Playing 24-bit/192kHz Flac Causes Crash ...
 

... but I have no problem playing 24-bit/96kHz flacs.

anyone, any clues?

Win7 Home Prem. w/SP1
Winamp Ver. 5.601

-thnx

thnx, 5.61 works.

However, when I re-install the dsp plugin 'Enhancer' (the most awesome dsp plugin EVER) it crashes :

Problem signature:
Problem Event Name: APPCRASH
Application Name: winamp.exe
Application Version: 5.6.1.3133
Application Timestamp: 4d88ec8b
Fault Module Name: dsp_enh.dll
Fault Module Version: 0.1.7.0
Fault Module Timestamp: 3bd138a6
Exception Code: c0000005
Exception Offset: 00002707
OS Version: 6.1.7601.2.1.0.768.3
Locale ID: 1033
Additional Information 1: 0a9e
Additional Information 2: 0a9e372d3b4ad19135b953a78882e789
Additional Information 3: 0a9e
Additional Information 4: 0a9e372d3b4ad19135b953a78882e789

Can we get Winamp fixed to use the Enhancer plugin for 192kHz files?

thank you.

contact the author.

How do I get in touch with Winamp's author?

the author of the plugin. i don't know which one you mean. link to it, or if it comes with winamp, post in bug reports; the thread for official plugins.

plugin = http://www.winamp.com/plugin/enhancer-017/81361

with over 2 million d/l's and a 5-star rating Winamp should look into this. I think the author has passed away.

why? or r u joking?

no one has been able to contact him for years and years. When you clik the app's 'about' button the website and one of the email addresses no longer exist. I have never recieved any replies from his yahoo mail address, which I think is still active as i've not recieved 'delivery failure' notifications. However, all this is irrelevant.

Winamp should look into either cloning, or making it 'official', or using it during version developments/upgrades.

winamp prob has no more idea how to contact him then you do. and unless he shares the code with winamp, they can't do anything about it.

I disagree. Winamp can design a similar app. Now whether they do or not is up to them. This was concieved 12+ years ago, It should be a no-brainer today for a creative developer. If I were skilled in this discipline, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

You should look at the stereotool DSP plugin. www.stereotool.com

There's some great presets that'll give you an awesome sound.

If you must stick with Enhancer, have you tried http://nunzioweb.com/daz/enhancer/index.html

?

This enhancer plugin is the best one I could find, I tested many others but none produce so good audio. But supports only 16bits samples... =/
I did try contact the plugin author too, no success at all, or he did pass away or got luck with lottery :P

Anyways it's not winamp's fault, it's still the best music player in my opinion.

But I'm facing trouble using format converter... I can't convert my high-quality musics (flac 96khz 24bits) to mp3 (to listen in cell-phone). I know mp3 does not support this high quality, but it should convert to 'normal quality' instead of error 'Cannot open encoder'.

i think its asking a lot of winamp. its like asking someone to clone KFC's special recipe.

I do not think it's asking all that much, but at least you concede that this a worthy enough app. However, your analogy is misguided. If an updated 'Enhancer' were to be developed for the sole purpose of keeping it current to version upgrades, there is no reason not to continue to give credit to the original author. It would be the decent thing to do.

the Enhancer DSP is just not compatible with such high bitrate formats (weren't really available when it was last updated in 2001) and its unlikely it'll be updated to support that (even with using the wrapper plug-in i've made which is beyond my means to re-write - as the wrapper just patches things which can be relatively easily patched).

it is asking a lot for a 3rd party plug-in to be 'officially' fixed when there's no source code and it requires re-implementing it all from scratch. there's far bigger things to be done than that. yes you'll disagree but that's always been the way that it's the responsibility of 3rd party authors to update things when newer features / compatibility issues arise as Winamp has developed

-daz

I understand now the difficulty in 'fixing' Enhancer. I repeat - my suggestion is to develop a new app with the same/improved features and to give credit to the original author as the inspirational source. Get it?

yes i get it and really there's no need to be obtuse.

however you've forgotten the biggest 'issue' no matter what and that is there are very few people who develop Winamp plug-ins anymore, especially ones like Enhancer who'd do it for free, etc as everyone expects Winamp plug-ins to be (little incentive when you can instead work on something for Android/iPhone/etc and get a decent return on things). i was even going to see if i was wrong with trying to patch Enhancer even if it's down sampling to a format it can cope with but meh, cba now.

-daz

You are mistaken as well as presumptuous. I have not forgotten - I did not know it in the first place. Oh well, at least Winamp is still around, grateful for that.

Again: Have you looked at the Stereotool DSP plugin for Winamp? It's like Enhancer on super drugs. It's simply amazing. I think if you give it a try, after the initial shock of all the options wears off, you'll be glad you don't use Enhancer anymore.

ok - i'll give it a go, thnx.

always open to new things, just learned that, for music playback, 16-bit/44.1kHz is more that adequate for the perfect human ear (those high numbers are just 'not there', except maybe for certain animals). I'll be converting down all my hi-rez stuff and gaining a ton of disk space.

thnx all!

just fyi, i think u misinterpreted my analogy, but that doesn't really matter. however, imo, if your source materials were themselves originally 24/192, i would keep flacs of them in that condition, and make mirrors of them in lessor forms, if needed. while i firmly believe that 16/44.1 is good for 99.9% of people/setups, i still don't like the idea of downgrading the flacs to that, esp as flacs, and esp if they are to be the only copies.

it is somewhat disingenuous of me to say that, since i use mainly mp3, which is inherently lossy, but if i were to get the 24 bit beatle flac remasters, i would be loathe to convert them into something else.

the methods/goals get more complicated if source materials were 5.1 or beyond stereo, (which flac can encode)