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: Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid! (Read 6558 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Hi folkz,
need some information from you. Today i made some experiments and testings with wavpack in lossy format
from 320kbps down to 280 in comparison with my prefered lossy psytel aac archive (it comes around 260-280 ).
And what the hell is goin on, for the first time i can't hear any differences beetween  codecs at exactly same bitrate. So I need your help, coz i think wavpack seems to be the most genius i've ever tested (correction file, you can also create an exefile of the original wave needs only 1/5 of the original  and by running this exe you create the orginal wave back in enormous speed, fantastic to store, but not playable). You psychoaccoustics, what can you tell me about your experiences. Should i delete all my highsounded aacs and make them once again in wavepack up to 320. What is the real lossy format to store and build up a timeeroding lib.

In doubt and looking forward to your answers

shine on

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #1 –
What I love about WavPack is that you can save the discarded information onto another folder/CD and the lossy/playable part on your hard drive.  If you want the original back, just copy the CD back to your hard drive and it automatically combines to 2 files

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #2 –
Porcuhead:
Thanks a lot for reporting your results, but there's one thing in your description I want to clarify. If you create an .exe that is 1/5 of the original size (lossy mode) you do not get the exact original wav back when you run the .exe. The executable requires the "correction" file to be in the same directory just like playing the .wv does (if you want lossless). You may know this, but I wasn't sure.

Before you consider switching to WavPack you should try an example of a file that it doesn't do so good on (especially without "high" mode):

www.wavpack.com/Furious.wv

And, of course, keep in mind that it's not exactly a "worldwide standard" 

Jen:
I've heard several people describing your procedure and I thinks it's fine, but it also makes me slightly nervous. You realize that if you somehow lose the .wv files on your HD you might as well throw the CD-Rs with the .wvc files into the trash because they are useless without the .wv files, right?

What I do takes a little more space, but I backup the .wv and .wvc files together and just keep the .wv files on my HD. This way I can delete the files on the HD when I get tired of those CDs, but can always copy just the .wv files from the backups when I want to listen again. Of course, I have a small HD, so this might not make as much sense for everybody.

Anyway, glad you like WavPack... 

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #3 –
@bryant

That's what I like to see. A developer who is more than happy to provide a problem sample to show faults in his own codec. Apart from your furious sample, are there any others that you are aware of? (By the way, I've tried out the noise shaping switch you mentioned elsewhere, but haven't really noticed any benefit with it for the stuff I've tried so far, and if anything, it increases the hiss slightly, like you mentioned.)

@porcuhead

As has been mentioned in the other posts, you may want to test some other files to make sure that none of your music poses any serious difficulties to Wavpack. Having said that, since I've switched to Wavpack lossy for all of my music collection ('70's - current pop/rock), I haven't found any other problem samples, apart from the furious sample provided by bryant.

Den.

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #4 –
Hi folkz, thanx for your answers. as i am a wavpack newbee learned a lot.
Two things:
In my opinion wavpacks greatest advantage to store is this creation of exefile. In my attempt i created an exefile of darkside of the moon (30 th aniversary), that i have as one wavefile with cue to cut them in singlefiles by usin eac, in hybrid 320 kbps. so i resulted a file 1/5 to the original. next step was to unpack (recreate) this exe by startin it. so i get a new wavefile that seems to have the same size as the original wave.
then i take this new recreated wave and tried to cut in singles by usin the orignal cue of the original wave with eac. and what can i tell, it worked. so for me that is the most genius point of wavpack. you are able to store valuable stuff in less size (1/5) by create an exe in hybrid 320 , burn them and puttin in the safe. later on you will be able to  recreate the original by clickin. and my test showed me its the original.wow .

the next step is that some of you create a lossyfile as well as correctionfile and store them at same folder. so by playin this lossy it finds the correctionfile and adding the missed parts so the original will be played.

-> my test : first i created a lossless of time (from darkside), size was 40,6 mb.

then i created an lossy at 320 (size: 15,6 mb) and correction ( 26,0 mb) -> added 41,6 mb.

results me that lossy with correction needs at this case exactly 1 mb more of hd capacity than the lossless by 
havin the same sound.

so there is no need for creatin correctionfiles whether for playback ( you can create a lossless needing less hd capacity than the solution of lossy and correctionfile) nor storing and recreation of original wave( the exefile i created comes to 15,6 mb (by usin lossy 320, exactly same sizefile as the lossyfile) and will rebuild the orginal wav as i tested. the solution lossy + correctionfiles to recreate originalwav comes up to 41,6 mb).

so at the end my opinion the two bigpoints of wavpack are:

1. Highquality lossy fileformat for playback--> stands at the top with psytel aac (though they are two absolute different ways of compression)
2. easy to store the originals by creatin an exe in hybridmode (size 1/5 of original wavefile) and easy to rebuild this originals by clicking. in this case i think wavpack is the best solution comes around. no other can bring it some water.

If you use wavpack as lossless or not is the way of thinking. there are existing a lot of solutions (ape, shorten, frog ......) that reached the same highpoint.

ps. i will wait to restore my library till the new 4.0 version (supportin vbr mode in hybrid and tagging as well) will appear at the market. as many others i can't expect it.
thanx to den for his genius work, will suggest you for nobelaward of technic.

shine on

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #5 –
Porcuhead:  Maybe that's just me, but if I wanted to be sure about the future of my music files, I wouldn't archive them in win32-dependant executable files. Think about the future, maybe you'll be using another OS when windows disappears  , you never know 

For example I didn't expect to switch to linux but when I did, I was glad that my document archives weren't executables  B)

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #6 –
To Numlock,
good thoughts, but who knows really what future will bring. only prophets maybe. praise the lord  there is the solution of doublebootin or more. and i ever can use my winxp corp for that kind of stored exefiles to recreate.
only have to click and to convert in whatever this new uprising os ( i dont see there anything that will beat winxp without ms spyware and all graphical nonsense switched off, but have to tell that i have a test partition on my hd where i test all the news like mandrake 9.2, ms longhorn 4015 or lindows 3.0). If i  buy me the next harddrive perhaps 160 or more i will use my actually 80 music hd to save all the cds there in wavpack exe as well as a copy of winxp corp. puttin this in the safe, perhaps one day when i'm long time gone anybody will be able to encrypt and enjoy.

shine on

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #7 –
Porcuhead:

With those executables you mentioned... You do realize that the extraction isn't lossless unless you have the correction files in the same directory as the .exe, right?

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #8 –
Hi Ariakis,
like i posted before. i checked this once again, what i told is exactly right. i created an exefile of one of these days (pink floyd) in hybrid mode 320 kpbs. this exe has the same filesize as a created lossy file with 320 kbps.
--> 17,7 mb. then i clicked that exe and a new wave was created with the filesize 78,0 mb. the original wave at start up of new test had 78,0 mb too. and this from the exefile recreated wave also works with cue of original wave. so i only can reach one point of view. the method to store the original wave in building exefiles by usin hybrid mode 320 kbps ( i will check if that also works with lower speedrates that at least will result in less filesize again) could be a revolutionary in storin and sharin music. and at least as my second test shows.--> no correction files are needed to rebuild original waves. the exe do it for itself.
i'm looking forward what the genius developer of wavpack will tell to that kind of experiences i made.

ps. try it as i did and you will be totally astonished, it's unbelievable but it works.

shine on

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #9 –
Quote
Hi Ariakis,
like i posted before. i checked this once again, what i told is exactly right. i created an exefile of one of these days (pink floyd) in hybrid mode 320 kpbs. this exe has the same filesize as a created lossy file with 320 kbps.
--> 17,7 mb. then i clicked that exe and a new wave was created with the filesize 78,0 mb. the original wave at start up of new test had 78,0 mb too. and this from the exefile recreated wave also works with cue of original wave. so i only can reach one point of view. the method to store the original wave in building exefiles by usin hybrid mode 320 kbps ( i will check if that also works with lower speedrates that at least will result in less filesize again) could be a revolutionary in storin and sharin music. and at least as my second test shows.--> no correction files are needed to rebuild original waves. the exe do it for itself.
i'm looking forward what the genius developer of wavpack will tell to that kind of experiences i made.

ps. try it as i did and you will be totally astonished, it's unbelievable but it works.

shine on

This is not lossless.  The filesize is the same because WAV is constant-bitrate, so the song *length* is the same.  However, the quality is inferior, and identical to the quality of the 320kbps lossy file.

If you scroll up a bit there's a post by bryant, the WavPack developer, saying essentially the same thing.

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #10 –
Indeed delirium.

Porcuhead: If you had a 32kbps vorbis file or something then decoded it to a wav it would also be the same size as the original wav. This does not mean is identical to the original, merely that it is the same length. The wavs will not be bit identical. Use EAC's wav comparison tool to spot the differences.
superdumprob
____________________________________________

"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #11 –
Hi delirium i dont want look to far out of the window for sure, perhaps i am on the wrong road.
so i have to look for a program that allows me to compare if the original and the recreated are completely the same as it seems for me. do you know such a prog that can look inside the waves???
if they are finally not, i have to say that i was too overoptimistic and only can bet that  my shot too fast will be forgiven.
later on i will post new results.

thanx in advance

shine on

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #12 –
Porcuhead: The original and "recreated" wave files will not be the same (unless you used a lossless compressor as this is their goal). I just suggested you used the compare wavs thing in EAC to prove it to yourself.

EDIT: Sorry for speaking for you Delirium. Hope you don't mind.
superdumprob
____________________________________________

"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #13 –
Hi folkz,
i checked with eac, they are not the same. next time it should be better to switch on my thinking machine . so i have to wonder why the cutting by cue worked with the restored wav, though eac tells me the original and the recreated aren't the same??

thanx to you for discussing and understanding.
thanx to bryant for his genius work.
thanx to me for laughing about me.

at least i have to agree with you all, that the only way to recreate original is by usin this correctionfile.


shine on.

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #14 –
Others here who play with EAC and cue files probably know more than me about this, but the way I understand it, even though the original and the restored wav file are not the same in content, they are the same in length. The cue file simply shows where the cut points are for the various tracks, so if you make a cue file and then apply it to the original wav, or a wavpack, vorbis or mp3 restored wav of the same content, all the timing for the tracks will be the same, so it will still work, even though the content may not be bit for bit identical.

ie. song one will be 0:00:00 to 4:03:00, track two will be 4:03:01 to 7:15:00 and so on. If you apply this to the original wav, or a wav from wavpack lossy, mp3 etc, the timing for where each song starts and stops will be the same, if they are all taken from encodes of the same album.

I hope this explains things.

Den.

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #15 –
Quote
Porcuhead:   Maybe that's just me, but if I wanted to be sure about the future of my music files, I wouldn't archive them in win32-dependant executable files. Think about the future, maybe you'll be using another OS when windows disappears  , you never know 

For example I didn't expect to switch to linux but when I did, I was glad that my document archives weren't executables  B)

wvselfx.exe runs OK on Wine.

Comparison psytel aac - wavpack hybrid!

Reply #16 –
Hi Den,
thanx for your explanation. Have learned once again a lot.

expecting bryants version 4.0

shine on