I have always wondered what it it meant when the documentation said "note that mixing brackets with $functions may give unpredictable results and should be avoided (use $if() instead)". Does it mean that we shouldn't mix square brackets with any $functions except $if, or should we only use $if instead of square brackets if we have to use other $functions in the first place?

I'd try this. It's a lot more simple, should give you the results you're looking for, and might address that vague problem in the documentation:

yeah that is confusing. ill try your code.

I've put the dll in my components folder, but when I start foobar I get a message: " Failed to load DLL: foo_pod.dll, reason: Unable to load DLL.". Any idea why?

Is there a version of this wonderful DLL that works for 0.9 yet? If not, is there something I can use instead? (besides the obvious answer of iTunes.)

There is no other plug-in available that is independent of iTunes. As for a ported v.09 version, that is still up in the air, as far as I know. Hopefully, Aero will address that issue soon. I still have FB2K v0.8.3 installed solely for use with foo_pod.

I hope it is soon! I bought an iPod and I don't want to use iTunes.

I'll wait, but I hope Aero is working on it.

I'm not sure how it's going to work, seeing as 0.9 uses ID3v2.4 tags, and (some) iPods can't read them.

No iPod reads tags from the files. The tags that it cares about (artist, album, genre, title) are all stored in a database file which is created by the software you use to copy the tracks onto the iPod. The reason that ID3v2.4 tags don't work is because iTunes can't read them properly.
BTW, they work for me using the latest iTunes, except that it displays two identical entries for every artist.

I also had problems with iPod and music, tagged with foobar2000. Fixed everything by retagging every file with ID3v2 tags only (without v1 or Ape).

Really?

That got me scared.

I rely on APEv2 tags...

Dumb question - where do you find out how your stuff is tagged? I use whatever tags EAC/flac produces, transcoded via foo_pod to LAME mp3, on my iPod Mini without a problem.

'Propeties' from context menu in foobar. Look for something like: tagtype = apev2|id3v1 in the "Other info" box.

Hi there,

any news on the foo_pod update to version 0.9?

Chris

+1

Is anyone porting it to 0.9???

patiently waiting....

Is there any was to tell how large a transcoded (ie - .flac > LAME mp3) file is/will be, after it's trans'ed? It'd take some of the guesswork out of deciding if just one more file will fit in my iPod.

I think I already know the answer ('no'), but I thought I'd ask anyway...

Hi.

Have installed foo_pod for my daughter who has just got an Nano. A lot of our music library is in FLAC and OGG and iTunes is of no use whatsoever. Foo_pod does the trick. Thankyou!

I have a couple of questions relating to Album art.

1. Was wondering how to get album art onto the Nano. It seems iTunes is the only way. I have tried embeding art in to the mp3's but it doesnt work.

2. If iTunes is the only way....how do I get iTunes to use all the folder.jpgs i have?

Also. After using foo_pod I can see the Nano contents in iTunes. Is that a feature or has something gone wrong?

How did you convert your file to mp3? Using the lame option in foobar/foo_pod I expect.

1. In order to get album art to display in your nano, you have to add the jpg images to the mp3 tag inside the mp3 file. Use Mp3tag (which is free) to add the images.

2. You can add image to a mp4 (or m4a in itunes case) the same way as an mp3 using the mp3tag program.

3. You should see the contents of what is on your nano in itunes when you browse to the ipod view so I guess this would be called a feature so nothing has gone wrong.

moderation: Removed unnecesarry full quote of previous post.

Thanks and oops. I meant to say I cannot see the iPod contents in iTunes.

Also I tried adding embedding art using Mp3tag and it didnt work.

moderation: Removed unnecesarry full quote of previous post.

Foo_pod doesn't fully support the latest iTunes DBs so that why you can't see it in iTunes.

moderation: Removed unnecesarry full quote of previous post.

some information on the 0.9 port would be nice...

I am having some confusion over how exactly the "Replaygain Adjustment Works".


Let's say I:

1. Add a single mp3 either with or without "soundcheck" data into a foo_pod playlist.

2. Right click the file and use either track or album replaygain.

3. In foo_pod preferences/advanced - I set"replaygain adjustment" +6dB

4. Send the file to iPod

Now...if I:

1. Clear all playlists in foobar

2. Use foo_pod to "Load ipod songs to foobar2000 playlist"

3. Right click the file I just sent and "Show file info (special)", it in fact displays the proper replaygain value according to my "+6 adjustment" in foo_pod from step 3 above. All seems good right?


However......


If I click on "Reload info" from within "Show file info (special)", it reverts the replaygain values back to if I had done no adjustment in foo_pod. Back to if it just had the default 89dB.

Also, if I copy that file back to my HD - with or without clicking on the "reload info", then loading that file back into foobar. It will also show replaygain with the default 89dB, and not with my +6 adjustment from foo_pod.

My question is, if there was in fact a change applied - why would clicking "reload info" change the displayed replaygain value? Why doesn't it stay displaying with my +6 adjustment?


Another question. Is this the best method for transferring mp3s to iPod using foo_pod, if I want to use the "replaygain adjustment"?

1. Load unmodified tracks into playlist (IE no previous soundcheck, replaygain, or mp3gain data)

2. Highlight all and do track or album replaygain

3. Set "replaygain adgustment" in foo_pod to desired level

4. Highlight all and "Send files to iPod"

That will automatically create soundcheck info on all my files, according to my +6dB replaygain adjustment? Or in step one, do I need to load files with existing soundcheck data on them?

Which now brings me back to my first question dealing with the "reload info" thing.

Sorry if this is all so easy but I'm kinda new at all this, and I hope I did a good enough job of explaining what I'm asking.

Thank you greatly in advance for any and all help.

Any news on cue support for foo_pod? I store all my music losslessly as one file and a cue sheet, if foo_pod supports cue sheets, then it'll be perfect.

The ipod doesn't read soundcheck data, or any tags for that matter, from the file itself. The information is stored in a separate database, so foo_pod is probably adding the correct information to the database without modifying the actual tags on the mp3. Have you tried to confirm if it's working by sending the same file with and without +6 adjustment and listening for the difference?


Those steps look fine to me. The files shouldn't need existing soundcheck data.

Rockbox has now created firmware for the iPod that allows for gapless playback and other useful features. This is good news for audiophiles like us, but will we be able to use foo_pod to transfer songs to an iPod with Rockbox firmware? Will the ReplayGain levels translate to SoundCheck?

Rockbox doesn't read the iTunes database, so using foo_pod will work, but then, anything will work. It also uses replaygain, not Soundcheck.

If you want to add files to Rockbox, I suggest using the "file copy" tool already in foobar, or just dragging them there in Explorer.

What about on the fly transcoding. That's the most important feature I use.

I was going to ask the exact same question...

sounds like foo_pod will not be ported

When does foo_pod supported the new version (0.9) of foobar2000 ?

I'm sorry, but you did read the post above yours, didn't you?

Anyway, that pretty much solves it for me...I stay with v0.8.3. I need this plug-in to survive in a cold hard universe...

The solution I came up with to enjoy both versions of foobar2000 (0.9 has some improvements I really like and better support for the Nero AAC encoder) is installing 0.8.3 on my USB flash drive and running it from there.

0.9 is installed on my computer's hard drive.

I still hope Aero reconsiders (or releases the source )

Are you saying that you've got v0.8.3 on a thumb-drive?

Sorry, but when I'm posting the previous post was not to see (it was post at the same time).

All my settings in foobar2000 are in verion 0.9. So I wan't be happy when foo_pod supported version 0.9.

I'm hope and waiting for this good news ;-)


------------------------------------------------------
Don't be angry about my bad english,
I'm only a german ;-)

I hope Aero decides to port foo_pod to 0.9. It would be much appreciated by many.

I have both 0.9 and 0.83 installed on my harddrive. 0.83 is only for foo_pod

I've asked many many times to release the source. Up till now it's been no. I would like to see him change his position on that......

Yep.

It is absolutely possible.

You just have to forget about saving playlists (because of the paths).

But everything works perfectly.

BTW, I have a bunch of things installed on a thumb drive. A "toolset" if you may. You wouldn't believe what you can run from one of those things.

Ah - that explains it...sorry...


It is absolutely brilliant! I never would have thought to even try this...

Looks like Aero hasn't even been logged into the forums since 22nd March 2006 - 11:16

Aero's Profile

if this is true, he probably wouldn't care if he released the source. The only person i know who might have a chance of contacting him is Otto.

@ Otto : lcan you look into contacting Aero

time to get an open source version in the books.

i'll be happy to help with the porting if the code is released

--robby.

Sure it'll work, but I don't think you understand what I'm getting at. Rockbox just need the files copied to the Ipod. Anything that can copy files to the ipod will work. So while you could use foo_pod to copy the files, you could also use the file writer (if you want to transcode) or file renamer (if you just want to copy) in foobar too.

Right guys, its time I stepped in. There are 'gracious' people here who appreciate that foo_pod is a labour of love, and is maintained on a purely altruistic basis. It seems however that there aren't that many 'grateful' people. Aero told me (in confidence I suppose - sorry Aero), when I sent him a donation by Paypal that it was the second one he had ever received. That stinks people. I think Aero gets plenty of kudos and appreciates that we dig what he does for us, but I think its time to adopt a 'money talks' attitude. Nothing better than a bit of bribery to perhaps lean him towards the open source or v 0.9 thing. Everyone, as soon as you've seen this, donate $10 to him on paypal. Just do it - right now, come on. It's a small piece of change for his effort. Hell you'd pay 3 times that for anapod or Xplay, both of which are a pale imitation, as you know. He lost an ipod and expensive pair of cans on a plane (ok sounds like it was his fault), but with 2 paypal donations, he's still way down on the deal. Paypal details are in the foo_pod read me - get your wallets open !!

all the best

faithful, gracious, and grateful foo_pod lover.

Niels

That's a good argument.

In this minute I've made a little donation, although I don't use foo_pod !!!

So I hope it's motivated too support foobar2000 v0.9 soon .

delll

------------------
Germany
------------------

To clunesy:

I am the first in line to praise & defend Aero in this forum, but I don't use foo_pod very much anymore, because it has limitations. If Aero expected monetary renumeration for his plug-in, he should have just came right out and said as much. If he wanted a donation, that's fine and good, but a donation cannot always be expected, and should not be expected. It is, what it is. I donate to a lot of organizations, but not all, and no one would expect me to, either. Considering that Peter does not charge for foobar2000, and none, save one plug-in developer charges for any of their plug-ins, then do you, or should you, really expect the majority of users to pay for a plug-in? Hopefully, Aero understood this when he took the project on, and if he expected to be paid, then he should have charged for it from the beginning. I believe that everyone should donate if they can, but the one asking for the donation should never "expect" anything. You can hope, but should never expect. Also, if Aero spoke to you about this in confidence, then it would surely be the last thing that you'd ever be told in confidence.


To Aero (if you are still around the forum):

Good luck with all of your future endeavours! I hope that you will continue with foo_pod, but I will not hold out any expectations of you doing so, any longer. Thank you very much for giving us foo_pod. Take care, and all the best.

I am just looking for a good alternative to iTunes. foo_pod seemed to be nice since it integrates with my primary music player. Just out of curiosity, what do you use instead?

Chris

If I am already in foobar2000v0.8.3 (which is becoming more rare by the day), I will use foo_pod, but lately I generally just use iTunes. Other than Anapod, there aren't many alternatives.

If only someone could convice Apple to add on the fly transcoding into iTunes, we'd be all set!

I use FLAC images with embedded cuesheets, so neither iTunes nor foo_pod can transcode the FLAC image. I use "Convert" in Foobar2000v0.9.2beta2 to encode to m4a then use either foo_pod in version 0.8.3 or iTunes to update my iPod.

So, I was wondering...

Can you have the iPod sort the music according to the DISCNUMBER tag? My albums are called "albumname" and I distingush between different discs by using the discnumber tag. Apart from the fact that in 0.8.3 the tag is called PARTINSET, my 5G ipod does not recognize the DISCNUMBER tag. It places all the files under the album name and alternates the files of the discs according to tracknumber.

One solution that I found: I use the Alternate Metadata Settings like this:

ALBUM: $if(%partinset%,[%album% '(Disc' %partinset%')'],%album%)

-> If the DISCNUMBER (PARTINSET) is present foo_pod adds "albumname (disc xx)" to the album name and saves it to the iPod DB. Now my iPod distinguishes between the different discs (according to the ALBUM tag!).

One problem with this: using the metadata tag the original file tag is not changed (which is great). BUT when I load the songs from my ipod in foobars playlist it displays the METADATA tags, i.e. for album: "albumname (disc xx)". Doubleclick on the file (or explicit reload of the tag info from the file) corrects the display to the original tag stored in the file, i.e. "albumname". Is there any way to have foobar change to the original tag data while reading out the ipod contents to a playlist?

And...is there any easier way to have the ipod recognize the DISCNUMBER tag and sort correctly?

Thanks,
Chris

My computer crashed last weekend, and I had to rebuild my copy of v0.8.3 from scratch - I'm getting the same error message (along with similar messages about the transcoder .dll's). I rebuilt my fb2k using the exact same installers used for the now-dead version (which worked perfectly), including the foo_pod installer. I've also tried foo_pod 9.9k and -9.9m, and all three produce the same errors.
- edit - I've also gone thru Tinkafoo's page, and no luck there...

Help!!!