Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: WavPack 4.41 beta available (Read 79905 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

WavPack 4.41 beta available

Reply #75 –
Quote from: bryant on
Of course, these changes would involve a lot more internal shuffling than the current stuff did. 

Yes  That's why I hoped to get some help from you  I need to think a bit more about it. You know, absence of spare time is the biggest problem...

Quote from: bryant on
BTW, please feel free to e-mail me directly on your ideas. I really do appreciate your input (and work so far). 

Thanks for the invitation! I think the developer mailing list would probably be a good place for discussion.

WavPack 4.41 beta available

Reply #76 –
Is it release time yet please  ?
WavPack 5.6.0 -b384hx6cmv / qaac64 2.80 -V 100

WavPack 4.41 beta available

Reply #77 –
Quote from: DARcode on
Is it release time yet please  ?

Well, there's going to be a beta3 to fix the issues raised in this thread, and I'm also looking at quickly throwing in the --skip and --until commands from the FLAC decoder. So It'll be at least a few weeks before an official release...

David

WavPack 4.41 beta available

Reply #78 –
Quote from: bryant on
Quote from: DARcode on

Is it release time yet please  ?

Well, there's going to be a beta3 to fix the issues raised in this thread, and I'm also looking at quickly throwing in the --skip and --until commands from the FLAC decoder. So It'll be at least a few weeks before an official release...

David
Fantastic! Thanks a lot!
WavPack 5.6.0 -b384hx6cmv / qaac64 2.80 -V 100

WavPack 4.41 beta available

Reply #79 –
Quote from: bryant on
I just wish I could get a few more percent on the decoding speed to break 100x. The way it looks now it's easy for people to get WavPack mixed up with the riff-raff! 
I've finally got around to uploading my test results for 4.41 final.

You may be pleased to see -f(x) achieving 104x when decoding.

It's just a shame (for WavPack marketing) that my CPU doesn't benefit as well as many.
I'm on a horse.

WavPack 4.41 beta available

Reply #80 –
Quote from: Synthetic Soul on
Quote from: bryant on
I just wish I could get a few more percent on the decoding speed to break 100x. The way it looks now it's easy for people to get WavPack mixed up with the riff-raff! 
I've finally got around to uploading my test results for 4.41 final.

You may be pleased to see -f(x) achieving 104x when decoding.

It's just a shame (for WavPack marketing) that my CPU doesn't benefit as well as many.


Just checked, nice tests. I'd like to see this test run under a dual-core CPU, to see how the codecs would scale. I don't know how many (if any) support it. We would see a huge speed improvement. AFAIK, WavPack doesn't support it (yet)... 
Maybe I'll run that tests in some time, maybe broading the test corpus to include other types of music! 
Regards!

WavPack 4.41 beta available

Reply #81 –
Quote from: Bruno Monteiro on
... run under a dual-core CPU, to see how the codecs would scale. I don't know how many (if any) support it. We would see a huge speed improvement.

You don't understand. On multi core machines you should run multi instances of the wavpack executable. Your hard disk will become the next bottleneck quite soon.
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.