Jump to content


Approved Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About spacebar2011

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 11/01/1983

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    London, UK

Recent Profile Visitors

2,670 profile views
  1. Yes, readily available with a simple Google search.
  2. @maxmp Finally, an update that was actually needed! Thanks! Works well on the V30. Could you please consider adding an option for automatic bit depth and no resampling at all? That is, the file is passed "as is" to the DAC, bit perfect, at original bit depth and sampling frequency?
  3. The amount of clueless people using resampling and claiming to hear better sound just makes me cringe! People, do yourselves favour, turn off any resampling, it actually makes audio worse and puts utterly unnecessary strain on the CPU. Also, unless your files are native 24 bit, leave the setting at 16 bit. I would imagine with so many people chattering about Hi Res in these forums, some would have a clue about how digital audio actually works...
  4. Well well... Thanks Max! Testing on my V30+, whatever is supposed to work, works. Hi-Res including. The only thing I wish for now is Direct Out support (bypassing any processing/resampling and passing audio to DAC at source bit rate and sample rate). In some cases, I really need untouched audio out ( the only reason I use UAPP tbh).
  5. UAPP (current alpha build) got internal DAC support for devices with a discreet DAC. Bit perfect output on my V30 now :-) Super responsive developer too.. The day it gets direct out support for Qualcomm DACs, it's going to be RIP Poweramp.. very soon.
  6. This thread ?. Going to be 2 whole years in a month without a single update of any kind. I don't know what else abandonware is, if not this.. The sheer lack of any regard, respect or honesty from the developer actually makes me angry for supporting and encouraging this app for years. Just last year, I made a bunch of my friends buy Poweramp despite there being more than a few capable, free options on the market. My reason to them was great audio, hi res internal DAC support and a great developer behind the app. I look like a moron to all those people now.
  7. Don't listen or read then. Its a public forum and people have the right to voice their frustrations. Simple.
  8. Of course! I mentioned it here a few months ago. That was the biggest middle finger from an app developer in Android history that I can remember. I even bought his music player that never got updated beyond the first release version. What a dbag! Last I heard was that he was holidaying in Oz while blatantly lying about the LP rewrite. No one knows where he vanished since. King of abandonware - Fede Carnales.. lol
  9. That's just your opinion. Things have to be tried in order to improve. We'd be sitting with Windows 95 on desktop and Symbian on mobile otherwise. Remember how amazingly beautiful those were? And it's completely wrong of Google to update the aesthetic of Android and urge developers to follow a more cohesive UI/UX path? Okay! I mean there are still thousands of apps on the Play Store that work, but look like they're still in 2010. So, there IS a choice for developers - to sit in the previous decade and moan how there's no technical reason to update/refresh the UI/UX. You want the KitKat U
  10. It's a shared responsibility. Not Google's alone. Most developers move with it and others sit and moan. And this is Google we're talking about, it's in their DNA to try new things, they're where they are today because of their experimentation oriented approach. Developers are not doing Google a favour by making apps for Android, they need the platform and there's only two on the planet today (as far as mobile goes). It's never one sided. It benefits both and in the end, in most cases, the consumer benefits greatly too. Before my time perhaps? I started with Windows 98 in school, if that t
  11. That's not how software development always works. Things move forward and developers are supposed to move with it. Sometimes, backwards compatibility is just not ideal or even possible. It weighs down the code and makes things unnecessarily complicated just because some developers are either too slow or too lazy or just have no interest or incentive in being up to date. Sometimes, a new iteration of something as complex as an Operating System incorporates so many new features and changes that backwards compatibility is unfortunately a liability. Can't fault Google for moving forward. Peop
  12. No surprises on the V3 front, but, here's a new player I found and been liking quite a bit. It does not have HiRes DAC capabilities (that's about the only reason I'm still waiting for PA V3), but the UI is ace imo! It's called Retro Music.
  13. All this discussion amounts to NOTHING really. It's pointless. The dev couldn't care less, has zero respect for his paying customers, does not know the first thing about communication or organisation or development priorities. It's moving rapidly in the direction of vapourware at this point. If it took him TWO years to design what I see in the (leaked?) screenshot, I hope he never attempts to design anything again. How long did it take him to design the original app (till V2), 5 years? There was the infamous Launcher Pro rewrite (remember?) and then there's Poweramp V3. That guy still hol
  • Create New...