search for: ohnonot

Opus or AAC will give you comparable results at reasonable bitrates (~128k). Though, I would suggest finding a way to get more storage. You could upload to Backblaze B2 or AWS S3 for pennies, if your current host won't let you upgrade. On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 3:36?PM D.T. <ohnonot-github at posteo.de> wrote: > Situation: > > - remote virtual server with very little storage (estimate: I can > spare about 40G for music) > - local music collection of ~80G in all sorts of formats - lossy in > varying quality, some lossless too > > > Vis...

...ill give you comparable results at reasonable bitrates > (~128k). > Though, I would suggest finding a way to get more storage.? You could > upload to Backblaze B2 or AWS S3 for pennies, if your current host > won't let you upgrade. > > On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 3:36?PM D.T. <ohnonot-github at posteo.de> > wrote: > > Situation:? > > * remote virtual server with very little storage (estimate: I can > > spare about 40G for music) > > * local music collection of ~80G in all sorts of formats - lossy in > > varying quality, some lossless too >...

Situation:? * remote virtual server with very little storage (estimate: I can spare about 40G for music) * local music collection of ~80G in all sorts of formats - lossy in varying quality, some lossless too Vision: * stream my whole music collection randomized so I can listen to it anywhere Plan/Idea: * Locally transcode everything to one format that results in files that are?

You do not need a "perfect player"- almost all media players can stream audio, too. What you need is to save the playlist (.m3u by default) and tell your media player to play that. On Wed, 2024-01-17 at 21:01 +0100, marc at clubcapelli.com wrote: > > hi friends, (sorry in advance if it is the wrong place to ask) > > i'm seeking the perfect player for a html website

You posted this message to the list, I'm not a mod and I can read it. For March, I do not see any other post made by you. It clearly says WHY your post was rejected: "Message body is too big: 59787 bytes with a limit of 40 KB" I suspect this was an automated action. Re-write your original post so that it isn't too large (likely caused by attachments), and re-send it. On

On Fri, 2023-03-24 at 21:45 +1100, redwood.andrew at gmail.com wrote: > ? > Yes, I did see that msg about taking up too many bytes ? but I never > received the promised email from the mods, telling me it had been > rejected!? So I assumed it had been posted ? and wanted to read the > thread. Sure, you can wait for the moderator's decision. How long, we do not know. Or you can