This forum has been archived. All content is frozen. Please use KDE Discuss instead.

Why I don't use Amarok

Tags: None
(comma "," separated)
Corwin
Registered Member
Posts
5
Karma
0

Why I don't use Amarok

Sun Sep 30, 2007 2:10 am
1. I need a player to be able to access songs within a single flac file w/embedded cuesheet, the flac file should just look like a directory containing the albums songs. If I were to play the entire album flac each song needs to be reported to last.fm as it's played.

2. Stability. I'm running Debian Unstable and to be fair right now xmms won't even come up (this is unusual) but probably 70% of the time Amarok will not go past the splash screen. My opinion is the KDE4 version will probably be a lot better in this regard.

From what I've gathered the only real solution for me is the Squeezebox, although I'm hoping Amarok is not that far behind.
Hydrogen
Registered Member
Posts
95
Karma
0

Re: Why I don't use Amarok

Sun Sep 30, 2007 2:27 am
Okay then,

Thanks for stopping in just to post this, continue on your way!
Corwin
Registered Member
Posts
5
Karma
0

Re: Why I don't use Amarok

Sun Sep 30, 2007 2:45 am
Thanks for the answer Dan. I guess I was wrong in hoping these were possibly things that could be incorporated/fixed in an upcoming version of Amarok. I will follow your advice and move on.
User avatar
dangle_wtf
Moderator
Posts
1252
Karma
0

Re: Why I don't use Amarok

Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:20 am
I don't use shavers on my legs for the same reason. thanks for posting.

edit: nearly forgot... Just had to take this out of context :P "2. Stability. I'm running Debian Unstable..." Thanks for the giggle.

Last edited by dangle_wtf on Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:22 am, edited 1 time in total.


"There are two theories to arguing with women. Neither one works."
.
If men could get pregnant, we'd learn the true meaning of "screaming nancyboy wuss"
Corwin
Registered Member
Posts
5
Karma
0

Re: Why I don't use Amarok

Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:50 am
dangle_wtf wrote:edit: nearly forgot... Just had to take this out of context :P "2. Stability. I'm running Debian Unstable..." Thanks for the giggle.


No Problem. Glad I could amuse you. Guess it's only fair that we trade giggles. I saw you were on maternity leave and instantly the movie Idiocracy popped in my mind.
User avatar
dangle_wtf
Moderator
Posts
1252
Karma
0

Re: Why I don't use Amarok

Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:12 pm
Be honest, it was the president's kids you thought of, right?


"There are two theories to arguing with women. Neither one works."
.
If men could get pregnant, we'd learn the true meaning of "screaming nancyboy wuss"
Thundercloud
Registered Member
Posts
7
Karma
0

Re: Why I don't use Amarok

Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:38 pm
I honestly don't know what you're complaining about stability wise, i'm running Debian Unstable on two machines now and amarok works perfectly on both of them.

The FLAC thing I agree with yeah, perhaps that will be incorporated in time.
manger_un_chien
Registered Member
Posts
7
Karma
0

Re: Why I don't use Amarok

Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:14 pm
This FLAC thing; is that the same as not being able to fast forward them because I'm getting really annoyed with having to listen to a whole song when the only good bit is at the end and when I try and dray the progress bar forwards the sound cuts out (but the analyser continues as if it is still playing) then a few seconds later it comes back on as if nothing had happened.

I checked to see if VLC player could fast forward FLACs and it could so Amarok - catch up please!

(This is however my only complaint and Amarok is still obviously the best music player (and probably program in general) that there ever was, is and will be)  :biggrin:
User avatar
Enric Likes Funk ;)
Registered Member
Posts
51
Karma
0

Re: Why I don't use Amarok

Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:28 pm
The FLAC thingy may take time to implement, i don't know. If you like the other features of amarok, you could temporarily split the one-file albums. I don't like the FLACs with cuesheet because it's very hard to listen just one song at a time (say, with a command-line client or if you want to transfer it to your portable media device) but Amarok is opensource and you can help. Caring about stability? don't use Debian Unstable. I have the latest packages of Arch Linux and the latest checkout i made of Amarok-SVN, and the player was fired up like three weeks ago, when i had to reboot the computer to apply a kernel update. Besides this, i dont have an unstable system. Thanks for sharing your thoughts by the way.


Rokymotion Member. Join the Rokymotion, the Amarok Insane Underground Team.
User avatar
markey
KDE Developer
Posts
2286
Karma
3
OS

Re: Why I don't use Amarok

Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:52 am
To fix seeking in FLAC files, use "metaflac --add-seekpoint=10s" on each file. You can find more information here:

http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=129405


--
Mark Kretschmann - Amarok Developer
Corwin
Registered Member
Posts
5
Karma
0

Re: Why I don't use Amarok

Sun Oct 14, 2007 7:53 pm
Thanks to everyone for the responses. Amarok is running again on my machine. Amarok and X are the only "mainstream", out of beta, non-Java programs I can remember ever had serious "stability" problems with. Debian Unstable is a lot like calling the 350lb guy tiny. I've been running Linux for my desktop about 9 years now and Debian for 5; I'm quite content. Debian Unstable's Amarok is certainly more stable than a random SVN checkout.

I have not directly run into the issue with not being able to fast forward flac's, but it explains the issue with the song name change being several seconds off. With XMMS/mp3cue on the same flac file the song change is dead on. Anyway I'll keep that info in mind, thanks.

Unless someone wants to buy me an additional TB of storage for my ZFS server, I'm not about to duplicate my flac files. I'm certainly not going to replace my existing one file CD images. For someone with a handful of flac image files that could be a great option however.


Bookmarks



Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], blue_bullet, Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]