FLAC and TAK are within 2% of each other.......FLAC vs TAK
If decoding speed is an issue you apparently aren't using a desktop or tethered laptop for playback, so at the minimum you've left out one important piece of information. More details needed - you've made an unusual request and don't appear to have adequately explained what your constraints are.
Because of my very old sound card, i could not test 24-bit playback. Futhermore: Some visualization plugins don't support 24-bit data. It has to be converted to 16 bit before sending it to those plugins. This has not been implemented yet! It's very easy to do, but i don't want to include code, which i am not able to test. I will soon buy a better soundcard.
I am using a desktop, but it's pretty old (Pentium D @ 3 GHz, 2 GB DDR2 RAM), so decoding and playing back a file compressed with Monkey's Audio's Very High (or something similar) is a—pardon my language—pain in the ass.
Whenever I try to open a file encoded in Monkey's Audio Very High, my CPU needs like 2-3 seconds to start playing back—the same happens with seeking. I don't really like that (I don't like it at all), seeing as I use lossless files for listening purposes as well as for archiving.
Whenever I try to open a file encoded in Monkey's Audio Very High, my CPU needs like 2-3 seconds to start playing back
For years, I've been using FLAC and only recently switched to True Audio. Two to five out of hundred rips didn't play properly in Winamp with cue_in, some songs stopped right in the middle. Time display is always a few seconds behind. Well, this may all be related to cue_in or other things related to my machine and not to FLAC. Don't want to blame FLAC here, it's a great tool.
The True Audio Encoder ttaenc has two perceived disadvantages: Nearly no compression options and inability to redirect output to a pipe. For the type of music I listen to, which is mostly Heavy Metal, I found that the generated files sizes of .flac and .tta are nearly identical when compression to FLAC is done with second best ratio (Q 7 out of . Both encoding and decoding speed are at least on the same level
Both encoding and decoding speed are at least on the same level, my (unverified) impression is that True Audio is often faster.
An advantage of True Audio is that it supports ID3 Tags. I create both lossless and lossy files when I rip. Having the very same id3 tags in both formats makes file management easier (for example file and folder name generation from tags).
True Audio is Open Source Software like FLAC is. Like FLAC, it lacks active development for a couple of years. Perhaps WavPack is the better, actively developed alternative? I don't know.
mostly Heavy Metal, [...]An advantage of True Audio is that it supports ID3 Tags.
Sad to see that noone linked to our own wiki..