I'd also advise against WavPack lossy because it targets bitrate (constant, except it won't pad data with useless bits if it already can encode a piece losslessly with lesser bitrate), not quality, so it has to be wasteful AND you still may get artifacts when there's something too complex for the target bitrate. If you really want to use this kind of codec, I'd recommend LossyWAV instead. (which targets quality, not bitrate)
It's theoretically true but efficiency of both formats is probably not the same. At a given bitrate the quality-based format can be worse.
This is what Shadowking wrote two years ago:
It could be true. Wavpack at same bitrate is better than lossywav with objectively less noise . Lossyway noise moves in 6db steps while wavpack moves infinite steps from what I read in the past. OTOH Wavpack doesn't have a yet a true quality mode while lossywav does. This also might not have any impact if comparing strong settings like lossyway --extreme to wavpack -b550x4 .. wavpack is also expected to be 100% transparent and offering better quality [objective]. At more moderate bitrates (400k) subjectively , Lossywav may have the advantage in very rare cases due to the quality mode . At lower rates like 250k wavpack may have a general advantage too .
From this post: WavPack lossy should be better at low bitrate as a consequence of advance coding techniques; and with no surprise at very high bitrate both WavPack and LossyWAV sound perfect. And between: LossyWAV has a true quality mode but lower quality coding technique; WavPack lossy better coding tool but no true quality mode. I don't see a clear winner here (except perhaps WavPack lossy at ~200…250 kbps) in the absence of listening tests.
You don't recommand WavPack because it's wasteful and with possible audible artifacts on possible situation. But is it really different from true VBR encoders like MPC --nmt 18, or from Ogg Vorbis 350, or anything lossy that always stays at very high bitrate?
Just for the anecdote, I fed my classical bitrate table with some extreme bitrate (low and high) recordings. And I have data for MPC and low bitrate stereo CD:
FLAC -8 MPC -7 MPC -10
Feldman [Schleiermacher] The Late Piano Works, Vol.2 (MDG, CD, 2009) 219 kbps 235 kbps 337 kbps
Mompou [Perianes] Música Callada (Harmonia Mundi, CD, 2006) 274 kbps 250 kbps 361 kbps
Silvestrov [Blumina] Piano Works (Grand Piano, CD, 2013) 255 kbps 217 kbps 332 kbps
VA [Haochen Zhang] Schumann, Liszt, Janacek & Brahms. Piano Works (BIS, CD, 2017) 308 kbps 235 kbps 335 kbps
AVERAGE 264 kbps 236 kbps 341 kbps
MPC is a true VBR encoder, quality-oriented and efficient… and it can wastes bit as well (MPC uses up to 50% bitrate more than FLAC, not LossyFLAC, true FLAC!) on some occasion. And even when bitrate exceeds the needed bitrate for lossless compression you still can't be sure that transparency is fully reached because every piece of the signal is transformed by the lossy algorithms. Anyway, these examples can also prove that MPC can be as wasteful as WavPack Lossy and probably as unsecure for maniac people (same apply to Vorbis and Opus, but AAC FDK, FHG and iTunes are more flexible here…).
To recap, problem is unchanged and Gecko perfectly summarized it. If we except MP3 which has native flaws at high bitrate (pre-echo handling), everything is considered as wasteful but transparent… at least until something breaks and wait to be discovered. For peace of mind lossless is therefore the best and maybe the only choice ; for high quality at 350 kbps almost all formats are fine. There is no need to tweak anything with additional switches or to recommend one format over another.
Topic: Musepack setting for very high quality? (Read 12892 times)
previous topic - next topic