Also, in ya'lls opinion, is it really worth using a lossless compression codec instead of using say Ogg Vorbis or MPC?
While I have alot of space at the moment I don't have enough to hold everything in lossless.
any of u guys actually use ONLY lossless formats?
Lossy = it doesn't produce output bit identical to the original.ADPCM, DTS, AC-3, MP3, Vorbis, GSM, Speex are lossy codecs.MLP, FLAC, Liquid Audio, Monkey's Audio, LPAC are lossless.
I am not very sure ab the nature of Monkey's Audio and LPAC, but only entropy encoding will produce prefect decompressed stream at 100% the time. As long as you resample / FT to frequency domain / change sample format-depth, there is always chance of introducing artifacts during reconstruction.Pure entropy encoding do not compress well however.
I'm puzzled by one thing. I would think that a compression format where you can't play the file without decompressing (like .zip, .sit, etc.) would be able to compress a file more than current lossless formats that have to leave the file playable. I understand that lossless formats are tuned for sound and that's why they compress a .wav better than .zip, .sit, etc. Couldn't someone create an audio tuned compression format, where you can't play the file, that would have much better compression than current lossless formats? All I want to do is archive source material that I may not have access to in the future. A format like .zip tuned for audio would work great for me if the compression was better than formats that you can play.I'd be interested to hear whether this is possible, whether it already exists, or whether I'm just a kook!
only entropy encoding will produce prefect decompressed stream at 100% the time. As long as you resample / FT to frequency domain / change sample format-depth, there is always chance of introducing artifacts during reconstruction.
Lossless codecs don't resample, nor FT, the sample depht or format are meaningless since they become compressed.Example : "0000" can become "4x0", that is a 3:4 compression ratio.Original sample format : one character per sample. Final format :
The highest possible lossless compression of any data (in theory) can be achieved using a perfect forward predictor and arithmetic coding. Since it relies on forward prediction you can still play the stream without problems (for faster seeking you must trade some compression ratio though).
I'm not an expert in this field, so I can't say that's wrong, but it seems off the top of my head that there should be at least some cases in which a forward predictor (even a perfect one) is less than optimal. Other sources of redundancy could be found by other things, such as taking future samples into account (I think?).
It energy-compresses by using an MDCT, and then stores residuals for the portion of the signal the MDCT doesn't perfectly capture.
It's kind of a chicken-egg problem... if your goal is to predict future data, you cannot "cheat" and exploit the future data for that purpose