Skip to main content

Poll

Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?

  • FLAC
    325 (55%)
  • WAVPACK
    222 (37.6%)
  • Neither, I use another losless codec
    44 (7.4%)

Total Members Voted: 718

Topic: Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK? (Read 70758 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • Badass01
  • [*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?


Please also state your reason why...

  • senab
  • [*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #1
I use FLAC.

Simply because my old DAP (Rio Karma) supported it. Now I've got a iPod w/ Rockbox, but simply can't be bothered to convert them for the minimal space I'd save.

  • keytotime
  • [*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #2
I use WavPack because of the smaller file size and the better encoder options "-h -m -w -d "CUESHEET=@*.cue"". Also I find it to be more actively developed.

  • toology
  • [*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #3
WavPack because of good encoding/decoding speed and at the same time better compression.

  • Fandango
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #4
Wavpack: higher compression

  • Maglor
  • [*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #5
FLAC, because my iAudio supports it. No other reason than that.

  • esa372
  • [*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #6
I used FLAC for quite a while, but I recently switched to WavPack (for the same reasons listed above).
Clowns love haircuts; so should Lee Marvin's valet.

  • vitos
  • [*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #7
WavPack - because of better compression and hybrid mode.
Not really a Signature.

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #8
WavPack - because of better compression and hybrid mode.

My voice is for WavPack, but I have converted more than 1000 files into flac the last days (mostly to remove hybrid encodings I had and that don't arrange me anymore).

Garf's flac 1.1.2.1 -8 often gives me a better compression ratio than WavPack -fx5. The difference is rarely important, excepted some case:
- some mono album (problem corrected with 4.4 which unfortunately break older decoder)
- some harpsichord albums
- few other ones.

This flac setting (-8) is also faster on the encoding side than (-fx5) [I recall that I never found one file that was smaller with -fx6], and offers a identical decoding speed on my Duron 800 (x60) but a significantly higher one on my Mobile Athlon (x120 vs x150).
I don't use the normal and the high profile of WavPack, because decoding speed is clearly lower (especially with -high).

But what I always hated with flac was the tagging format, which isn't really compatible with massive and constant tagging. With foobar2000 0.9, the problem is gone (at last), and tagging is now as fast as WavPack and all APEv2 based file formats. Nevertheless, the problem is still present with flac/cue files, and adding a new field takes a good minute with this format 

I'm still a WavPack user, because I still have 1500 hours of music in WavPack format. But EAC is currently set to use flac 1.1.2.1... Both formats are great, but I prefer WavPack over FLAC for several reasons.
  • Last Edit: 23 April, 2006, 11:03:09 AM by guruboolez

  • jmartis
  • [*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #9
I've used Wavpack lossy, but I've just acquired a new 120gb harddrive so nothing inhibits me from going lossless 

  • ffooky
  • [*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #10
FLAC because it is universally accepted and compatible with shntool and Toast. If they ever do get around to incorporating support in Audacity, my cup will runneth over.

  • lextune
  • [*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #11
I use both, for different reasons.

I use WavPack to rip to image w/ embedded cue, so if/when EAC adds test&copy for images, I will probably completely change over.
foobar2000 + EAC + Burrrn = Happiness

  • iGold
  • [*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #12
FLAC because of wide Linux support and embedded cuesheet metadata block (for my backups I prefer one .flac for one CD).

  • pepoluan
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #13
Between FLAC and WavPack I use FLAC for it's cross-platform compatibility.

However, newer rips I encode using OptimFrog --mode extranew.

So, there.
Nobody is Perfect.
I am Nobody.

http://pandu.poluan.info

  • krmathis
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #14
Other -->> Apple Lossless

Simply because its the only lossless format which is supported by the software and hardware I use. Like iTunes, AirTunes and iPod's.

  • Synthetic Soul
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #15
This is spooky. 

I was going to start a new "Your lossless codec of choice" poll this morning.  I was half way through setting it up, and ran out of time.

The last one started August 2004 I believe.  I think it's about time for a new one.


WavPack BTW.

Edit: Sorry, a reason:  better compression (my first choice was Monkey's Audio for the same reason); ease of use; the @ thing.
  • Last Edit: 23 April, 2006, 02:04:07 PM by Synthetic Soul
I'm on a horse.

  • Shade[ST]
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #16
Wavpack -- I like the name better.

  • singaiya
  • [*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #17
Wavpack for the hybrid feature. I don't use lossless for listening, but for transcoding or if I need to burn an audio disc.

Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #18
WavPack because it's faster.

  • slks
  • [*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #19
FLAC - more support, faster decoding.

  • moozooh
  • [*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #20
Wavpack: fast decoding, good compression, great support within fb2k and Rockbox, many useful features.
But honestly, if it wasn't for the last two points, I'd use YALAC (or however it will be called).
Infrasonic Quartet + Sennheiser HD650 + Microlab Solo 2 mk3. 

  • rjamorim
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #21
Wavpack. Partially because Bryant is a hell of a great guy.
Get up-to-date binaries of Lame, AAC, Vorbis and much more at RareWares:
http://www.rarewares.org

  • Duble0Syx
  • [*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #22
I use WavPack.  I like the extra compression, although small.  Also I make music it is normall 32-bit, which FLAC does not seem to support.  The APEv2 tags are more convenient for me.  Editing the vorbis comments on FLAC can be very slow sometimes.  I still have a lot of FLAC's around, but I prefer wavpack.  Encoding/decoding is only a very small amount slower, and if optimizations like MMX are included in the future that may change as well.  If I recall the license on the source is more open than FLAC as well.

EDIT:  Thought I'd add I also love the -m function for storing MD5's in wavpack files.  -hxm all the way.  Especially now with the MMX optimized encoder.  Can't wait to see what the future bring so for WavPack.  Since both FLAC and WavPack are supported in everything I need them to be I still have both.  In the end if one dies and the other doesn't I won't have as many files to convert at least.
  • Last Edit: 27 April, 2006, 10:54:55 PM by Duble0Syx

  • kwanbis
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer (Donating)
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #23
shouldn't you had inclided monkey, alac, yalac, wma lossless as choices?

  • gfngfgf
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #24
Wavpack, better compression