One obvious area where help may be appreciated is the website, which indeed is looking like 1997 and also is outdated content-wise.
Steinberg Cubase and Adobe Audition
I think Xiph should push to make FLAC an ISO-standard (or IETF-standard like Opus).I think that would help it become the mainstream standard it deserves to be.
QuoteI think Xiph should push to make FLAC an ISO-standard (or IETF-standard like Opus).I think that would help it become the mainstream standard it deserves to be.IETF usually involves Internet standards; stuff that would be used over the internet. Lossless audio requires a lot of bandwidth, but with today's internet speeds it might be feasible. Streaming FLAC won't work on my connection Opus satisfies a lot of use cases for use on the Internet like low-delay, low-bandwidth, packet loss etc.
FLAC needs >2G support
More or less, they reached a point of maturity. But they still need to do improvements (2gb limit for example).
Quote from: IgorC on 31 August, 2012, 04:30:36 PMAFAIK the future Xiph's format Ghost will support lossless. But it won't be ready any time soon.I'm honestly not really interested in formats that support both lossy and lossless mode. It's purely my opinion, but I like knowing that if I have a FLAC file that I have an exact copy of the audio that was encoded. If I want audio in a form where I don't mind loss, then there are plenty of choices out there. Mixing lossy and lossless audio in the same codec does nothing but confuse the issue and introduce too much chance of mistaking a lossy version as lossless and introducing loss into a signal chain that was intended to be lossless.Imagine if mp3 had a lossless mode and you had the hordes of noobs out there mangling their encodes because they don't understand the difference. You'd have people loading sansa clips with lossless mp3 files then complaining because they can only get 5 or 6 albums on it. Then you'd have "CD backups" loaded with 128Kbps CBR files. You know it would happen, A LOT. Keep it simple.
AFAIK the future Xiph's format Ghost will support lossless. But it won't be ready any time soon.
Oh this nonsense has been debunked before. Wavpack lossless files have a 'lossless' flag in the tag profile and most people are using lossless mode exclusive or a hybrid / lossless mix. WV Lossy files have a 'lossy' flag. You don't know the authenticity of a file unless you encode it yourself. Just because a FLAC file doesn't support lossless doesn't mean the source isn't lossy. In some cases it is on P2P networks and likewise LAME V0 / 320k files have a sharp 16khz cutoff . You don't know the a flac file hasn't been tampered with . No one will get a wavpack lossy file unless using the -b switch in the encoder explicitly.
You couldn't have explained better why I don't like WavPack.Opensource projects are too easily abandoned...
How exactly is a wavpack user gonna end up with a lossy / lossless confusion - unless they have seriously diminished brain function ?
So here's a simpleton's question: am I correct that Sourceforge still contains the latest FLAC binaries? And that there are no "variant" versions available (akin to halb27's -V0+ variant of LAME)?
I find this thread to be a fascinating look into a codec that I'm just starting to use (yes, I'm a latecomer).So here's a simpleton's question: am I correct that Sourceforge still contains the latest FLAC binaries? And that there are no "variant" versions available (akin to halb27's -V0+ variant of LAME)?
However, since they're all lossless, the actual data stored is bit-for-bit identical no matter what approach is used. So the encoder doesn't really matter.
Class 10 64GB µSDHC card in phone, FLAC to phone in not too much time at all.
Should be pointed out that not all FLAC files are streamable, though. The safe option is to use the reference encoder (and avoid the --lax command-line option ... I guess beginners will be more than satisfied with -8).
But yes, I've found -8 -p to be more than satisfactory in most cases. That said, I have been surprised at the apparent complexity of some of my favorite tracks, as FLAC could only go to a .800 or so ratio on some of them, even with these settings.