Gapless Winamp output without the use of a plugin.


Recommended Posts

I am a very big Pink Floyd fan. I pretty much listen to them everyday of the week.

They are also the only band that has more than 1 album that I love every song on.

The only problem is that most audio players have a small gap between songs, and when you're listening to Pink Floyd it can ger really annoying.

I tried many plugins but all of them didn't work too well and they didn't allow me to use my other DSP plugins.

I then started messing around with Winamp and found the trick to doing this without a plugin.

I only did this in Winamp 5 but it should work on just plain old 2.

Lets get on with the guide now.

1)Open Winamp and right click "Options>Prefrences" or just press ctrl+p

2)In the treeview on the side look for the group titled Plug-Ins. In that group there should be an Output selection. Click it.

3)You should now see a box in the area next to the treeview. In that box there should be things that say "Nullsoft Disk Writer plug-in" and "waveOut output". Look for one that says "Direct Sound output". Click it and then press the configure button at the bottom of the window.

4)A new window should've popped up. Look on the top of it and click the tab "Buffering". This is the final part. all you need to do is Adjust the Buffer-Ahead on Track change to a high number.

There are 3 slider bars that allow you to adjust the Buffer settings.

Buffer Length

This adjusts the length of the buffer. This also limits the Prebuffer and Buffer-ahead.

Example: If I had a Buffer Length of 2400 ms then my Prebuffer and Buffer-Ahead could only go from a range of 0 ms - 2400 ms.

Prebuffer on start/seek/underrun

This tell Winamp how much data to eat before it outputs sound. I don't really understand what that means, so I can't inform you on this.

The suggested amount for this is 500 ms - 1000 ms.

Buffer-Ahead on track change

This is what we want to change. This tells Winamp when to start reading the next song to get a gapless transition. For me, I just set it to 5000 ms (5 seconds) but that is a bit to high for some people. I'd say anywhere from 1000 ms to 5000 ms is a good range. If you have low memory, a slow computer, or and outdated one, then set it lower, but not to low, or else it'll still have gaps.

The way this works is like this.

Example: If I set the Buffer-Ahead to 5000 ms, then Winamp will start reading the next song where the current song had 5 seconds left until it ends. This make it so winamp can trnasition them smoothly.

After that is all done, click the apply button on the window and then close the propterites window. Try it out! open two songs and set it near the end. If it worked then there should be no gap.

Waluha!

You know, I was wondering the same thing as you were and I too decided to fiddle around with those settings, because I have alot of Game soundtracks that loop. When I did it though I didnt think it was the best way to it though. Seems I was wrong.

Good stuff.

Oh, Ill also point out, It should be fairly obvious, but you cannot set the Buffer-Ahead any higher than the max amount winamp is allowed to buffer tracks. :D

which is what Dazza said.

OK folks, let's get this right:

When you get to the buffering tab, Whatever the value for "Buffer length" is is going to be the *MAX* you can make the "Buffer-ahead on track change" setting. So, if you leave "Buffer length" at 2000 you can't set "Buff-ahead ..." to any higher than 2000.

That is what Kenta meant when writing

Buffer Length

This adjusts the length of the buffer. This also limits the Prebuffer and Buffer-ahead.

Example: If I had a Buffer Length of 2400 ms then my Prebuffer and Buffer-Ahead could only go from a range of 0 ms - 2400 ms.

HTH

Hmmmm - RIO Karma - =costs money = I have to spend money

WinAmp = free = I can listen to it through my 210 Watt Receiver in my AV system which I have my computer routed through and add effects, set EQ, etc.... - And I don't have to pay for it.

Guess which one *I* am going for.

What's funny is that you're still using a plugin.

It's just that they plugin you're using *comes* with Winamp. =)

What you mean to say is that you're not downloading *another* plugin.

Just about *everything* in Winamp is plugin based. Input plugins, output plugins, DSP plugins, visualization plugins...

If you didn't have any plugins, Winamp wouldn't do very much...

Dazza: I daid it, but it wasn't in a very good position to read it from.

Superkicky: I could send you the updated Direct Sound output plugin to see if that works.

If you want it just PM me.

semifamous: Yes your right, but it's the way out language developed.

Think of it this way. If you had hot coffie and let it set on the counter for a few hours and then drank it, you'd say it's cold.

Then you do the same thing, but with an ice cold soda. When you go to drink it, you say it's warm, even though the soda and coffie are about the same tempature.

The same can be said with the included plugins and the 3rd Party plugins. But if we got technical, yes, they are just plugins.

I still notice one "little" gap in live recordings, to fix it, choose "remove silence at the beginning / end of track" in "other" tab.....

Use this trick, plus Kenta Guide, and you will no hear gaps between songs.

Edited by retri
  • 1 year later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 years later...
  • 2 months later...
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Calling GTA 6 overhyped crap doesn’t make you edgy, it just makes you sound like someone who hasn’t enjoyed anything since the PS2 era.
    • I’m not arguing whether Rockstar likes money. Obviously, they do, they’re a business. I’m saying this isn’t new. They’ve always launched console first. This is just how Rockstar operates.
    • I'm not sure how old the school is, but they've been doing this since GTA 3. Back in those days we'd be lucky for game companies to release on the PC at all. And with the current state of Sony (or Microsoft) their gaming wing won't be getting a penny from me.
    • We now know when and how the Universe may truly end by Sayan Sen Image by Marek Pavlík via Pexels| Not representative A study by physicist Henry Tye of Cornell University suggests that the universe may not expand forever. Instead, it could eventually stop expanding, begin contracting and end in a "Big Crunch" roughly 20 billion years from now. The research, published in the Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, was conducted by Tye, Horace White Professor of Physics Emeritus at Cornell University. Using recent observations from major dark-energy surveys, Tye and his collaborators developed a cosmological model that predicts the universe could have a total lifespan of about 33 billion years. Since the universe is currently estimated to be 13.8 billion years old, the model places it near the midpoint of its existence. According to Cornell University's summary of the research, the study centers on the cosmological constant, a term introduced by Albert Einstein in his theory of general relativity. In modern cosmology, the cosmological constant is commonly used to describe the simplest form of dark energy, the unknown phenomenon believed to be driving the accelerating expansion of the universe. "For the last 20 years, people believed that the cosmological constant is positive, and the universe will expand forever," Tye said in a Cornell University news release. "The new data seem to indicate that the cosmological constant is negative, and that the universe will end in a big crunch." The study draws on data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) and the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), two major projects designed to investigate the nature of dark energy. According to Tye, recent observations suggest that dark energy may not behave exactly like a simple cosmological constant. To account for those observations, Tye and his collaborators proposed a model involving an extremely light hypothetical particle that evolves over time. In their calculations, this produces a negative cosmological constant and leads to a future collapse of the universe. The model predicts that cosmic expansion would continue for approximately another 11 billion years before reaching a maximum size, after which the universe would begin contracting and eventually collapse. Scientists have long debated how the universe might end. As explained in an article published in The Conversation by Stephen DiKerby of Michigan State University, several possibilities have been proposed. If dark energy remains constant and positive, the universe could continue expanding indefinitely, gradually becoming colder, darker and more diffuse in a scenario often called the "heat death" of the universe. Other theoretical possibilities include a Big Rip, in which cosmic expansion accelerates so dramatically that galaxies, stars and even atoms are torn apart, or a Big Crunch, in which expansion reverses and the universe collapses back into an extremely dense state. DiKerby notes that the Big Crunch idea itself is not new. What distinguishes Tye's work is that it attempts to use current observational data to estimate when such a collapse might occur and how it could unfold. Much of the universe's long-term evolution remains uncertain. According to current astrophysical understanding, stars will continue to form and die for billions of years. The Sun, for example, is about halfway through its expected lifespan. Galaxies are also expected to continue merging; the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies are projected to collide several billion years from now. At the same time, the nature of dark energy remains one of the biggest unanswered questions in cosmology. While observations indicate that the universe's expansion is accelerating, scientists still do not know what is causing that acceleration. Future observations may therefore alter current predictions about the cosmos's ultimate fate. Tye emphasized that additional evidence will be needed before firm conclusions can be drawn. DESI continues to collect data, while upcoming observations from missions and observatories including Euclid, SPHEREx and the Vera C. Rubin Observatory are expected to provide more precise measurements of dark energy. "People have said before that if the cosmological constant is negative, then the universe will collapse eventually. That's not new," Tye said. "However, here the model tells you when the universe collapses and how it collapses." For now, the study presents one possible future for the cosmos rather than a settled prediction. Whether the universe ultimately ends in a Big Crunch, expands forever, or follows another path entirely remains an open question that future observations will help answer. Source: Cornell University, The Conversation This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • If you look around on Amazon, some of these are available for $9
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      With What earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      570
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      175
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      73
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      68
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!