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 70412 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • audiomars
  • [*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #125
I hope you guys are all voting in the Which lossless audio codec do you use? thread also.

I'm very suprised that there are so few votes there compared to this thread.  Maybe running both at the same time was a mistake.


Sure! Voted there too.
Reason is immortal, all else mortal
- Pythagoras

  • cinezone
  • [*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #126
Hi, I'm new with wavpack and I wonder if it's possible to extract the cue sheet from a .wv as we do with FLAC (metaflac  --export-cuesheet-to=FILE thefile.flac) or the only way is using foobar ?

Thx
  • Last Edit: 18 May, 2006, 11:30:17 AM by cinezone

  • Synthetic Soul
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #127
WVUNPACK.EXE or WAVPACK.EXE cannot do this, although I have seen discussion with David regarding the ability to automatically extract the cuesheet upon decoding.  This would be double-ace for a self-extracting file IMHO.

My latest mod of Case's Tag will let you do this quite easily, e.g.:

TAG.EXE --tocuea myfile.wv

Quote
Code: [Select]
--tocue <scheme>  : output cuesheet tag to file, name generated from <scheme>
--tocuen <name>   : output cuesheet tag to file <name>
--tocuea          : output cuesheet tag to file, name generated from source
I'm on a horse.

  • weemies
  • [*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #128
FLAC. Better name. Better file-extension.

But I don't use lossless much, because it's largely a waste of space. Ogg is my thing.

  • Patsoe
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #129
The best part of this codec isn't the speed or the compression, but the foresight of the developer. Every aspect of the codec is exceptionally well thought out. [..] FLAC properly places the emphasis on the simplicity and speed of the decoding. [...] The size difference with regard to WavPack is negligible, so I don't really vote based on this. [...] FLAC has the blessing of Xiph as well as some major players in the hardware and software industries.

Couldn't have said it better, but I can be more brief

  • arctic
  • [*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #130

The best part of this codec isn't the speed or the compression, but the foresight of the developer. Every aspect of the codec is exceptionally well thought out. [..] FLAC properly places the emphasis on the simplicity and speed of the decoding. [...] The size difference with regard to WavPack is negligible, so I don't really vote based on this. [...] FLAC has the blessing of Xiph as well as some major players in the hardware and software industries.

Couldn't have said it better, but I can be more brief


*lol* A typical statement for a DAE guy ;D ;D ;D

Well, my 2 Cents:
Im also a convinced FLAC-user, it's fast and flexibel. Moreover, it enjoys a lively "scene" around this
codec making it imho to the codec with best future prognosis.

  • Febs
  • [*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #131
WavPack.

I started using lossless compression at just about the same time that Rockbox was ported to the iriver H100 series.  WavPack was functional before FLAC in Rockbox, so I chose WavPack.

Since then, I simply haven't had any good reason to switch.  Hardware compatibility is not really an issue.  My portable players run Rockbox and I use Foobar on my PCs, so WavPack is available everywhere I need it to be.  (Besides which, I use 3.97b2 -V5 --vbr-new most of the time for portable use, and WavPack is mostly for archiving.)

  • hawkeye_p
  • [*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #132
Accidentially mad a NULL vote.

I'm planning to move from OptimFrog to WavPack due to tag, speed and size considerations (Optimfrog needs too many CPU cycles and I have plenty of
space left)

  • Stevie
  • [*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #133
correct me if im wrong, but flac doesnt support higher bit depths and samplingrate.
as i use lossless audiocodecs for archiving my audio projects, i use wavpack, since it also supports 24 bit etc...

is flac still lacking those features?

  • bryant
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer (Donating)
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #134
correct me if im wrong, but flac doesnt support higher bit depths and samplingrate.
as i use lossless audiocodecs for archiving my audio projects, i use wavpack, since it also supports 24 bit etc...

is flac still lacking those features?

FLAC supports 24-bit audio fine. My understanding is that the FLAC format also handles 32-bit ints, but the reference encoder does not implement it, and FLAC has no support for float data. WavPack handles all integer bitdepths up to 32-bit and also 32-bit floats.

Both codecs handle all sampling rates.

  • sony666
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #135
When i use lossless (rarely) it's FLAC.
Both developers seem to be cool, yet FLAC sounds cooler I think
  • Last Edit: 30 June, 2006, 03:56:29 PM by sony666

  • Gow
  • [*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #136
WavPack user.

Single File w/ embedded cue and eac log with -h

To me, WavPack is the perfect balance between the compression size of Monkey's Audio and the Decoding Speed of FLAC.  Plus if I need another lossless type for playback in hardware...pop it into foobar2000 and convert. Done!

After all, we have all chosen lossless so that we are not stuck with ONE format. 

- Gow
Zune 80, Tak -p4 audio library, Lossless=Choice

  • greynol
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #137
Monkey's Audio 3.99 user (4.01b2 GUI) and batch files.

I liked what Gow had to say and decided to say that I happily broke from the pack and voted other!

I just wish it would store a checksum of the raw pcm data and support piping like flac.
13 February 2016: The world was blessed with the passing of a truly vile and wretched person.

Your eyes cannot hear.

  • Triza
  • [*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #138
Another great thing about FLAC is the --apply-replaygain-which-is-not-lossless switch in the reference decoder. I use it all the time when I convert to lossy (Ogg Vorbis) so that I do not have to replaygain the lossy files. This is important for me because my HW player do not read the replaygain tags. If FLAC decoder did not have this I could work around that, but it is nice to have it.

Triza

  • Stevie
  • [*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #139
@bryant

ah youre right, foobar doesnt put the highest bit depth to 32 per default. so i encoded at 16 all the time.

  • beto
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #140
Another great thing about FLAC is the --apply-replaygain-which-is-not-lossless switch in the reference decoder. I use it all the time when I convert to lossy (Ogg Vorbis) so that I do not have to replaygain the lossy files. This is important for me because my HW player do not read the replaygain tags. If FLAC decoder did not have this I could work around that, but it is nice to have it.

Triza


Foobar can do this as well when using the embedded converter for any supported codec. I use it all the time to encode my wavpacks to ogg vorbis. 

  • Stevie
  • [*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #141
i just tried flac compared to wavpak and must say that wavpack has a slight better compression rate.

  • Triza
  • [*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #142

Another great thing about FLAC is the --apply-replaygain-which-is-not-lossless switch in the reference decoder. I use it all the time when I convert to lossy (Ogg Vorbis) so that I do not have to replaygain the lossy files. This is important for me because my HW player do not read the replaygain tags. If FLAC decoder did not have this I could work around that, but it is nice to have it.

Triza


Foobar can do this as well when using the embedded converter for any supported codec. I use it all the time to encode my wavpacks to ogg vorbis. 


OK, but I only use Foobar only for playing on my media PC. The main rig is Linux and I do convert with scripts.

Triza

  • Synthetic Soul
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #143
Monkey's Audio 3.99 user (4.01b2 GUI) and batch files.

...

I just wish it would store a checksum of the raw pcm data and support piping like flac.
The version at shntool supports piping; I used it to convert my APE collection to WV.  I'm not sure if it supports STDIN, but definately STDOUT.  I think it will do both.
I'm on a horse.

  • windmiller
  • [*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #144
I use Flac because.....

1. Has Hardware Support
2. Is Actively Developed (Thanks Josh!)
3. Widespread Software Support
4. So I can wear my FLAC shirt without being a liar!

  • jgarra
  • [*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #145
 

I use Monkey's.  It compresses better than either. I don't care about how fast it seeks or its license, or any of that other stuff as I'm not an idealist, nor do  I use it for anything besides archival purposes in ape+cue.

  • greynol
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #146
Monkey's Audio 3.99 user (4.01b2 GUI) and batch files.
...
I just wish it would store a checksum of the raw pcm data and support piping like flac.
The version at shntool supports piping; I used it to convert my APE collection to WV.  I'm not sure if it supports STDIN, but definately STDOUT.  I think it will do both.

Thanks Synthetic Soul.

I've used the version that you mentioned; I just wish the developer would implement it himself.
13 February 2016: The world was blessed with the passing of a truly vile and wretched person.

Your eyes cannot hear.

  • kanak
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #147
WavPack because of its awesome hybrid mode. I'm currently ripping all my cds to the hybrid mode with 320 kbps lossy. i'm gonna burn all the correction files to a DVD-R in case i need to transcode to lossy or to burn an audio cd.

I tried FLAC too, i'm blown away by it's decompression speed (it was like 147 X) but WavPack has better compression speed. i'll be sticking with wavpack.

  • Synthetic Soul
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #148
I've used the version that you mentioned; I just wish the developer would implement it himself.
Ah, sorry; sucking eggs and all that.  Yes.  It seems stupid to not implement piping in the default encoder/decoder.  One of the many reasons that I appreciate WavPack more.
I'm on a horse.

Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?
Reply #149

I use WavPack.
(Yes I like the red foobar2000 wv icon)

Unfortunately, I'm quite unhappy when I use Linux. There are few options then.
Basically I just dislike XMMS.
Quod Libet is a really nice piece of program but just refuses to play some of my wv files while other just play fine. Me being blind or something?

Quod Libet uses the gstreamer-wavpack plugin and there are some problems with earlier versions (like 0.8) of that. I don't know my way around Linux yet to know how to upgrade, but that's what you need to do (you might need an updated app also, I don't know). The problem was that WavPack "high" mode files crash the plugin. And, files before 4.0 will not work either, in case you have some of those. I have the same problem with Rhythmbox.

Hope this helps... 

I updated everything (Ubuntu, GStreamer and Quod Libet) in the last weeks and now everything works fine indeed. Now I'm a happy man using Linux AND WavPack.

You're a great guy bryant.