PDA

View Full Version : Gapless mp3 playback when is it going to be fixed??



cparker
2006-09-14, 01:06
Hi,

The bug/request to playback gapless MP3s which have been encoded with Lame has been open more than 18 months now.

Anybody have any clue when its going to be fixed, its set into the distant future at the moment even beyond release version 7???

Even Apple/iTunes have fixed this now but Slim seem more interested in churning out new products instead of making the basics of the software work!! How funny that would be, buying a Transporter for thousands of dollars and it still wouldnt play your mp3 gapless, though I assume you wouldnt play lossy on it ;)

Please vote for it and see if we can get it pushed up the priority list the gaps are driving me crazy!

http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026

Yes I know Vog Orbis already does gapless.. and yeah I guess I will get flamed, but I'm not asking for miracles!

Thanks

kdf
2006-09-14, 01:16
On 14-Sep-06, at 1:06 AM, cparker wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> The bug/request to playback gapless MP3s which have been encoded with
> Lame has been open more than 18 months now.
>
> Anybody have any clue when its going to be fixed, its set into the
> distant future at the moment even beyond release version 7???

when someone provides a patch, it will be in a build.
you can search the forum or the web for reasons why mp3 gapless
isn't something that 'just works'
-k

slimpy
2006-09-14, 01:58
If this were so easy every player (software and hardware) in the world would support mp3 gapless - but only a handful do and only very few can actually do it right. Mp3 just isn't made for gapless playback, any attempt to solve the problem will always be a workaround.
And workarounds for flaws in certain encoding formats is certainly not the basics of the software!
If the gaps are driving you crazy why don't you switch to a format that does support gapless? There are alternatives to mp3 as you said yourself.

-s.

cparker
2006-09-14, 03:26
From the lay person it doesnt seem so hard, LAME encoded MP3s have the detail of the padding required.

Many players dont, because companies cant be bothered to update their firmware to support it and want you to buy the latest and greatest, hence these guys;

http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/FeatureComparison

So I do consider it the basics when its encoded in the file. If it meant that you had to write a bit more code to read the genre tag would you leave that out??

Ben Sandee
2006-09-14, 05:24
On 9/14/06, cparker <cparker.2e47qo1158221402 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> The bug/request to playback gapless MP3s which have been encoded with
> Lame has been open more than 18 months now.
>
> Anybody have any clue when its going to be fixed, its set into the
> distant future at the moment even beyond release version 7???
>
> Even Apple/iTunes have fixed this now but Slim seem more interested in
> churning out new products instead of making the basics of the software
> work!! How funny that would be, buying a Transporter for thousands of
> dollars and it still wouldnt play your mp3 gapless, though I assume you
> wouldnt play lossy on it ;)
>
> Please vote for it and see if we can get it pushed up the priority list
> the gaps are driving me crazy!


Why not just encode your CD's to FLAC and be done with it? At least for
those albums which drive you crazy. I have only a handful of albums myself
that benefit from gapless transitions.

It would be nice if they could add this but if I were running the show I
don't think I would devote much attention to this either. Regardless, if
you are patient you will notice that they are slowly working their way
through the backlog of enhancement requests (you call it a bug, but it's
not).

Anyway, the truth is not that many people are asking for this and those that
are do have a better option -- FLAC.

Ben

cparker
2006-09-14, 10:09
Why not just encode your CD's to FLAC and be done with it? At least for
those albums which drive you crazy. I have only a handful of albums myself
that benefit from gapless transitions.

Ben

Because I bought them from mp3 commerical sites and they are LAME encoded, so I dont want to have to buy them again! :(

I hope they fix it soon, I was looking at installing another 2 slim boxes next year, but I might look at other offerings, maybe the new Apple device.

Cheers anyway :)

Dont forget to keep voting ;)

Ben Sandee
2006-09-14, 10:27
On 9/14/06, cparker <cparker.2e4wqn1158253801 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
>
> Because I bought them from mp3 commerical sites and they are LAME
> encoded, so I dont want to have to buy them again! :(


I understand -- but I think you are a rarity. How many people these days
who care about gapless audio are satisfied with a lossy codec?

Maybe you can convert the mp3 to flac preserving the gapless information.
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if foobar2000 would do this in a few
mouse-clicks. Have you considered this?

Ben

radish
2006-09-14, 11:26
Doing gapless with mp3 used to be hard, but with LAME encoded stuff it's now pretty easy - just read the tag. Other formats are gapless, so the infrastructure to do seamless transitions is there, all that needs adding is the code to the firmware's mp3 decoder.

I'm aware it's an issue of priorities, and I'm aware that as a non-contributor myself my voice is weaker, but I consider this a significant issue.

People coming over from other platforms frequently have large existing libraries in mp3, and certain genres of music really require accurate gapless playback (while others, of course, make no use of it). Being able to answer "yes, the SB3 will playback your files as intended" rather than "sure, just transcode to flac/rerip from cd/whatever" strikes me as a big selling point.

As for the issue of whether people who care about gapless would still use mp3 - you betcha. For me it's not about getting total fidelity, it's about not having one of the most important part of the album (the track transitions) destroyed. If you listen to mixed music, as many people do, having a gap in there is like having someone hit you with a frying pan every 5 minutes.

Case in point, for the last 2.5 years I've used an increasingly scratched up and flaky Rio Karma as my portable device for the sole reason that plays Vorbis gapless. Yesterday I bought an iPod because Apple finally realised gapless matters. I would never have bought my first SB if it didn't do gapless from at least Vorbis & FLAC - and if I had a large mp3 library at the time (I didn't) I'd have wanted that to be gapless too.

CatBus
2006-09-14, 11:47
On 9/14/06, cparker <cparker.2e4wqn1158253801 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
>
> Because I bought them from mp3 commerical sites and they are LAME
> encoded, so I dont want to have to buy them again! :(


I understand -- but I think you are a rarity. How many people these days
who care about gapless audio are satisfied with a lossy codec?

Maybe you can convert the mp3 to flac preserving the gapless information.
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if foobar2000 would do this in a few
mouse-clicks. Have you considered this?

Ben

Gaps between sequential tracks sound just as bad on a $10 pair of speakers on 64KHz MP3s as they would on an audiophile system with FLACs. The demographic that gets annoyed by gaps is much larger than the demographic that gets annoyed by a 16KHz lowpass filter.

I don't think it's fair to assume that those who prefer gapless playback would always use FLACs. While I opted for Vorbis myself, at a bitrate I considered to be transparent, I can see why someone would choose LAME MP3, and even choose a bitrate that was not always transparent. Regardless of the encoding choice, gaps are obvious to untrained listeners on even the lousiest equipment, and some of those folks are going to be annoyed.

Transcoding at the server is a great workaround for gapless playback, and I'm very grateful we have it. But true client-side gapless MP3 playback support would be a very good feature--and not just a feature only a few rare cases would take advantage of.

Ben Sandee
2006-09-14, 12:37
On 9/14/06, CatBus <CatBus.2e51db1158259801 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
> Transcoding at the server is a great workaround for gapless playback,
> and I'm very grateful we have it. But true client-side gapless MP3
> playback support would be a very good feature--and not just a feature
> only a few rare cases would take advantage of.


I realize anyone can hear the gaps -- I certainly can hear them (although
they are VERY short, almost inaudible). But I'm also able to contain my
rage at them and still enjoy my music. If gapless MP3 were added I would
certainly use it. On the other hand, if gapless were important to me I
wouldn't hesitate to migrate to a format that supported it more uniformly,
rather than waiting for the feature to be added to my player.
You're not going to get SlimDevices to commit to this, or any other
unannounced feature improvement, so you just can't know how long it might
take. Life is too short to sit on the sidelines and complain.

By the way, thank you for correctly identifying this as a feature and not a
bug.

Ben

gregklanderman
2006-09-14, 12:42
>>>>> kdf <slim-mail (AT) deane-freeman (DOT) com> writes:

> On 14-Sep-06, at 1:06 AM, cparker wrote:

>> The bug/request to playback gapless MP3s which have been encoded with
>> Lame has been open more than 18 months now.

> when someone provides a patch, it will be in a build.

Wouldn't this need to be done in the firmware? Can we get
the firmware source to create a patch against? :-)

greg

CatBus
2006-09-14, 13:35
I realize anyone can hear the gaps -- I certainly can hear them (although
they are VERY short, almost inaudible). But I'm also able to contain my
rage at them and still enjoy my music. If gapless MP3 were added I would
certainly use it. On the other hand, if gapless were important to me I
wouldn't hesitate to migrate to a format that supported it more uniformly,
rather than waiting for the feature to be added to my player.
You're not going to get SlimDevices to commit to this, or any other
unannounced feature improvement, so you just can't know how long it might
take. Life is too short to sit on the sidelines and complain.

By the way, thank you for correctly identifying this as a feature and not a
bug.

Ben

I'm also a stickler for bug/feature nomenclature correctness ;) MP3 is not a natively gapless format, so gapless MP3 support (via nonstandard LAME tags) can only be considered a feature. Problems with gapless FLAC and Vorbis playback would be correctly called bugs.

Nevertheless, it's a nice feature.

Also, I fully realize that gap-hating is subjective, although part of it may be musical preference. Many classical CDs separate one musical piece into multiple tracks (for movements, etc). Perhaps you would feel more rage if the gaps happened several times DURING a song, rather than between songs?

Ben Sandee
2006-09-14, 13:53
On 9/14/06, CatBus <CatBus.2e56gn1158266401 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
> Also, I fully realize that gap-hating is subjective, although part of
> it may be musical preference. Many classical CDs separate one musical
> piece into multiple tracks (for movements, etc). Perhaps you would
> feel more rage if the gaps happened several times DURING a song, rather
> than between songs?


It probably would -- it might even drive me to switch to FLAC. :-)

Ben

CatBus
2006-09-14, 14:25
On 9/14/06, CatBus <CatBus.2e56gn1158266401 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
> Also, I fully realize that gap-hating is subjective, although part of
> it may be musical preference. Many classical CDs separate one musical
> piece into multiple tracks (for movements, etc). Perhaps you would
> feel more rage if the gaps happened several times DURING a song, rather
> than between songs?


It probably would -- it might even drive me to switch to FLAC. :-)

Ben

Touché! Well, it certainly did drive me to Vorbis, and I have no complaints there. I guess I can't argue any further on someone else's behalf. My points were that:

1) Rational people (not me) can choose the MP3 format (and smart ones use LAME)
2) Rational people (including me) can see gapless playback as a must-have feature
3) There's no reason why a person would not be in groups 1 and 2 at the same time

Your solution for #3 is that they should transcode, and that solution does in fact work. But it's not pain-free (and neither is adding features to SqueezeBox firmware, I'll note).

In the open-source world, there would be an easy way to see which pain was greater: if the pain of adding a feature was less than the pain of transcoding, storing and maintaining multiple copies of your music collection, a user would step up and write the code. If writing the code was more painful, then the user would just transcode.

But as it stands, the user has no power to change the code, so he assumes the code change must be easier. The coder has no power to transcode the user's collection, so he assumes that must be easier. The grass is always greener, and all that ;)

Incidentally, can't SlimServer do MP3-to-PCM on-the-fly transcoding? Isn't that how Vorbis is handled in the current version? Wouldn't that make everything gapless and wonderful for everyone?

b6662966
2006-09-14, 21:35
reading this, also a problem when i considered buying slimdevice. today SONOS officially annouce full support for gapless LAME mp3 and OGG playback. so this problem is one slimdevice needs now to fixing.

cparker
2006-09-17, 05:01
reading this, also a problem when i considered buying slimdevice. today SONOS officially annouce full support for gapless LAME mp3 and OGG playback. so this problem is one slimdevice needs now to fixing.

Its a shame that SONOS are so expensive though :(

cparker
2006-09-17, 05:03
On 9/14/06, cparker <cparker.2e4wqn1158253801 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
>
> Because I bought them from mp3 commerical sites and they are LAME
> encoded, so I dont want to have to buy them again! :(


I understand -- but I think you are a rarity. How many people these days
who care about gapless audio are satisfied with a lossy codec?

Maybe you can convert the mp3 to flac preserving the gapless information.
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if foobar2000 would do this in a few
mouse-clicks. Have you considered this?

Ben


Do you know whether converting to flac from mp3 would keep the gapless information?

Thanks

Michaelwagner
2006-09-17, 06:52
It seems to me that, months ago, someone (might even have been me) looked into this and it's a can of worms.

There are several sources for gaps.

What people mean by gapless seems to vary too.

The gap could be on the original recording. Despite that, some people want to get rid of it.

The gap could have been encoded by the mp3 encoder as extra silence (some early encoders weren't careful in this area and added their own ideas about gaps).

Some gap can be caused by delays in the server as the next track starts. I know the server stops serving and pretty much drains the buffer at the end of each track and then starts again. If the network is at that moment having problems, the gap can be longer. This is especially true in wireless.

It's possible that the player adds gap of it's own. I don't remember if this question got answered or not.

Some gap is added by the player synchronization feature and can only be removed by another enhancement request, that is, the network clock synchronization feature, itself a can of worms.

I would be interested to know how this is solved in FLAC (if in fact it is solved).



In addition, there are several encoders of MP3s. Not all support gapless in the same way, and some not at all. Older versions of encoders that now support gapless didn't at some earlier time.

Some of the competitors who now claim to support gapless do it by cheating, that is, by merely truncating silence in a fixed way. Since the definition of silence is artificially imposed rather than a reproduction of the recording, the playback will still be in some way incorrect. I'm sure Slim doesn't want to cheat and get it wrong.

The fix needs both client (that is, SB) and server changes.

The server is open source but the player is not. That means that someone at Slim with access to the player source and time must define an architecture for this new feature before code for the server can be defined.

People with access to the client code have been busy making wireless work. Since that's been a hot topic the last 6 months, that's probably all the firmware resources Slim has tied up in that area.

(myself, I could do without wireless ... I think it's a toy and no substitute for real copper ... especially since it's been a distraction for the last 6 months .... but that's just me)

The player now sees none of the ID3 tags (according to Vidur), so there's no easy way to just pass the LAME gapless tags through to the player. Thus new architecture needs to be done between the player and the server ... something that needs to be done with some care.

There, I think that's a (somewhat) concise summary of what I remember of the issue. There's more, of course, but I didn't want to get into details.

radish
2006-09-17, 18:15
There are several sources for gaps.
Indeed.



The gap could be on the original recording. Despite that, some people want to get rid of it.

Forget it - silence detection is a pain in the butt and not worth the effort. I don't know anyone personally who wants that kind of gapless support - we're not talking about removing gaps, we're talking about _not_adding_ them.



The gap could have been encoded by the mp3 encoder as extra silence (some early encoders weren't careful in this area and added their own ideas about gaps).

Such as basically all mp3 encoders except lame, and things like wma encoders. Again, forget it. If the format doesn't support it (vorbis, flac, aac, wav, etc all do) or if there isn't a definitive simple workaround (lame mp3) then don't support it.



Some gap can be caused by delays in the server as the next track starts. I know the server stops serving and pretty much drains the buffer at the end of each track and then starts again. If the network is at that moment having problems, the gap can be longer. This is especially true in wireless.

Slimserver/squeezebox is perfectly capable of gapless playback with very high bitrate files (wav, flac, etc) and does so flawlessly for me on both wired and wireless. This is nothing to worry about. Again, we're not asking for anything which hasn't already been done for other formats.



It's possible that the player adds gap of it's own. I don't remember if this question got answered or not.

It doesn't.



Some gap is added by the player synchronization feature and can only be removed by another enhancement request, that is, the network clock synchronization feature, itself a can of worms.

Yes. Sync disables gapless for all formats. I'd like gapless & sync, but that's a whole other discussion. This thread is about support for lame mp3 gapless.



I would be interested to know how this is solved in FLAC (if in fact it is solved).

It is, and it's not (conceptually) hard. You just do a little prebuffering and don't stop the decoder. I'll re-iterate this point because it bears repeating - slimserver/squeezebox is already 100% gapless by design for all formats which are themselves gapless. Mp3 is _not_ a gapless format, and in the general case (looking only at the basic mp3 spec) will never be. But for lame, and only lame, a simple workaround for gapless exists. We're asking that it be used in slimserver/squeezebox as it is in _many_ other products including, as of recently, the iPod.



Some of the competitors who now claim to support gapless do it by cheating, that is, by merely truncating silence in a fixed way. Since the definition of silence is artificially imposed rather than a reproduction of the recording, the playback will still be in some way incorrect. I'm sure Slim doesn't want to cheat and get it wrong.

No-one wants silence removal. It sucks [as I already mentioned :) ]. Who are these competitors who claim to be gapless but only use silence removal? I'm unaware of any.



The fix needs both client (that is, SB) and server changes.

Why?



The player now sees none of the ID3 tags (according to Vidur), so there's no easy way to just pass the LAME gapless tags through to the player. Thus new architecture needs to be done between the player and the server ... something that needs to be done with some care.

IIRC the gapless tags are not ID3, they're some other part of the mp3 spec (I forget the details but I'm sure they're easily discoverable). However, they may still need to be propagated to the client, so you're right, that might need a little work. On the other hand, assuming the server merely strips the ID3 block and passes the actual mp3 structure un-messed-with, they may already be there. My (uneducated) guess is that they're probably already being sent.

Michaelwagner
2006-09-17, 18:54
The fix needs both client (that is, SB) and server changes.

Why?
I don't know why, but if you look at the enhancement request, this point is made very early on by Vidur, who originally filed the enhancement request and had done some of the firmware programming by that point.

I shall assume, until proven otherwise, that he knew what he was talking about.

By the way, from this article

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/27/technology/27askk.html?ei=5090&en=2f1f91593b451113&ex=1303790400&adxnnl=1&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1146143754-H3zYGnf30OoYrdBEl4vPqA

in the NY times, iTunes it seems don't support gapless playback, it supports gapless ripping of the CD in the first place (which is a different issue).


IIRC the gapless tags are not ID3, they're some other part of the mp3 spec
Again, going by what Vidur wrote at the time, and I assume he researched it, that's not how it works. From my lousy memory, the first and last block in the ID3 spec can contain made up silence (that is, silence inserted by the encoder that wasn't there on the CD). Lame adds some way of signaling how much of this can safely/should be ignored.

I don't believe this is the same as FLAC at all. I believe FLAC doesn't insert the silence in the first place. Lame and other MP3 encoders put it there and then lame leaves some clues around that you can ignore so much of the first block and so much of the last block.

Whether it's ID3 tags or LAME specific tags, the point is, it's out of band information which must be supplied to the player in some other way, which needs to be architected. The information is that, after unblocking the data stream, ignore the first so many samples. And the last so many.

At the moment, there is no way of doing this, and no other need for it.

Notice that you can't just not send part of the first block, because the blocks have internal sync and stuff, and you'd have to build a whole new first and last block and substitute them. And I think the blocks are fixed size, or fixed within a small range, so you might potentially be forced to rebuild the whole song.

Like I said, it's a can of worms.

radish
2006-09-17, 21:31
So I did some reading up on this, as it's clear there's a great deal of confusion. This is what I found:

As I thought - the gapless info is NOT in an ID3 tag. It's stored in the "XING VBR Header" which is a special header built into the start of the data field (i.e. - it's embedded right in the data stream). I would be _amazed_ if slimserver was somehow stripping this out, it's a lot of work and any competent decoder (like the one in the squeezebox firmware) will happily deal with it as is. So I really don't believe that any significant change to the server/client protocol will be required, and it's possible that no server change at all is required.

Description of the MP3 file format, including the location of the XING header is here : http://www.codeproject.com/audio/mpegaudioinfo.asp

Description of the contents of that header, including the LAME extensions, are here : http://gabriel.mp3-tech.org/mp3infotag.html

The whole problem arises from the fact that mp3 uses fixed length frames, and variable length audio files will therefore rarely be an exact number of frames long. This header fixes this by including both the pregap (i.e. any 0 bytes which may be wrongly present at the start of the first frame) and postgap (any 0 bytes at the end of the last frame). Skipping both will lead to gapless nirvana. Other formats (FLAC, Vorbis, etc) avoid this problem by using variable length frames so no padding is required.

There are a number of apps out there which read these headers properly - I know of Winamp, Foobar and iTunes in the Windows world (the NYT link in an earlier post is out of date) and several portable players including the Rio Karma and iPod (although it's not yet known if it actually reads the headers itself or has iTunes do it first).

oreillymj
2006-09-17, 22:01
By the way, from this article

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/27/te...0OoYrdBEl4vPqA

in the NY times, iTunes it seems don't support gapless playback, it supports gapless ripping of the CD in the first place (which is a different issue).


The article you mention is dated April 2006. I'm guessing that the gapless ripping mentioned here means that all the tracks selected are ripped into 1 track without the standard 2 second gap that CD players insert. That's all iTunes 6 supported.

iTunes7 supports gapless playback or tracks on CD's that orginally flowed into each other without any gap, like dance remix CD's

cliveb
2006-09-18, 01:43
There are ... several portable players [that support the LAME tags] including the Rio Karma and iPod (although it's not yet known if it actually reads the headers itself or has iTunes do it first).
There's been a lot of discussion of the new iPod gapless feature over at the Hydrogen Audio forums. All the evidence so far seems to indicate that:
1. You need to use iTunes to analyse the MP3 files. If they contain LAME tags, iTunes reads those during the scan, otherwise it uses some sort of silence-detection heuristic. This is probably the right way to do it, so that non-LAME-ripped MP3s still have a chance of being gapless.
2. The gapless metadata is then stored in the iTunes database (and thence transferred to the iPod database); the LAME tags are not used during playback.
3. Only 5G and later iPods (possibly 4G colour, too) have a firmware update that support this feature. What seems certain is that there is no firmware update for the 4G greyscale or the old iPod mini, which of course are the ones my wife and daughter have. Bummer.

badbob
2006-09-18, 04:47
Rockbox has gapless mp3 support, perhaps get their help? (open source as well) my H140 plays gapless flawlessy..

http://www.rockbox.org/

Michaelwagner
2006-09-18, 06:03
Both Radish and I updated the enhancement request today with pointers to information - Radish, the Xing header, and I a pointer to this thread so the thoughts here don't get lost or forgotten when someone starts to fix the problem.

stevieweevie
2006-09-18, 11:29
I happy with a fudge for gapless if that is what it takes. MP3 is a compromise - and there is no point implementing a perfect solution for a lossy format.

el payo
2006-09-18, 13:14
3. Only 5G and later iPds (possibly 4G colour, too) have a firmware update that support this feature. What seems certain is that there is no firmware update for the 4G greyscale or the old iPod mini, which of course are the ones my wife and daughter have. Bummer.

The 2G iPod Nano also supports gapless playback.

b6662966
2006-09-18, 14:14
Some of the competitors who now claim to support gapless do it by cheating, that is, by merely truncating silence in a fixed way. Since the definition of silence is artificially imposed rather than a reproduction of the recording, the playback will still be in some way incorrect. I'm sure Slim doesn't want to cheat and get it wrong.

As i was pointing out before, the Sonos new firmware supports completely LAME mp3 gapless playback (and OGG). They are doing it the CORRECT way by simply reading the gapless info found in the LAME tag. Possibly the problem is in the way slimdevices is designed, maybe a shortcoming in its hardware or the way it streams music. fact is that MANY people desire gapless, even winamp and itunes support the LAME tag now, you guys need to catch up.

Ben Sandee
2006-09-18, 14:31
On 9/18/06, b6662966 <b6662966.2ecmqz1158614101 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
>
> now, you guys need to catch up.


Or else...? Who are 'you guys'? Nobody from SlimDevices even participated
in the thread so I'm not sure where your directive is, well, directed.

Ben

autopilot
2006-09-18, 15:38
I have been reading up on the new iPod gapless support too, and it seems like it’s the real deal :) I might at last be tempted.

Gapless is massively important to me too. For that reason i use ogg and flac, but i do have a large number of old MP3s i would like play back properly.

No offence to our American friends, but i also think there are regional forces at play here too. Gapless music is way more important outside of the US than many Americans like to realize. DJ culture is much bigger in other countries. While rock and hip hop is the mainstay of US mainstream music culture, Dance (make that 'electronic', dance has different connotations in the US) is the mainstay in Europe and much of the rest of the world. But that does not mean many rock CD's, audio books, classical music does not require it.

With iTunes properly supporting it (and quite well it seems), as well as the Sono’s too soon, it looks like the world has finally woken up to its importance.

Lets not forget that the Squeezebox is still the best hardware device on the plannet for gapless playback (everyone else is playing catch up with Slim Devices), one of the main reasons i bought one, but MP3 is important too.

Michaelwagner
2006-09-18, 16:45
fact is that MANY people desire gapless, even winamp and itunes support the LAME tag now, you guys need to catch up.

"Us Guys" here in the forum are enthusiasts who help others out.

We don't write code, at least most of us don't, we certainly don't work for Slim Devices unless the tag says we do, and none of them have contributed to this thread.

If you want to influence Slim, vote for the enhancement request.

Or write to the principals.

Or both.

But telling "us" to hurry up with it, especially since it seems to require hacking the closed code we aren't able to access, seems like a waste of time and good will.

gregklanderman
2006-09-18, 18:02
>>>>> Michaelwagner <Michaelwagner.2ectxb1158623401 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> writes:

> b6662966;137269 Wrote:
>> fact is that MANY people desire gapless, even winamp and itunes support
>> the LAME tag now, you guys need to catch up.

> "Us Guys" here in the forum are enthusiasts who help others out.

I don't support b6662966's attitude, but it sure would be nice if
Dean or one of the other Slim folks who read these forums would chime
in and let us know if they have any plans to support LAME gapless.

> If you want to influence Slim, vote for the enhancement request.

Many of us have, it's a P2, assigned to Dean, has been targeted for as
early as the 6.0 release, has been open 18 months.. is it too much to
ask for a status update from Slim?


greg

dean
2006-09-18, 20:07
On Sep 18, 2006, at 6:02 PM, Greg Klanderman wrote:
>> b6662966;137269 Wrote:
>>> fact is that MANY people desire gapless, even winamp and itunes
>>> support
>>> the LAME tag now, you guys need to catch up.
>
>> "Us Guys" here in the forum are enthusiasts who help others out.
>
> I don't support b6662966's attitude, but it sure would be nice if
> Dean or one of the other Slim folks who read these forums would chime
> in and let us know if they have any plans to support LAME gapless.
Absolutely yes. It's been far too long.

We've got our hands full at the moment trying to get the backordered
Transporters out the door, but this is a high priority bug fix
afterwards.

-dean

gregklanderman
2006-09-18, 22:42
>>>>> dean blackketter <dean (AT) slimdevices (DOT) com> writes:

>> I don't support b6662966's attitude, but it sure would be nice if
>> Dean or one of the other Slim folks who read these forums would chime
>> in and let us know if they have any plans to support LAME gapless.
> Absolutely yes. It's been far too long.

> We've got our hands full at the moment trying to get the backordered
> Transporters out the door, but this is a high priority bug fix afterwards.

Thanks Dean, this is great news. Totally understand you've got your
hands full right now, best wishes on getting those Transporters shipped!

greg

gorman
2006-09-19, 10:18
On 9/18/06, b6662966 <b6662966.2ecmqz1158614101 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:
>
>
> now, you guys need to catch up.


Or else...? Who are 'you guys'? Nobody from SlimDevices even participated
in the thread so I'm not sure where your directive is, well, directed.

BenWell, Ben, to be honest "you guys" might legitimately be the company on whose forum he is writing.

Let's not get carried over by the whole open source thing. This is a product that Slim Devices is selling (a product I adore, incidentally). Users informing them of features they're lacking compared to competition are doing them a favour. Nothing else.

I see Dean has answered. Great! Best wishes for the new product, btw. Now we just need a "regular" SB that doesn't look like an alarm clock. ;)

ModelCitizen
2006-09-19, 13:09
Now we just need a "regular" SB that doesn't look like an alarm clock. ;)
You've seen the SB3 I guess???
MC

Michaelwagner
2006-09-19, 13:28
Well, Ben, to be honest "you guys" might legitimately be the company on whose forum he is writing.

Why? At the time he wrote it, no one from Slim had commented on the thread. So the only "guys" in the forum were us, and we have no affiliation with Slim.

(In any case, for those who are watching the enhancement request, there's been some activity in the last day, which is a good sign)

Nostromo
2006-09-22, 15:39
Am I dreaming or did they fix it 6.5? I checked with some AAC and ALAC tracks and I don't hear gaps.

andyg
2006-09-22, 15:41
Those would use the FLAC decoder. Gapless mp3 will be in 6.5.1.

Nostromo
2006-09-22, 16:12
Do you mean that the gaps are removed in the transcoding process?

radish
2006-09-22, 18:24
Do you mean that the gaps are removed in the transcoding process?

I don't know about AAC but ALAC is already gapless, so no gaps need to be removed. The ALAC is transcoded to FLAC (already gapless) and so everything's cool. This thread is specifically about mp3, which is not gapless by default.

Nostromo
2006-09-22, 18:41
AFAIK, AAC isn't gapless.

Sorry if my question was slightly off topic.

radish
2006-09-22, 19:59
Sorry if my question was slightly off topic.
I wasn't criticising, merely clarifying.

gorman
2006-09-24, 05:53
Why? At the time he wrote it, no one from Slim had commented on the thread. So the only "guys" in the forum were us, and we have no affiliation with Slim.Not to raise a fuss but... what did I write? If I write on a company's forum and I'm talking about their product, "you guys" might as well mean "you Slimdevices guys". The fact that you don't see it this way doesn't detract from it being true. :)

gorman
2006-09-24, 05:54
You've seen the SB3 I guess???
MCYes I have. And it looks like a nice alarm clock. I'm talking something with the form factor of the Transport, without all the extra super audiophile stuff (which in my opinion it's pretty useless unless you can afford an acoustically treated environment for your music listening activities).

Michaelwagner
2006-09-24, 07:02
Not to raise a fuss but... what did I write? If I write on a company's forum and I'm talking about their product, "you guys" might as well mean "you Slimdevices guys". The fact that you don't see it this way doesn't detract from it being true. :)

In English, you can't turn an absent third person into the second person (you). The Slim people weren't in this thread - we were.

I, and many others, took it to mean "you guys who have been talking to me here".

None the less, if that's not what your intention was, we can drop it now. If you didn't mean I should fix it (which is how I interpreted that posting), then I have no reason to react and no reason to continue this side-thread.

Back to the original thread, the feature enhancement has now been listed as intended to be fixed in 6.5.1. So perhaps this thread did move the Slim people to elevate the priority of it.

gorman
2006-09-25, 02:46
None the less, if that's not what your intention was, we can drop it now. If you didn't mean I should fix it (which is how I interpreted that posting), then I have no reason to react and no reason to continue this side-thread.No problem for me, for two reasons:
1) I'm Italian, I *think* I understand, speak and write English correctly enough, but obviously some subtleties might be beyond my command of your language.
2) I wasn't the one who wrote that thing. I was just trying to justifying the guy! ;)

Now let's cross fingers for 6.5.1 :D

ModelCitizen
2006-09-25, 12:48
On 9/14/06, CatBus <CatBus.2e51db1158259801 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>
wrote:Transcoding at the server is a great workaround for gapless playback, and I'm very grateful we have it. But true client-side gapless MP3 playback support would be a very good feature--and not just a feature only a few rare cases would take advantage of.
I realize anyone can hear the gaps -- I certainly can hear them (although they are VERY short, almost inaudible). But I'm also able to contain my rage at them and still enjoy my music. If gapless MP3 were added I would certainly use it. On the other hand, if gapless were important to me I wouldn't hesitate to migrate to a format that supported it more uniformly,
rather than waiting for the feature to be added to my player.
Ben

The gaps are not that short (are we talking microseconds or cloth ears?) and they are very annoying. Many other players support this and SlimServer should too. Unfortunately migrating away from SlimServer is not that easy as nothing else quite does the trick... and perhaps this is why people are so eager to get their particular problems sorted.
MC

Michaelwagner
2006-09-25, 12:57
MC: I think you missed the point. When he said

if gapless were important to me I wouldn't hesitate to migrate to a format that supported it more uniformly
he didn't mean migrate away from slimserver, he meant migrate away from mp3.

At least that's how I understood his comments.

And again, folks, it's rapidly becoming moot. It's slated for the next minor release.

buddachile
2006-10-03, 08:21
Good news on bug 1026. Comment #15 From Richard Titmuss 2006-10-03 07:50:

> This bug is fixed in firmware sb65/tr19.
> It is currently undergoing internal testing.
> You will be notified again when it is made
> part of a nightly release.

flattop100
2006-10-03, 09:34
Wow, I'm glad I missed most of this thread. You folks can be pretty snarky.

SuperQ
2006-10-21, 09:17
I just noticed Firmware 67 in 6.5.1:

* Firmware 67 for Squeezebox2/3 and Firmware 22 for Transporter
- Gapless MP3 playback for files encoded with LAME. Please do a complete wipe and rescan of your library to enable this.
- Bug fixes.

ROCK.. now if only I had some gapless tracks to test with, I guess I will have to test convert some FLAC files.

shabbs
2006-10-21, 09:44
I just gave it a test on my SB3 with some Richie Hawtin tracks I had ripped a while ago using LAME v3.90.3. Very nice. Gotta love that gapless.

Great stuff SD!

autopilot
2006-10-21, 10:24
I just gave it a test on my SB3 with some Richie Hawtin tracks I had ripped a while ago using LAME v3.90.3. Very nice. Gotta love that gapless.

Great stuff SD!

Richie Hawtin eh, quality techno. Saw him play out a couple of years ago, awesome set :)

shabbs
2006-10-21, 10:29
Richie Hawtin eh, quality techno. Saw him play out a couple of years ago, awesome set :)
Not too shabby for a Canuck, eh?

Steven Moore
2006-11-22, 06:47
I just noticed Firmware 67 in 6.5.1:

* Firmware 67 for Squeezebox2/3 and Firmware 22 for Transporter
- Gapless MP3 playback for files encoded with LAME. Please do a complete wipe and rescan of your library to enable this.
- Bug fixes.

ROCK.. now if only I had some gapless tracks to test with, I guess I will have to test convert some FLAC files.

No update for sb1's?

shabbs
2006-11-22, 06:53
No update for sb1's?
There has not been an update for those in a long long time. Firmware 40 is the end of the line for those that have the SB1s I believe.

Michaelwagner
2006-11-22, 07:33
The SB1s have a totally different hardware architecture at the lowest level, the MP3 decoder is hardware, not software, so likely no such fix is possible on the older hardware. That excludes sliMP3s too.