I notice there are some forum users who advocate (or at least personally use) WavPack hybrid mode for "lossless" archiving. So, do you go by the recommendation on the WavPack site?
320 kbps gives audibly transparent operation in the vast majority of cases... This is a reasonable size for keeping music permanently on a hard drive...
How would you use EAC and the external compression option? What would your command line look like? Would you use wapet to tag the files with APE tags or would you attach ID3 tags or do you not tag at all?
I notice there are some forum users who advocate (or at least personally use) WavPack hybrid mode for "lossless" archiving. So, do you go by the recommendation on the WavPack site?
I do for my CD backup purposes. But hybrid surely isn't lossless - although quality is surely very good, because there's not much signal processing.
What would your command line look like?
I don't use EAC to directly compress my WavPack files because of file naming issues (due to EAC's renaming behaviour). I rip to Wav and then use WavPackDrop to encode them.
Would you use wapet to tag the files with APE tags or would you attach ID3 tags or do you not tag at all?
After I encode, I APE tag them with TAG using file name and directory, in the format:
\Album Name\Artist - Track number - Track Name.wv
That's all the information I need in a tag, really.
Regards;
Roberto.
I notice there are some forum users who advocate (or at least personally use) WavPack hybrid mode for "lossless" archiving. So, do you go by the recommendation on the WavPack site?
320 kbps gives audibly transparent operation in the vast majority of cases... This is a reasonable size for keeping music permanently on a hard drive...
How would you use EAC and the external compression option? What would your command line look like? Would you use wapet to tag the files with APE tags or would you attach ID3 tags or do you not tag at all?
The issue of using EAC with WavPack is discussed in this thread:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....eac,and,wavpack (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=19&t=7340&hl=eac,and,wavpack)
Lately I have been using the new beta WavPack plugin for the dBpowerAMP ripper that Spoon created, and it works really well. It doesn't require an intermediate wav file, it works well with the hybrid mode and it appends APE2 tags which are supported very nicely by FooBar2000.
But hybrid surely isn't lossless
I thought: .wv file + .wvc file = all info needed for lossless decoding
Is that wrong?
But hybrid surely isn't lossless
I thought: .wv file + .wvc file = all info needed for lossless decoding
Is that wrong?
No, that's correct.
If you have the .wvc file then you have lossless.
How does the total file size (.wv + .wvc) affect the advantage of smaller file size. In other words, is the size of both files together larger, smaller, or the same as a comaprable lossless format?
How does the total file size (.wv + .wvc) affect the advantage of smaller file size. In other words, is the size of both files together larger, smaller, or the same as a comaprable lossless format?
The combined size is
slightly larger than a regular lossless file, like a percent or two. Few things are free.
Also, the cost is somewhat higher for lower lossy bitrates, so there is more cost associated with a 265 kbps file compared to 384 kbps.
But hybrid surely isn't lossless
I thought: .wv file + .wvc file = all info needed for lossless decoding
Is that wrong?
Oh, sorry. I was thinking about the lossy part only.