I wouldn't see why
Best lossless encoder: TAK.Second best lossless encoder and most universally usable: FLAC.
Maybe I should have explicitly said: best resp. second best lossless encoder for encoding the lossyWAV result.
"My experience is with FLAC.Improving with TAK doesn't change the result very much however.",
And for a codec to benefit from lossyWav, is it enough that it can be set to a blocksize of 512 manually, or does it ALSO have a built-in function similar to FLAC's "wasted bits" feature (i.e. question is if the codec must meet both requirements) ?
WMA Lossless doesn't have 'blocksize' option yet it can benefit from lossyWAV.On the other side, CUETools.ALACEnc have blocksize option, but cannot effectively compress files after lossyWAV.So, only the latter feature is absolutely necessary.
The blocksize is automatic and equates to approximately 11.6msec for 44.1kHz material and 10.6msec for 48kHz material. This is due to the default 1.5msec and 20msec (approximate) FFT window lengths used for the analysis.For lossless encoding, the blocksize can be set to anything that you want, however for optimum encoding it should be set to 512 for 44.1/48kHz material, 1024 for 88.2/96kHz material and 2048 for 176.4/192kHz material.
Is there anything I can do about this (parameters, etc.) ?
Or is anything planned for a future version?
So lossyWAV blocksize at first is just an internal detail of the lossyWAV mechanism.
In practice your choice is TAK, FLAC, or wvPack, and wvPack isn't very attractive as it desn't work well with small blocks.
For lossless encoding, the blocksize can be set to anything that you want,