dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

[PeterP]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

I'm finding that with latest R16 betas (b11 & b12) when ripping CDs, occasionally one or more tracks will successfully rip, but only contain two accurate rip and replay gain tags. Meta looks OK in the dBpoweramp display for all tracks before ripping. After ripping, the title of all tracks are correct, but sometimes most meta data, including track title, artist, album art are not be placed in the final ripped track. R15.8 WORKS CORRECTLY.

Examples:
1) Screenshot of ripped CD from Finder. Note the problem with tracks 1, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 12 (issue is same as described above).
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1175[/ATTACH]

2) As an example of the failure, Screenshot of dBpoweramp tag editor for track 1 showing only 4 tags are populated.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1173[/ATTACH]

3) Screenshot of dBpoweramp tag editor for track 2 as an example showing all data is correctly being populated in most other tracks.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1174[/ATTACH]


If it's of help, I'm ripping to Apple Lossless using "Secure", and have the "When Ripping" option set to "Rip to '._' files, rename...". DSP Effects are with ReplayGain, "Delete Destination File on Error", "ID Tag Processing" (deleting some meta data values like [Piano], and changing some genres; switching Artists around for non-multi-artist aware apps, dropping track & disc count). FWIW, I have tried ripping the same CD without any DSP Effects, with the same result in R16b12. The whole CD with same DSP Effects rips correctly with R15.8.

Thanks for the bug report, the problem is being investigated.

In meanwhile, does it make any difference if you attempt ripping to another file format, such as FLAC or MP3?

[PeterP]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

R16b10 appears to have a problem perhaps with IFCOMP and/or IFMULTI in CD Ripper Naming. Following naming works fine with R15.8, causing track names of a multi-disc set to be coded as e.g. 1-02... Whereas R16b10 names the same track 02... (missing the disc number on all tracks). In any case, R16 beta is acting differently with the same source compared to R15 when it comes to this naming logic.

[IFCOMP]Compilations/[][IF!COMP][IFVALUE]album artist,[album artist],Unknown Artist[][]/[album]/[IFMULTI][disc]-[][track] [title]

Thanks for the bug report and sorry about slow reply.

I used your exact string and could not see anything out of ordinary with multi disc albums; disc number gets included as intended. What exact album are you seeing these symptoms with?

A semi-related bug with track numbers not being present in "filename" column of ripper has been addressed, but that's not what is troubling you.

[Spoon]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

In January sometime.

[febLey]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

Any release date for the R16 in sight? I want to purchase dbPoweramp, but I don't want to throw money at the R15 if the R16 released soon.

[Spoon]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

320kbps AAC is your best option.

[glevethan]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

Spoon

Thanks for the reply. Been a long time since we have spoken (back in the Klimax DS1 days!)

I want to store my collection on my iPhone 7+ and use a pair of wireless bluetooth headphones (which use AAC codec as APTx not supported on iPhone). Any advice/preference on MP3 vs. AAC? I thought AAC due to the wireless headphones using AAC via Bluetooth? Bit rate - 320 should suffice?

Best
Gregg

[Spoon]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

It uses both, at 320 kbps there will be very little difference between the codecs.

[glevethan]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

About to start a project transcoding my FLAC files. I am going to use 320 AAC because they will be stored on my iPhone 7+. The release notes for b12 state:

"Added support for Apple AAC encoder"

My limited knowledge of things tells me that the current official release of dBpoweramp does not use the Apple AAC encoder but rather a different one.

Will this beta release use the Apple encoder for simply ripping - or also for transcoding as I will be doing in this project of FLAC to AAC?

Is this Apple encoder considered to be "better" than the one currently provided in the official release?

[BertL]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

I'm finding that with latest R16 betas (b11 & b12) when ripping CDs, occasionally one or more tracks will successfully rip, but only contain two accurate rip and replay gain tags. Meta looks OK in the dBpoweramp display for all tracks before ripping. After ripping, the title of all tracks are correct, but sometimes most meta data, including track title, artist, album art are not be placed in the final ripped track. R15.8 WORKS CORRECTLY.

Examples:
1) Screenshot of ripped CD from Finder. Note the problem with tracks 1, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 12 (issue is same as described above).


2) As an example of the failure, Screenshot of dBpoweramp tag editor for track 1 showing only 4 tags are populated.


3) Screenshot of dBpoweramp tag editor for track 2 as an example showing all data is correctly being populated in most other tracks.



If it's of help, I'm ripping to Apple Lossless using "Secure", and have the "When Ripping" option set to "Rip to '._' files, rename...". DSP Effects are with ReplayGain, "Delete Destination File on Error", "ID Tag Processing" (deleting some meta data values like [Piano], and changing some genres; switching Artists around for non-multi-artist aware apps, dropping track & disc count). FWIW, I have tried ripping the same CD without any DSP Effects, with the same result in R16b12. The whole CD with same DSP Effects rips correctly with R15.8.

[BertL]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

R16b10 appears to have a problem perhaps with IFCOMP and/or IFMULTI in CD Ripper Naming. Following naming works fine with R15.8, causing track names of a multi-disc set to be coded as e.g. 1-02... Whereas R16b10 names the same track 02... (missing the disc number on all tracks). In any case, R16 beta is acting differently with the same source compared to R15 when it comes to this naming logic.

[IFCOMP]Compilations/[][IF!COMP][IFVALUE]album artist,[album artist],Unknown Artist[][]/[album]/[IFMULTI][disc]-[][track] [title]

...and same with R16b12

[BertL]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

R16b10 appears to have a problem perhaps with IFCOMP and/or IFMULTI in CD Ripper Naming. Following naming works fine with R15.8, causing track names of a multi-disc set to be coded as e.g. 1-02... Whereas R16b10 names the same track 02... (missing the disc number on all tracks). In any case, R16 beta is acting differently with the same source compared to R15 when it comes to this naming logic.

[IFCOMP]Compilations/[][IF!COMP][IFVALUE]album artist,[album artist],Unknown Artist[][]/[album]/[IFMULTI][disc]-[][track] [title]

Same issue with R16b11. (BTW, thanks for fixing the multiple-artist display issue in b11!)

[BertL]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

R16b10 appears to have a problem perhaps with IFCOMP and/or IFMULTI in CD Ripper Naming. Following naming works fine with R15.8, causing track names of a multi-disc set to be coded as e.g. 1-02... Whereas R16b10 names the same track 02... (missing the disc number on all tracks). In any case, R16 beta is acting differently with the same source compared to R15 when it comes to this naming logic.

[IFCOMP]Compilations/[][IF!COMP][IFVALUE]album artist,[album artist],Unknown Artist[][]/[album]/[IFMULTI][disc]-[][track] [title]

[danno321s]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

You mean the batch converter tree shows them?

Yes, consecutively.

[PeterP]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

You mean the batch converter tree shows them?

[danno321s]

Re: dBpoweramp R16 for Mac OS X beta Discussions

It looks like BC R10 is finding stale network share labels: Qmultimedia, Qmultimedia1, and Qmultimedia2 where only the last label points to valid network share. (I could not upload a screenshot for some reason.)