PDA

View Full Version : Finally a proper << and >> search with SB Classic.



Alco
2009-08-10, 08:28
Hi guys,

By coincidence I discovered something today that put a smile on my face.

Let me explain:
I'm a satisfied SB3 user since early 2008. The only feature I kinda missed on the SB3/Classic, compared to my CD-player (Naim CD5i) is the possibillity to search fast-forward/back (<< >>) within a track.

Now, last week I had to buy a new PC. (my >7 year old PC was getting very slow and was ready for retirement/backup use)
On the old computer I had Slimserver installed to run the SB3. On the new one I installed Squeezecenter.

Today I suddenly noticed that I can now easily search within a track, holding the |< or >| button on the remote, for a few seconds.
The elapsed and remaining time of the track is then shown in large characters on the display. :)

With the old Slimserver installed searching withing a track was quite a tricky pain in the a.. ehh,...bottom. :(

So, to make a long story short(er)...I'm an even more happy SB Classic user now! :)

regards,
Alco

Alco
2009-08-10, 08:31
Whoops....I'm sorry... :(
Just noticed that I placed this topic in the wrong place. (system Photos instead of general)

Can the moderator place it in the right section ?

thanx,
Alco

bhaagensen
2009-08-10, 08:56
Yes that feature has been around almost since Squeezecenter was introduced, more than a year i believe. Can you believe that there were quite some discussion about this. Some prefered the old way. Beats me.

Bjørn

Philip Meyer
2009-08-10, 09:24
Yes that feature has been around almost since Squeezecenter was introduced, more than a year i believe. Can you believe that there were quite some discussion about this. Some prefered the old way. Beats me.

Bjørn

I am one that prefered the old way. Let me explain the reasoning:

The new "Search" has no audio feedback. It's no longer a fast-forward/rewind function, it's a "set song position" function.

I (used to) use Fast-forward for searching for the next track in long podcasts. i.e. skip through a track until I hear that the song has finished, then stop the fast-forward by pressing play, and it started playback from just before that point. With no audio feedback, it's a total guess.

The new functionality requires that I hold my finger on a button to set the playback position. Skipping a long way through the track is harder, can't control the speed that it skips through. Also causes more wear on the IR remote button/battery, and susceptible to IR line of sight issues.

The accuracy isn't exact - it varies I believe based on song length, and how long the button is held down. e.g. I have podcasts over 6 hours!

You have to take your finger off to start playback from that location (to hear audio), and then press again to start fast-forwarding, ramping speed up automatically the longer it is held, so setting a specific position is not easy.

I never need to fast-forward through short tracks; only long things with substantially different content over the duration of that item.

There was a plugin that provided the "set song position" functionality for classic players, so I had the best of both worlds.

Having said all that, the new functionality works well. I mainly just miss the audio feedback. It's like fast-forwarding an old VCR without looking at the picture, trying to find the end of an advert break.

bhaagensen
2009-08-10, 09:51
I (used to) use Fast-forward for searching for the next track in long podcasts. i.e. skip through a track until I hear that the song has finished, then stop the fast-forward by pressing play, and it started playback from just before that point. With no audio feedback, it's a total guess.


But did it actually work reliably for you? It was always rather flaky for me, especially when going to 4x, or even worse 8x which was almost useless. It seemed many had the similar problems. Also I couldn't really recognise the sound when it was fast forwarding. AFAIK it wasn't playing the samples quicker (as a conventional CDP), but rather just skipping some.

Philip Meyer
2009-08-12, 04:23
But did it actually work reliably for you? It was always rather flaky for me, especially when going to 4x, or even worse 8x which was almost useless. It seemed many had the similar problems. Also I couldn't really recognise the sound when it was fast forwarding. AFAIK it wasn't playing the samples quicker (as a conventional CDP), but rather just skipping some.

Yes, it worked reliably for me. I'd often go up to 64x to skip quickly through a long piece of music to find the next gap.

It didn't work well if you fast-forward too far, i.e. through track boundaries, but neither does the new mechanism.

I know some people seemed to have reliability issues, perhaps relating to mis-use/mis-understanding of the feature. After all, there's no documentation. I personally found it quite intuitive, as it was quite similar to Sky+ fast-forward, and VCRs.

The audio effect was to play a snipit from the current scan position periodically. So no matter how fast you are scanning, it played at the same speed. It was good enough to detect where the sound had changed significantly, so I knew when to stop fast-forwarding (by pressing play).

There's no reason why it couldn't have been incorporated into the new mechanism.

eg. having got the progress bar up to adjust playback position, press and hold << or >> to fast-forward through the track with audio. Maybe allow the speed of fast-forward/rewind to be adjusted to fine-tune the position. eg. the longer you hold the button down, the quicker it would scan through the track.

paulduggan
2009-08-12, 09:11
Are there any plugins that do it the 'old' way (with audio)?

andyg
2009-08-12, 09:21
Audio scrubbing was a poorly implemented idea and I'm glad it's long gone. Anyone who wants to try and implement audio-based scrubbing will soon realize why it was removed: it's an absolute nightmare to get right for all file formats, possibly with transcoding involved, and the stream possibly from a remote source. Even the simple seeking we have now is complicated to get right.

Philip Meyer
2009-08-15, 05:31
>Audio scrubbing was a poorly implemented idea and I'm glad it's long
>gone. Anyone who wants to try and implement audio-based scrubbing will
>soon realize why it was removed: it's an absolute nightmare to get right
>for all file formats, possibly with transcoding involved, and the stream
>possibly from a remote source. Even the simple seeking we have now is
>complicated to get right.
Worked for me, for the file formats I used.

If it is hard for some formats, then it could have been disabled for those formats. I still see it as removal of functionality that previously worked fine, and for me made the whole fast-foward functionality mainly useless.

It's why I now use an iPod Nano connected to line-in on a Boom box.

Other functionality, such as syncing music playback over multiple players was/is quite complicated to get right too, but that functionality wasn't dropped.