I watched execution of each program for many minutes to see how memory usage changed. Virtual memory size was similar for Foobar and MC 14 (around 40 Mbytes.) Actual memory use varied over time for both programs with no clear advantage to either program overall. I've posted those results on the AA PC Audio forum.

If Foobar isn't using a library, its memory use will be less. That is true for MC 14 as well.

Bogged down? Are you talking about the time it takes MC 14 to start? With about 28,000 files, MC 14 is ready to use in under a second.

Are you talking about how fast the UI updates when you select a tag value and the file list is updated? I don't see any delays on my system.

Some of your perceptions may be based on an older version of MC. MC 11 used less memory but was less responsive. J. River has continued to tune MC and MC 14 is snappier now than older versions were. Sometimes using more memory to cache things like tag values is the right tool for speeding up program execution.

I have been using MC for about 4 years. I have no problem with buffer underruns causing glitches.

> Working with .cue files aswell as single tracks is a giant pain.

What problem do you have?

When I import a CUE file, I see each line in the cue file shown as a music file.

> Tagging system is more complicated than it needs to be.

I don't understand this. Do you mean the UI you use when you rip or import files? Do you mean the way you display a list of music files? Do you mean the way you specify tags for the browser pane mode?

Selecting which tags to display in the list of music files is simply a matter of selecting tags from a list. Selecting which tags to use for browsing files is similar: just pick from a list. Specifying a sort order for a view involves picking tags from a list too.

If you want to change the sort order on the fly, you can click on the column heading. If you want to create a new view, you can do it in 1-2 minutes picking tags from the list at each step.

> It doesn`t have the GUI to be audiophille

Well, the MC 14 UI isn't limited, awkward and undocumented. If that is your definition of a UI for an audiophile player, you are right.

If you think that a rich UI necessarily affects audio quality, prove some proof.

Bill
post #28 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonci View Post
In fact I do, I cracked xp with the tricks on cm play site, they recommend CMPlay, but foobar is working good,
I managed to get it go buffer length to 100ms, without pops and clicks,

Nothing against JRiver, is good for theatre view and Zen transfer, but its not audiophille,
It doesn`t have the GUI to be audiophille
I can see that you're long lost to the asylum and computer tweak pseudo-science. Enjoy your stay.
post #29 of 55
The Computer Audiophile website just released an article called Windows 7 & J. River Media Center 14 configuration.
post #30 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojave View Post
The Computer Audiophile website just released an article called Windows 7 & J. River Media Center 14 configuration.
Hi mojave,

Great article on J. River. I see you posted on that website in reference to the Library Server. I have been messing with it but to no avail. Could you post the steps on setting it up and running it with 2 PCs.

Thanks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › J.River Media Center plays bit-perfect 24Bit/192Khz