Skip to main content

Topic: lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread (Read 223847 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • Nick.C
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #25
Monkey's Audio does not make use of a "wasted-bits" feature as FLAC, TAK, Wavpack, WMA-Lossless, etc do. Therefore there is no space-saving benefit in using lossyWAV with Monkey's Audio, ALAC, etc.
lossyWAV -q X -a 4 -s h -A --feedback 2 --limit 15848| FLAC -5 -e -p -b 512 -P=4096 -S-

  • krmathis
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #26
I love the idea, I just don't have the development platforms or the experience to carry out the conversion.

Fair enough, especially the lack of experience part.
But regarding development platform I am quite sure all you need is a GNU/Linux distro with GCC, ...

  • Nick.C
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #27
And a knowledge of C which I don't have - lossyWAV is Delphi & IA-32 assembler....
lossyWAV -q X -a 4 -s h -A --feedback 2 --limit 15848| FLAC -5 -e -p -b 512 -P=4096 -S-

  • [JAZ]
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #28
And a knowledge of C which I don't have - lossyWAV is Delphi & IA-32 assembler....


http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/

I briefly tried it and one of the first problems is dealing with the "uses Windows" import.
But you should be able to workaround that.

If i've read it correctly, it runs in several platforms and *is able to crosscompile* (as in compiling in windows for linux).

  • Nick.C
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #29
Thanks [JAZ], that's certainly worth a look - if it means that other platforms can be accessed simply by changing my compiler I'll give it a try!
lossyWAV -q X -a 4 -s h -A --feedback 2 --limit 15848| FLAC -5 -e -p -b 512 -P=4096 -S-

  • servimo
  • [*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #30
Quote
lossyFLAC:
CODE
Encoder: c:\windows\system32\cmd.exe
Extension: lossy.flac
Parameters: /d /c c:\"program files"\bin\lossywav - --standard --silent --stdout|c:\"program files"\bin\flac - -b 512 -5 -f -o%d
Format is: lossless or hybrid
Highest BPS mode supported: 24
What happen if I use lossywav - --standard and flac -8 ? will I have more compression? and why not use it in this default config for foobar2000? if there is some problem.

I did some tests in a little file (an acoustic guitar flac file), this is what happen:

original file:
7.741.294 bytes bitrate 572kbps

lossywav - --standard flac -5:
5.722.908 bytes bitrate 423kbps

lossywav - --standard flac -8: (here I lose the tags(?)) don't know if I did something wrong here, but in the next conversion the tags are all there.
5.713.914 bytes bitrate 422kbps

lossywav - --insane flac -8: (the size is increased)
8.029.224 bytes bitrate 593kbps
  • Last Edit: 04 September, 2008, 11:40:20 PM by servimo

  • sauvage78
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #31
servimo:
RTFM
-b 512
Rip & Check: EAC Secure [Low/C2]+CUETools [AR Confidence 2+]
NAS (Backup): Flac -4 (for Speed) | CDImage+CUE with F2K
DAP (Playback): Opus 128Kbps | Tracks with F2KM on Android (LG G5)
Video: VP10 (2160p30@24Mbps/2160p60@48Mbps) Asap !!!

  • servimo
  • [*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #32
I should have did it this way: FLAC -> WAV -> lossyFLAC
Is this?
Sorry  I didn't see it is a Development thread and there is others threads. I was just looking for some explanation about lossyWAV
  • Last Edit: 05 September, 2008, 01:40:47 AM by servimo

  • Nick.C
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #33
servimo, the foobar2000 settings work perfectly - if you're having problems, check the converter settings carefully. Please ensure that the "-b 512" remains in the flac element of the command line as this is what ensures optimal flac block length during encoding.

Alternatively, if you create a batch file containing the following:
Code: [Select]
@if exist "%1" flac -d "%1" --stdout --silent|lossywav - --stdout --standard|flac - -b 512 -o "%~n1.lossy.flac" --silent && tag --fromfile "%1" "%~n1.lossy.flac"
and drag-n-drop single files onto it then that should also work.
  • Last Edit: 05 September, 2008, 03:20:03 AM by Nick.C
lossyWAV -q X -a 4 -s h -A --feedback 2 --limit 15848| FLAC -5 -e -p -b 512 -P=4096 -S-

  • halb27
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #34
...lossywav - --insane flac -8: (the size is increased)...


a) -b 512 usually is essential as sauvage78 said.

b) You encoded a solo instrument. This is the situation where lossyWAV  + FLAC doesn't come out well.
    If you can use WavPack or TAK instead of FLAC the situation is better.
    I have a series of tracks like that, but as they form a very minor portion of my total collection I don't care
    and keep using FLAC. It doesn't sound good that in these cases lossless wavPack yieds smaller files than
    lossyWAV + FLAC, but in practice it's insignificant. Moreover though in theory lossyWAV + FLAC is lossy in
    these cases the error of the procedure is extremely close to zero if not really zero.
  • Last Edit: 05 September, 2008, 03:28:19 AM by halb27
lame3995o -Q1

  • [JAZ]
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #35
What happen if I use lossywav - --standard and flac -8 ?


The usage of flac -5 vs any higher compression was chosen because of the nature of FLAC.
Higher settings usually improve on compression, just because they can work on a bigger chunk of samples. But since lossyWav needs to work on a small chunk (so that it can maximize the reduction of bits. That's why the -b 512 setting is required for optimum results), the gains are few, while the encoding time increase.

  • servimo
  • [*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #36
In all those tests I'll keep the -b 512 I didn't change anything alse excepts the parts bold in my post above, --standard and -5. It just happen that when I used -8 for FLAC I didn't have the tags copied between. Nothing more...
I have a DVD with various albums in wav format and I encoded some of them to lossyFLAC and I like the result. The compression and what I hear is very good. The only thing, I think I could notice is that mp3 is more muffled(Google translation) than the lossyFLAC and it reminds me a little of the AAC convertion when I hear it.
As i said above I will keep using these defaults settings, not much gain at all if I use FLAC best compression.
  • Last Edit: 05 September, 2008, 04:57:47 PM by servimo

  • uart
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #37
The only thing, I think I could notice is that mp3 is more muffled(Google translation) than the lossyFLAC and it reminds me a little of the AAC convertion when I hear it.


So far only one person has posted transcode listening tests and they had trouble hearing any difference in the mp3's even on problem samples and with "lossyway -P" setting. See http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=65637

My understanding was that (theoretically at least) the lack of psychoacoustics should make it a very good format for transcoding. Can anyone confirm is that correct?

  • halb27
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #38
...My understanding was that (theoretically at least) the lack of psychoacoustics should make it a very good format for transcoding. Can anyone confirm is that correct?

It is expected to be a very good format for transcoding though just 1 test backs this up. This test was done at low quality setting -q 1, and as people with the target of transcoding are expected to use a higher quality setting this should give some confidence regarding lossyWAV for this one test.
  • Last Edit: 06 September, 2008, 12:08:50 PM by halb27
lame3995o -Q1

  • uart
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #39
I'm new to lossywav and I've just tested started testing it with a few files. So far I really like it. With the "lossywav - S" setting I'm getting about one half the files size of my previous "monkey audio -extreme" files.

A couple of questions though.

1. When I make a correction file it only seems to contain a small amount of noise without even vestige of the original music. I'm guessing this is a good thing. Is that small noise in the correction file exactly equal to the added noise in the lossywav file or is correspondence between the two more indirect.

2. I see that currently people are mostly interested in the correction file for the purpose of inspection only. Say however that I wanted to keep the correction file for archiving purposes, the correction file seems to compress much more poorly than the actual lossywav so the total storage is larger then with lossless (tak or monkeyaudio). Does anyone know if it would be possible (at least in theory) to make the correction file more compressible, or perhaps for a compressor that "understood it" to compress it more efficiently?
  • Last Edit: 06 September, 2008, 12:18:13 PM by uart

  • uart
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #40
HELP I'm getting double file extentions in all my lossy.tak's converted from foobar (latest 0.9.5.5).

I used the following guide to set up a custom command line encoder in foobar  : http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LossyWAV

It works perfectly except that the output files are named like "my_song_title.lossy.tak.lossy.tak" and I cant figure out why the double extention. Can anybody help?

BTW, here's the exact code as per the guide. I have exactly this except for different path names where appropriate.

Code: [Select]
lossyTAK settings:

Encoder: c:\windows\system32\cmd.exe
Extension  : lossy.tak
Parameters : /d /c c:\"program files"\bin\lossywav - --standard --silent --stdout|
             c:\"program files"\bin\takc -e -p2m -fsl512 -ihs - %d
Format is: lossless or hybrid
Highest BPS mode supported: 24
  • Last Edit: 06 September, 2008, 02:17:27 PM by uart

  • Nick.C
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #41
uart:

1: The correction file is made up of the difference between the lossless original and the bit-removed samples. Essentially it is white noise, louder where more bits have been removed.

2: The compressibility of the correction file has long been an issue - I suppose if we could find a compressor which would handle it better we might not need lossyWAV at all!

Transcoding problem: try deleting the contents of the "extension" box in the converter settings in foobar2000, then retype "lossy.tak".
lossyWAV -q X -a 4 -s h -A --feedback 2 --limit 15848| FLAC -5 -e -p -b 512 -P=4096 -S-

  • uart
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #42
Thanks for the info Nick.

Transcoding problem: try deleting the contents of the "extension" box in the converter settings in foobar2000, then retype "".


No that didn't fix it.

BTW, if I remove the "lossy.tak" from the extention box then the conversion fails. When I put it back in it works but with the double extentions.

When I right-click (in foobars playlist) the file I want to convert and select "convert to..." etc, just before it does the conversion it pops up a "save as" dialog and the filename in the dialog is "my_song_name.lossy.tak. However when I click save and it start converting the "converter" states that the destination is "my_song_name.lossy.tak.lossy.tak

If I edit the save dialog and delete the ".lossy.tak" extention before I hit save then it names the file correctly. That is, if make the save file dialog read just "my_song_name" without any extention, then when I hit save it adds the correct extentions just once. This works ok but I have to do it manually every time.

BTW. I have my file system settings (in winxP) set to display file extentions (the default windows XP setting is not to do so, but I'm guessing that many others like myself enable it). Could that be a problem?

  • Nick.C
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #43
I have all file extensions visible by choice too.

How are you naming your files in the converter?

I use:
Code: [Select]
[[%album artist% - ][$char(91)%date%$char(93)] %album%\][%discnumber%-]%tracknumber% - %artist% - %title%
for single tracks and:
Code: [Select]
[%album artist% - ][$char(91)%date%$char(93) ]%album%[ - CD%discnumber%]
for albums.
lossyWAV -q X -a 4 -s h -A --feedback 2 --limit 15848| FLAC -5 -e -p -b 512 -P=4096 -S-

  • uart
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #44
UPDATE.

Previously I've just been testing this with a single file. Just now I tested it with multiple files selected for conversion. Whereas a single files displays the actual filename in the save dialog box in the case of multiple files it only display the destination folder name. Well what do you know, it names the multiple files correctly.

I'd still be interested to know if there's a fix, but at least the work-around is not so bad now that I know I only need to do it (that is, to delete the extention in the save dialog box before clicking save) for the case of converting single files.

I have all file extensions visible by choice too.

How are you naming your files in the converter?

I use:
Code: [Select]
[[%album artist% - ][$char(91)%date%$char(93)] %album%\][%discnumber%-]%tracknumber% - %artist% - %title%
for single tracks and:
Code: [Select]
[%album artist% - ][$char(91)%date%$char(93) ]%album%[ - CD%discnumber%]
for albums.


I haven't edited those fields. They currently read,

Single track
Code: [Select]
[%list_index% ]%title%


Album Images
Code: [Select]
[%album artist% - ]%album%


Is that a problem?

  • Nick.C
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #45
Your track / album naming strings shouldn't be a problem. I am at a loss with respect to a solution as I have never encountered this phenomenon using foobar2000.
lossyWAV -q X -a 4 -s h -A --feedback 2 --limit 15848| FLAC -5 -e -p -b 512 -P=4096 -S-

  • uart
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #46
Thanks anyway Nick. I've just cut and pasted your filename settings into foobar and they work fine. With your settings it no longer puts the filename in the save dialog box, it just puts the folder name and everything works fine. I guess I'll have to learn the syntax of those foobar settings if I want to change anything there, otherwise I'll just keep your setting.

  • foosion
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • FB2K Moderator (Donating)
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #47
My theory is that some part of the software checks if you have set the file name has already the extension .lossy.tak, but compares it against .tak only. Of course, that doesn't match, so it will helpfully append .lossy.tak to the file name. Since this occurs only when converting single files, I suspect that the culprit may be the standard Windows "Save As" dialog, but I'm not sure.
http://foosion.foobar2000.org/ - my components for foobar2000

  • sauvage78
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #48
As I wanted to know if it was usefull to include a lowpass filter to lossywav (with the hope to save some space) I did a quick test with Adobe Audition:

Album: Darkness, The - 2003 - Permission To Land:

CDImage Original            + Tak -p2e ==> 286mo
CDImage Lowpass 20Khz + Tak -p2e ==> 280mo
CDImage Original            + Lossywav Portable + Tak -p2e ==> 97.3mo (102 092 800 octets)
CDImage Lowpass 20Khz + Lossywav Portable + Tak -p2e ==> 97.3mo (102 054 995 octets)

Album: Fantômas - 2001 - The Director's Cut

CDImage Original            + Tak -p2e ==> 246mo
CDImage Lowpass 20Khz + Tak -p2e ==> 243mo
CDImage Original            + Lossywav Portable + Tak -p2e ==> 97.3mo (102 080 296 octets)
CDImage Lowpass 20Khz + Lossywav Portable + Tak -p2e ==> 97.3mo (102 090 392 octets)

needless to say it is completely useless  ... but I still wanted to share the result with everyone ...
  • Last Edit: 08 September, 2008, 05:33:41 AM by sauvage78
Rip & Check: EAC Secure [Low/C2]+CUETools [AR Confidence 2+]
NAS (Backup): Flac -4 (for Speed) | CDImage+CUE with F2K
DAP (Playback): Opus 128Kbps | Tracks with F2KM on Android (LG G5)
Video: VP10 (2160p30@24Mbps/2160p60@48Mbps) Asap !!!

  • Gow
  • [*][*][*]
lossyWAV 1.2.0 Development Thread
Reply #49
Anyone know of a way to set up up a Lossy WMA-L string for foobar2000?  Zune 80 supports WMA-Lossless and I was reading WMA-L also works with Lossy WAV, so I figured I would go Lossy WMA-L and replace the Mp3/m4a library that I sync my Zune with. 

Though so far it looks like I am going to have to convert to another lossy WAV format and then to WMA-Lossless if I use just foobar2000.
Zune 80, Tak -p4 audio library, Lossless=Choice