Finally, how about the tracks to encode? I have much metal (quite many different subgenres), much classical, some jazz, rock, some pop, but probably it would be interesting to see how these codecs encode 24-bit or 96kHz material (as I heard FLAC does quite bad comparing to Wavpack)
How are you planning to display the results? I've been meaning to upgrade my comparison for a long time. One thing I'd like to do is to enable users to filter results by various criteria, including genre.
...I'll search for ... some more classical and some more solo-instrumental. (mainly Classical) ...
http://www.icer.nl/test%20-%20Nightwish%20-%20Oceanborn.pdfAdded wavpack normal and ALAC. I tested ALAC using dBpoweramp on Wine, but I can't get Real and WMAL to work, so I'll test these on Windows. When these tests are complete, I'll write some scripts to generate graphs
Please also consider testing the EBU Sound Quality Assessment Material (SQAM) CD.
It would be way easier to automate indeed, but will it reflect the capabilities of ALAC? I mean, iTunes ALAC codec will be used more? This program doesn't use its own implementation of ALAC, it works via DLL plugins AFAIK
dpoweramp has its own ALAC implementation as well, or are you referring to the old iTunes plugin?
FLAC -8 -A tukey(0.5) -A flattop can bring +0.1% compression comparing to -8
For Flac there are some hints that there might be non-official settings that could be interesting for end users.
Also It's usefull to see that encoding from FLAC -8 to LAME is only 1.12% slower than from FLAC -0. There are a lot of bottlenecks like HDD, RAM etc in real encoding scenarios.
- Nine Inch Nails - The Slip (24-bit/96kHz)
... Now the question is: what should I do to enhance readability (or is it clear enough?) ...