Skip to main content

Topic: Wavpack - a thank you note (Read 6196 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • airon
  • [*]
Wavpack - a thank you note
Thanks for Wavpack.

It is now my compressor of choice for archiving Broadcast WAV audio, because it's crossplatform, free, fast, effcient and most importantly(for me) it doesn't lose any funny chunks of data, like Flac does. This data happens to be the descriptions of content and origin in many forms, from which I build my searchable database(Netmix actualy).

Thanks Bryant. Well done yet again.

  • bryant
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer (Donating)
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #1
Quote
Thanks for Wavpack.

It is now my compressor of choice for archiving Broadcast WAV audio, because it's crossplatform, free, fast, effcient and most importantly(for me) it doesn't lose any funny chunks of data, like Flac does. This data happens to be the descriptions of content and origin in many forms, from which I build my searchable database(Netmix actualy).

Thanks Bryant. Well done yet again.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=236108"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks Tony, I appreciate it. 

BTW, I don't know if you remember this, but you were the first person to bring to my attention the fact that WavPack didn't properly store those extra RIFF chunks and gave me a sample file for testing. That was over 4 years ago. How time flies!

  • robUx4
  • [*][*][*][*]
  • Developer (Donating)
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #2
Oh, nice.

What kind of information is this ? Because we definitely don't want to lose it when muxing WavPack into Matroska

  • airon
  • [*]
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #3
Quote
Quote
Thanks for Wavpack.

It is now my compressor of choice for archiving Broadcast WAV audio, because it's crossplatform, free, fast, effcient and most importantly(for me) it doesn't lose any funny chunks of data, like Flac does. This data happens to be the descriptions of content and origin in many forms, from which I build my searchable database(Netmix actualy).

Thanks Bryant. Well done yet again.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=236108"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks Tony, I appreciate it. 

BTW, I don't know if you remember this, but you were the first person to bring to my attention the fact that WavPack didn't properly store those extra RIFF chunks and gave me a sample file for testing. That was over 4 years ago. How time flies!
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=236355"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Hot damn, you're right! Hehe. I think I sent you a broadcast WAV generated by Protools back then. 2000... oh dear, it's so long ago.

As for your question, robUx4, it's simply a bunch of extra data chunks. It may not be as useful for streaming media as for post production.

I'm using Wavpack to store our rather large sound library now, so other post facilities covering other series can unpack the library within hours. I'm getting somewhere between 40-50% space savings here, which is great for the backup backup on DVD media.

Is there a frontend for MacOSX yet ? This issue'll creep up in a the coming months. I'm using Frontah on Windows btw. Works like a charm, especially for keeping directory structures intact.

  • airon
  • [*]
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #4
Post production folks like myself, use database programs like Soundminer, Netmix or MTools. Most of this stuff is based around embedding meta data (i.e. tags) in to the Broadcast WAVs.

The App reads that data and stores THAT in its database with references to the file. Around this all the other stuff is built.

All the information on the sound libraries is available for free as tabbed data from the vendors like Sound-Ideas.com , but most folks need solutions now and they have to work well and cater to work's needs, which is why you've got a whole bunch of expensive solutions(Netmix and Soundminer cost ~$1000).

As long as nobody offers anything remotly competetive with Matroska, sound professionals will pay that money and chosse Broadcast WAVs, which is already being used even in location sound recorders like the Deva range. They bolt timecode and all kinds of other information in to the BWF or WAV files.

I don't see most you fellas spending time on coding free apps and solutions for these purposes.

I know that I'll have a hard time explaining Wavpack files to the folks in the other productions anyhow . That'll be fun teaching them how to use a simply frontend to unpack the library. Hehe.

  • ExUser
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Read-only
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #5
Just adding my voice to support what the last four posters said.

.WV will be the extension of my next losslessly encoded file for sure. No question. Thanks for adding asymmetric support, that's a feature I've been craving for a while.

  • p0wder
  • [*][*][*][*]
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #6
I've been thinking about converting my FLAC collection into WavPack, but, what kind of data does FLAC discard?

  • ExUser
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Read-only
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #7
Quote
I've been thinking about converting my FLAC collection into WavPack, but, what kind of data does FLAC discard?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=236581"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


If you convert via one of the myriad options foobar2000 offers you, you should lose nothing in the transition from FLAC to WavPack.

Edit: Mods, please split this post and the post I was replying to off. They're off-topic.
  • Last Edit: 23 August, 2004, 11:02:28 PM by Canar

  • p0wder
  • [*][*][*][*]
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #8
Thanks Canar.  Gotta love fb2k.

  • jcoalson
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #9
Quote
I don't see most you fellas spending time on coding free apps and solutions for these purposes.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=236507"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

this is a great opportunity for you to use your specialized knowledge in this area to contribute to one of the open/free projects and help make it better.

Josh

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #10
Another thanks.
With wavpack, I now have a very fast decoding lossless encoder, with tagging possibilities really friendly for my usage (unfortunately, flac doesn't offer this), and correct encoding ratio (slightly better than flac).
Seeking is impressive, asymetrical mode is surprisingly good (-11,5 kbps between -f and -fx5 without compromise on decoding speed - tested on 75 hours of classical music)...

I think that all my next rips will be in wavpack4 format

  • indybrett
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #11
I'm ready to use Wavpack exclusively,  just for the savings in disc space.

My only issue is that I have become very dependant on MPEG Audio Collection to keep an inventory of my music. As soon as MAC supports Wavpack 4.0, I'll be ready to switch.
flac>fb2k>kernel streaming>audiophile 2496>magni>dt990 pro

  • emtee
  • [*][*][*]
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #12
Thank you Bryant.

I'm switiching from FLAC to Wavpack because of its hybrid capabilities, tagging format, and higher compression ratios. These features are more important to me than streaming or decoding speed, that's why I'm switching.
I must say I'm really impressed with the compression achieved so far (25% to 70%, depending on the file), although it's much slower than FLAC or Monkey's Audio (the two other codecs I've tried so far).

Edit: I'm not sure I'm posting in the correct thread. I was under the impression I openned "Wavpack - a thank you note", but all I see is a silly matroska rant. I bet bryant is loving the debate. Show some respect 
  • Last Edit: 24 August, 2004, 07:57:34 AM by emtee

  • 384kbps
  • [*][*][*]
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #13
Quote
Thank you Bryant.
I'm switiching from FLAC to Wavpack...

Yes, thanks for WavPack 4.0 ! - I already have made my expereience with 3.96 but... - However, v4.0 now is much better!

Before i'm also swichting from Flac to Wavpack, i have a little question  before concernig hybrid-files. Would be great if anybody could give me a piece of advice.

  • airon
  • [*]
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #14
Quote
Quote
I don't see most you fellas spending time on coding free apps and solutions for these purposes.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=236507"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

this is a great opportunity for you to use your specialized knowledge in this area to contribute to one of the open/free projects and help make it better.

Josh
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=236595"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Yeah, I shoot the folks at Audacity an occasional design suggestion and write about how apps like Protools and Logic work for what they're doing.

Many professional apps are simply collections of user requests with a usable interface, though market leading stuff usualy makes realy basic mistakes, like the region bin in Protools, still a poorly designed part of PT. AudioVision however had what's possibly the best 'bin' structure ever. You'd figure the Digidesign folks would have used those features after snatching up that app, but there's little to nothing coming from that direction. This is where FREE apps are much more flexible.

The problem I see is that authors will usualy just implement what they imediatly need for most part.

Audacity is moving in a good direction from my point of view. They're designing all their stuff on their own and questioning design and implementation all the time. That app may be the one to integrate what loads of people regard as essential. For me this is a database with waveform preview, playback, parts copied, FX'ed before import, mixed with other stuff before import(NetmixPro does this) and of course support for Broadcast WAVs, which carry all the relevant information in the pro world.

Making a free app for converting this information in to Wavpack and VORBIS Flac's where the tags carry all the information as well would be possible too.

Except for the last paragraph, all this stuff is already here in professional applications, but usualy bolted on and very expensive. NetmixPro costs almost a thousand dollars, and it's simply a collection of user suggestions and requests, packed in to a usable interface. It's a database for audio people leaning towards sound editors.

And applications like Audacity need more people designing and coding these kinds of things to make a well designed and free alternative a reality.

Join the fun lads. Audacity realy needs a decent database and a plenthora of other nifty features, that save time and effort which should be spent creating.

  • robUx4
  • [*][*][*][*]
  • Developer (Donating)
Wavpack - a thank you note
Reply #15
Quote
Making a free app for converting this information in to Wavpack and VORBIS Flac's where the tags carry all the information as well would be possible too.

Except for the last paragraph, all this stuff is already here in professional applications, but usualy bolted on and very expensive.


Hopefully there will be solutions that allow doing all of this soon.