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: mppenc 1.15u (Read 21973 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

mppenc 1.15u

Reply #25 –
Quote
It is amazingly encouraging to see development picking up again. I hope at some point to be able to use mpc on portables and at some point in the future would like to see a -portable setting with focus on balance of size/quality/battery life, since mpc already uses less power then other codecs focusing on this may make it ideal, not to mention its high quality.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=277995"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Quality setting 4 is pretty damn good already. See Roberto's tests.

mppenc 1.15u

Reply #26 –
Posted this on Musepack.net already, but there's probably more traffic here ...

Thanks to the developers who are continuing the progress of Musepack.

Quick request: does anyone out there have a mirror of the latest Win version? My work firewall won't let me access the main download site.

Thanks!

mppenc 1.15u

Reply #27 –
Quote
Quick request: does anyone out there have a mirror of the latest Win version? My work firewall won't let me access the main download site.

Thanks!
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=278596"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


(removed, newer version available now)

mppenc 1.15u

Reply #28 –
Thanks B!

mppenc 1.15u

Reply #29 –
Quote
Quote
It is amazingly encouraging to see development picking up again. I hope at some point to be able to use mpc on portables and at some point in the future would like to see a -portable setting with focus on balance of size/quality/battery life, since mpc already uses less power then other codecs focusing on this may make it ideal, not to mention its high quality.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=277995"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Quality setting 4 is pretty damn good already. See Roberto's tests.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=278158"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Agreed, but as little intentional tuning has gone into low bitrates for MPC there is probably some room for improvement. In addition, I dont know if it would be possible to NOT use some coding tricks that might save even more on battery power. All academic as there is little to no support right now (betaplayer on pocketpc - come on palm) and dev is just picking up on what many ppl wrote off as a dead codec

mppenc 1.15u

Reply #30 –
Yes, very nice indeed! 

I encoded some non-problem samples just to check if avg bitrate changed and was positively surprised to see the difference was just a few bytes. In prior tunings the solving of problem samples made bitrate encrease even for non-problem (and already transparent) samples, which was suboptimal IMHO.

I see differences in binary size and I have noticed a ~6% speedup in encoding compared to 1.15t. Were different compiler settings used?

mppenc 1.15u

Reply #31 –
1.15t was just an attempt to solve a problem by using a different compiler. It was not the right solution, although it did eliminate the glitches in teh_sample. 1.15u is made by MSVC and the compiler was set to optimize for speed, not binary size. It should now create MPCs that are indeed similar to the ones 1.15r created (Frank's last version) except for the samples that trigger the gapless bug or the other 2 bugs discovered and fixed in 1.15s.
And if Warhol's a genius, what am I? A speck of lint on the ***** of an alien

mppenc 1.15u

Reply #32 –
Quote
This is the first real quality-related fix we've made without Frank's help.

Enjoy the new encoder
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=277061"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


OK, tnks a lot!

But!

Can you explain me, why if it yours first release without Frank, why it size ~ 100Kb, but 1.15t was only ~ 50Kb, though, 1.14 ~ 75Kb??????

So! What are you completely lost (50Kb!!!) in 1.15t when compile it, and what is it apears now in 1.15u again????

mppenc 1.15u

Reply #33 –
Quote
1.15t was just an attempt to solve a problem by using a different compiler.


OK!

Forgot to read to the end... 

mppenc 1.15u

Reply #34 –
Quote
Can you explain me, why if it yours first release without Frank, why it size ~ 100Kb, but 1.15t was only ~ 50Kb, though, 1.14 ~ 75Kb??????

So! What are you completely lost (50Kb!!!) in 1.15t when compile it, and what is it apears now in 1.15u again???

I just compiled mppenc 1.15u for Mac OS X and it came out as a 308KB executable (192KB after I strip it).
I dont care much about filesizes, but its strange that it varies so much! 
 

mppenc 1.15u

Reply #35 –
Quote
Can you explain me, why if it yours first release without Frank, why it size ~ 100Kb, but 1.15t was only ~ 50Kb, though, 1.14 ~ 75Kb??????

So! What are you completely lost (50Kb!!!) in 1.15t when compile it, and what is it apears now in 1.15u again????


[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=281552"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Un-upx them all and i'm pretty sure, you'll get almost everything back (at least in filesize part)