Skip to main content


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.
Recent Posts
Listening Tests / Re: Personal blind sound quality comparison of Opus hard-CBR with framesize options
Last post by C.R.Helmrich -
OK, I figured it out, and explain here so that Jean-Marc (jmvalin) can read it. For stereo, 56 kbit/s CBR uses a different encoder configuration than for 56 kbit/s VBR, one where the encoder adaptively switches between the speech (Silk) and music (CELT) core. On the applaud sample, the first few seconds are interpreted as speech, and Silk apparently sounds quite a bit worse on applause-like signals than CELT. Using the --music option in Opus's command-line forces CELT throughout this sample. That avoids the problem you describe on this sample but, of course, a more robust speech/music discriminator would be a better solution.

3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: SACD .dsf file conversion plug-ins
Last post by Apesbrain -
Just tested and foobar2000 supports DSF 5.1 conversion to multi-channel WAV, FLAC, AAC and OGG.  I could not find a multi-channel encoder for MP3; Fraunhofer once had one in development, but it's no longer on their site.  I didn't test 7.1 as I have no such files.

After resampling to 44100, I also managed to encode the 5.1 WAV to AC3, if that is useful. Here's the test file: (Good for 30 days.)
FLAC / Re: New FLAC compression improvement
Last post by Porcus -
maybe there are still some surprises on 96kHz/24-bit material left.
I said the autoc-double testversion 2021063 -7 was good on hi-rez, this one is even better - on some material. Your new -9 is slooow on this material, good I didn't test the first one.

tl;dr on the below specified four hours of 96/24 (no fancy compression options given!)

-9: spends 40 minutes to achieve 57.25%
-8e spends 15:44 to achieve 57.30% (compared to autoc-double testversion 2021063 it shaves off .31 points at a cost of 8 seconds)
-8: spends 5:36 to achieve 57.33 (savings: 0.38 points, costs 12 seconds). ffmpeg at -8 gets inside that 0.38 interval, no matter whether it uses lpc_order 2 (spending 6:28) or 6 (at 17 minutes)
-7: spends 3:38 to achieve 57.37, which is still better than the autoc-double testversion's -8e
-6: spends 3:11 to achieve 57.83, that is not good compared to -7. Here and down to -4, the differences to the autoc-double testversion is at most .17
-5 spends 2:10 to achieve 57.92. -4 spends 2:00 to achieve 57.98. That's on par with ffmpeg -5, but twice as fast.

I tested CUETools.Flake -4 to -8, not so much variation, spending from 8:27 down to 3:04 for 58.23% to 58.48%.
I tested 1.3.1 at -8 -e (the -e by mistake), took twelve minutes for 58.97 and was worst for all files - except ordinary -8 half a point worse.

But a lot of the improvement is due to an album and an EP out of four. Your new -7 is faster than 1.3.1 -8 and yields savings by half a percent point up to 8.5 (!!) percentage points, and it is the biggest file that is least compressible.

Material: to get done in a day, I selected the following four hours from the above 96/24 corpus, in order of (in)compressibility:

* Kayo Dot: Hubardo. 93 minutes, prog.metal. Needs high bitrate despite not sounding as dense as the next one.
All about the same, all within half a percent point. And this is the biggest file of them all
Best: flake -8 at 65.72, then your new -9 at .73. (Heck, even OptimFrog -10 only beats this by 1 point.)

* Cult of Luna: The Raging River. 38 minutes sludge metal/post-hardcore.
Large variation, flake does not like this.
Best: New -9 at 59.45. -7 and up shaves a full percentage point over the autoc-double testversion. ffmpeg -8 about as good. ffmpeg -5 at 60.8. flake -8 at 62.59, 1.3.1 even a point worse at -8 -e.

* The Tea Party: Tx20. An EP, only 18 minutes Moroccan Roll. Earlier tests reveal: differs significantly between encoding options.
Large variations. Your -9: 53.95. Your -7 beats your new -6 by 3.2 points and your previous -8e by half that margin. ffmpeg varies by 3 points - here is the file where one more lpc pass makes for .1 rather than .02. Flake runs 60 to 61. flac 1.3.1 62 and 63.

* Open Goldberg Variations.  82 minutes piano, compresses to ~47 percent. Earlier tests reveal: doesn't use high Rice partition order.
Best: ffmpeg -8, but between 46.71 and 46.92 except flac -1.3.1 (add a point or more).

Done on an SSD, writing the files takes forty to sixty seconds. Percentages are file sizes without metadata, padding or seektables, but those don't matter on the percentages for such big files anyway.
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: SACD .dsf file conversion plug-ins
Last post by dbnicholls -
Thanks for your reply.

My standard playback is "portable".  The .wav files will be put on a high-capacity USB stick to plug into the port on my truck, or the port of my Sony Blu-ray USB port to play through my main stereo system.  Both have limited file support (e.g. not .flac) and I'd like to avoid the compression of .mp3
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2021