|
Ian @ un4seen
Administrator
Posts: 15363
|
 |
« Reply #100 on: 11 Apr '07 - 14:31 » |
 Quote
|
That's strange, I can't reproduce that here. What Windows version are you using? Windows 98 SE. Ah, I see what's happened. I updated to the latest Windows SDKs recently, and unless told otherwise, that'll use the latest function/structure definitions. It's now been told  www.un4seen.com/stuff/xmp-midi.dllRunning Windows 98 SE, the Task Manager doesn't report CPU usage, I'll have to run the "resource meter" and get back to you on that one. You can use Wintop on Win98, available here... http://www.microsoft.com/windows95/downloads/contents/WUToys/W95KernelToy/Default.aspBtw, how slow is sloooooooow? Extremely choppy... No, I meant how slow is the system, eg. CPU? That is indeed true... The 'official' Japanese supporting fonts which come with the OS are 'MS Gothic', 'MS Mincho', 'MS PGothic', 'MS PMincho' and 'MS UI Gothic' (sometimes they are listed with an @ like '@MS PGothic'). There is an optional huge font named 'Arial Unicode MS' available (shipped with some MS products and sold online, filename ARIALUNI.TTF) - but being named different it doesn't help being available in XMPlay. The Gothic and Mincho fonts are only installed in Win2k when Japanese is enabled in the locale settings. Japanese/etc characters show up fine on WinXP, even without the ARIALUNI.TTF font. I guess WinXP is mapping the missing characters to another font, while Win2k unfortunately isn't. Maybe there's some way to make it do so? I don't know which font is being used by the iXMPlay - but I'm guessing its MS PGothic whose ASCII chars looks a lot like Arial.
So for me I'd select 'MS PGothic' as a font for the skin if I had the option - or I would edit the skin myself if they werent in these kinda encrypted binary formats. The source files for a lot of the skins are available at the support site, and can be "installed" by putting them in a sub-directory of XMPlay. You can change the fonts that are used in the skinconfig.txt file. iXMPlay uses the "Lucida Sans Unicode" font, so I guess you could change them to that. I have replaced the .exe file with the "stuff" ;exe fioe, and removed the xmp-ra.dll, but it keeos crashing while scanning.
her eit s the error log Unfortunately, that just gives version info. To get some more useful info, please upload your drwtsn32.log file, which you should find here... C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Microsoft\Dr Watson\ |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
kragg
Posts: 45
|
|
« Reply #101 on: 11 Apr '07 - 14:42 » |
Quote
|
the dr watson file is big (more than 1mega).
Should i send everything ? It might content non-xmplay-related infos.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ian @ un4seen
Administrator
Posts: 15363
|
|
« Reply #102 on: 11 Apr '07 - 17:23 » |
Quote
|
If you know where to chop it, you could do so. But otherwise it'd probably be better to just upload the whole thing. You can upload it here... ftp.un4seen.com/incoming/ |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
kragg
Posts: 45
|
|
« Reply #103 on: 11 Apr '07 - 18:20 » |
Quote
|
ok. done.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Pike84
Posts: 1398
|
|
« Reply #104 on: 11 Apr '07 - 21:23 » |
Quote
|
Ok, now XMPlay doesn't crash, but are there any chances of getting the visualization to actually work? It still closes after a second or so...
Are you talking about The Rabbit Hole visual? It works fine to me, both standalone and in Rappa. Yes, I meant The Rabbit Hole. I'm currently using 1152 x 864 screen resolution without the restrict vis rendering option. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Rich Nagel
Posts: 292
|
|
« Reply #105 on: 12 Apr '07 - 06:59 » |
Quote
|
Ah, I see what's happened. I updated to the latest Windows SDKs recently, and unless told otherwise, that'll use the latest function/structure definitions. It's now been told www.un4seen.com/stuff/xmp-midi.dllMany thanks, I'll give it a try ASAP -:) Thanks for the heads-up, (per above) I'll give it a try ASAP -:) (edit) Uh... that page says "System Requirements: Microsoft Windows 95. NOTE: This download is not intended for use on computers running Microsoft® Windows® 98." (?). Nevertheless, the Windows 98 "Resource Meter" will (should) be able to report the CPU usage of any given program or process, correct? No, I meant how slow is the system, eg. CPU? Hehe, (now) understood <LOL>! One is an AMD500 and the other is a P233MMX (in other words, slow... <G>). |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 12 Apr '07 - 07:04 by Rich Nagel »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Cris
Posts: 230
|
|
« Reply #106 on: 12 Apr '07 - 11:22 » |
Quote
|
Yes, I meant The Rabbit Hole. I'm currently using 1152 x 864 screen resolution without the restrict vis rendering option.
About the test I was talking a few posts before... I finished a part of it, and it seems that the Rabbit Hole visual is pretty sensible about what resolution you use. On the other hand, Rabbit Hole TEST 1.1 had no problems whatsoever...yet. So you could try using Rabbit Hole TEST 1.1 instead of Rabbit Hole.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ian @ un4seen
Administrator
Posts: 15363
|
|
« Reply #107 on: 12 Apr '07 - 19:11 » |
Quote
|
Thanks for the heads-up, (per above) I'll give it a try ASAP -:) (edit) Uh... that page says "System Requirements: Microsoft Windows 95. NOTE: This download is not intended for use on computers running Microsoft® Windows® 98." You can ignore that. Some of the other stuff included might not work on Win98, but WinTop does. Hehe, (now) understood <LOL>! One is an AMD500 and the other is a P233MMX (in other words, slow... <G>). Blimey! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Rich Nagel
Posts: 292
|
 |
« Reply #108 on: 13 Apr '07 - 05:19 » |
Quote
|
You can ignore that. Some of the other stuff included might not work on Win98, but WinTop does. A-OK, thanks for the info -:) Blimey! Hehe, I didn't even mention my still-operational 486DX-100 <LOL>, as it only has Windows 3.11 installed on it <G> -:) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
PVTele
Posts: 48
|
|
« Reply #109 on: 13 Apr '07 - 08:53 » |
Quote
|
Hehe, I didn't even mention my still-operational 486DX-100 <LOL>, as it only has Windows 3.11 installed on it <G> -:)
Arrgh! Win 3.1 is one of those bad memories I try to keep repressed  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ripieces
Posts: 20
|
|
« Reply #110 on: 13 Apr '07 - 23:29 » |
Quote
|
thank you for 3.4 <3 fullscreenvis and the new skins (except the new default one)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
yagood
Posts: 215
|
|
« Reply #111 on: 14 Apr '07 - 10:49 » |
Quote
|
Probably a bug - when I use "Add directory" in the Playlist window and select certain directory, files from that directory are being added two times to the playlist, so it looks like this (instead of display names I paste paths below):
001 E:\Mp3\!soundtrack\Batman Begins [2005-06-14]\01. Vespertilio.flac
002 ...
.
.
.
012 ... (last file from this directory) ...
013 E:\Mp3\!soundtrack\Batman Begins [2005-06-14]\01 Vespertilio.flac
.
. (files from that directory, but without "." after track number in the path - marked as dead)
.
For some reason it only happens in this particular directory, I can't reproduce it with other directories so far. It worked fine with 3.3, not sure about 3.4 betas.
OK, now I know more about this problem - there are playlists in some directories that contain references to (now) dead tracks - when I tag my files, I also use rename option in the tagger and sometimes forget to delete old playlist file from the directory and files from that playlist become "dead" for XMPlay when I use "Add Directory" option. But still, I have "Ignore playlists & shortcuts" option enabled and these playlists are added to XMPlay anyway, this didn't happen in previous versions. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Jace
Posts: 775
|
|
« Reply #112 on: 14 Apr '07 - 15:58 » |
Quote
|
Yeah, I had that happening too, when the box was checked. Tried to remove plugins in case one of them is grabbing them along?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ian @ un4seen
Administrator
Posts: 15363
|
|
« Reply #113 on: 14 Apr '07 - 17:07 » |
Quote
|
Ah yes, the "ignore playlists" option wasn't working properly (only had effect in sub-directories). It should be sorted now... www.un4seen.com/stuff/xmplay.exeBtw, regarding the earlier question of playlists in monitored directories, they will now be added to the library if the "Don't preprocess playlists" option is enabled. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Brian
Posts: 733
|
|
« Reply #114 on: 14 Apr '07 - 19:15 » |
Quote
|
Btw, regarding the earlier question of playlists in monitored directories, they will now be added to the library if the "Don't preprocess playlists" option is enabled. Great stuff, and it works a treat - thanks very much indeed. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Pike84
Posts: 1398
|
|
« Reply #115 on: 14 Apr '07 - 21:25 » |
Quote
|
Yes, I meant The Rabbit Hole. I'm currently using 1152 x 864 screen resolution without the restrict vis rendering option.
About the test I was talking a few posts before... I finished a part of it, and it seems that the Rabbit Hole visual is pretty sensible about what resolution you use. On the other hand, Rabbit Hole TEST 1.1 had no problems whatsoever...yet. So you could try using Rabbit Hole TEST 1.1 instead of Rabbit Hole. Thanks! The Rabbit Hole 1.1 seems to work fine . |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
legumo
Posts: 7
|
|
« Reply #116 on: 15 Apr '07 - 07:20 » |
Quote
|
i've never used Plugins or anything, always downloaded XMPLAY, all i ever setup in it is setting 16bit to 24bit playback, nothing else, the equalizer is always turned off i prefer music without it.
im completely unimpressed with XMPLAY 3.4 it sounds totally flat compared to 3.3, there's a lack of articulation be it from the bass or general sound in the mp3 played.
playing with 3.3 again everything sound perfect.
3.3 and 3.4 each are in different directories so it cant be an old option messing it up.
deleted the xmplay 3.4 and hoping you take a look at the audio playback cause something is definetely not right.
i got an AUDIGY 2 with latest drivers.
even Winamp and WMP sound better than 3.4
im kinda of an audiophile and can pick even the minimum change in my music as its played,
i did notice in 3.4 some additional audio in the song U2 - With Or Without you which i never heard
before with 3.3, but the music is all drowned and lacking. that song gives me emotions every time
i heard it....and now i feel nothing.
playing it with 3.3 or winamp and it sounds good again and well done.
im disappointed.
hope this get fixed.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Knurek
Posts: 505
|
|
« Reply #117 on: 15 Apr '07 - 10:51 » |
Quote
|
i got an AUDIGY 2 with latest drivers.
im kinda of an audiophile and can pick even the minimum change in my music as its played,
Objection! The witness is providing contradicting statements! |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 15 Apr '07 - 10:53 by Knurek »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Auren
Posts: 144
|
|
« Reply #118 on: 15 Apr '07 - 11:07 » |
Quote
|
Ian, can you add a feature to omit the extension from the file that is being encoded (both in the dialogue window when it is prompted to name the encoded file and when it is encoded automatically using "Auto-filename" or "Source" options)?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dotpitch
Posts: 2501
|
|
« Reply #119 on: 15 Apr '07 - 12:13 » |
Quote
|
im completely unimpressed with XMPLAY 3.4 it sounds totally flat compared to 3.3, there's a lack of articulation be it from the bass or general sound in the mp3 played. ...
im kinda of an audiophile and can pick even the minimum change in my music as its played, i did notice in 3.4 some additional audio in the song U2 - With Or Without you which i never heard before with 3.3. ... playing it with 3.3 or winamp and it sounds good again and well done.
im disappointed. hope this get fixed.
So, generally, you're claiming somewhere in the process from MP3 to output something tiny changed. Assuming you have exactly the same settings in both XMPlay versions (sample rate, dither, noise shaping etc.) and no DSP (reverb, equalizer etc.), would you be willing to help Ian find out what changed? For example, record the song playing in 3.3 and in 3.4, and compare the files with a wave editor. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
