PDA

View Full Version : SqueezeBox 2, Slimserver 6 and FLAC question



Steinar Bjaerum
2005-03-30, 09:08
> -----Original Message-----
>
> Sean Adams wrote:
>
> >
> > On Mar 30, 2005, at 7:36 AM, Daryle A. Tilroe wrote:
> >
> >> Daryle A. Tilroe wrote:
> >>
> >>> Daryle A. Tilroe wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Quick followup: Does this also then mean that track based FLACs
> >>> will support FF/REW within the track whereas the transcoded
> >>> CUE sheet based ones won't?
> >>
> >>
> >> Vidur? Sean?
> >
> > I'm not ignoring the FLAC questions - I'm waiting for Vidur to wake up.
> :)
> >
> > One thought on this: if we find that CUEd FLACs are inherently just a
> > pain in the butt with no advantage in terms of gaplessness, would you
> > accept as a solution a script to unCUE them?
> >
>
> I think you have me confused with a CUE sheet fanatic. I'm a track man!
> ;-) I was just trying to confirm that since FLAC was native with the SB2
> (ie. no transcoding) you could now FF/REW within a streaming FLAC track
> file. I just wanted one more <Nelson>HA!HA!</Nelson> to rub in the faces
> of the CUE sheet fanboys. :P :D
>

I am a CUEd FLAC fan, allthough not a fanatic...

My understanding is that currently CUEd FLACs are transcoded to stand-alone
FLAC tracks by the server. To me, it therefore looks like the client won't
see any difference between CUEd and single-track FLAC files. Assuming FF/REW
etc. are done in the client, there should be no difference between CUEd and
single-track FLACs with respect to this type of functionality. Am I right?

Steinar