BTW I'd really love if Josh Coalson would come across this thread. Hey, if TBeck has been able to fine-tune TAK and gain 10% in only a few hours time, maybe Josh could do something similar with FLAC ?
I'm asking this because otherwise they would be quite useless for most 24/192 files : the files for my initial example were stereo, but most 24bit files are also multichannel AFAIK (e.g. DVD-A)...
@TBeck, Bryant or whoelse needs 1 or 2 (classical) 192kHz files for a test, have a look on the Lyndberg Lyd (2L) HiRes Download - test bench page.
I am sure those files will be very FLAC-friendly: Because of the high pitched noise they will not show it's inefficiency when dealing with low passed alike files.
FLAC 1.2.1 -8 54.65 Monkey's Audio 3.99 Extra 53.34 TAK 2.0 (Developer version) -p3m 53.51
But what are such 192 KHz files good for? Twice the space requirements than 96 KHz recordings only to add noise above 48 KHz?
Quote from: TBeck on 14 August, 2008, 01:54:23 PMBut what are such 192 KHz files good for? Twice the space requirements than 96 KHz recordings only to add noise above 48 KHz? I forgot that L2 likes to record in (what they call) DXD, which is like DSD but twice the sample rate.As I said I didn't bother with the 192kHz but the 96kHz 5.1 at least sounded pretty good.
Are there any upcoming developments on this matter from the FLAC side ? Thanks.
Original, not lowpassed audio fileWave: 296,5MB, duration 4:29FLAC -8: 57,2%, took 43 sec (encoding CPU)Flake -8: 54,4%, took 28 secMonkey's -c3000: 53,4%, took 38 secWavpack -hh -x4: 53,6%, took 856 seclowpassedFLAC -8: 53,9%, took 41 secFlake -8: 44,1%, took 29 secMonkey's -c3000: 44,7%, took 37 secWavpack -hh -x3: 50,2%, took 187 secWavpack -hh -x4: 27,0%, took 842 sec