31
Lossless / Other Codecs / Re: Lossless codec comparison - part 3: CDDA (May '22)
Last post by Porcus -So how much of the news is the change in corpus?I guess that's hard to tell in general. I could have chosen to take the same corpus as last time to be able to compare, but that would propagate any advantages certain codecs have on certain material. I instead chose to make a 'fresh' start.
* Hm, since I am too lazy to check: Is the Revision 4 corpus a subset of the Revision 5, or did you also remove signals?
* Also, since I cannot check: the Pokémon album you have both as hi-res and as CDDA. Are they ... what we in music would speak of loosely as "the same mastering" (in that the difference would be very low volume if the 192 were carefully resampled to 44.1)? The results are a bit different between 192 and 44.1
* What was the recording chain of your diffuse sound fields recording? Is there any suspicion about that phenomenon "2" that TBeck points out in reply #12?
* I looked at the CDDA results the other day with fresh eyes, and there are some "unexpected" (well maybe not after Revision 4): In line with what you point out about where asymmetric codecs shine, it seems that the symmetric benefit at "denser" music. (Also that is how LA benefits vs OptimFROG?). But then at the most noisy, this Merzbow track fools the ape - and so also with the Merzbow album you included, although it isn't the least compressible in your corpus.
... it wouldn't be hard to visualize, if one is bothered to do the work: sort the albums by compressibility (say averaging some codecs at their max setting to order the signals) and present how TAK -p4m vs Monkey's Extra/Insane do against each other, say per decile/quartile. And what frog level it takes to beat them (and LA!).