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: best lossless codec (Read 30676 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

best lossless codec

hi

which lossless codec should i use?


i testet flac 1.10, wavpack 4.0 beta and la 0.4

when i look at the compression
flac und wavpack are close together

flac needs abut 1 mb more than wavpack
but la needs  2 mb less than wavpack, but needs a lot cpu power
and i haven't found a tag editor for it.

best lossless codec

Reply #1 –
Use de Search
myspace.com/borgei - last.fm/user/borgei

best lossless codec

Reply #2 –
Even if you didn't mentioned it, I reccomend Monkey's Audio, it's a very powerful codec especially when set at high or very high compression, it's fast and very efficient and also easy to use with CDEX and EAC...

best lossless codec

Reply #3 –
It depends on what you need. In general they all compress nearly the same. You may save a couple of megs with one over the other. On the other hand some are VERY cpu intensive for encoding and/or decoding.

My bet is that the most popular here would be:
1)FLAC
2)Monkey's Audio

When I decided to go lossless I was primarily choosing between these 2. Ultimately I choose flac as it already has hardware support, is completely open source, and IMHO is the best all around performer.

best lossless codec

Reply #4 –
Monkey's is good if you want maximum compression, or if you like to rip albums to a single file and play back using a cue sheet.  I am not exactly sure why peoplie like the single file/cue sheet aqpproach, but a sizable minority around here does like that.

Flac is better if you expect to transcode to a lossy format frequently.  This might the case for iPod owners who use AAC encoding and expect to periodicly refresh their collection with the latest faac or Nero AAC codecs.

Wavepack is kind of exotic....

best lossless codec

Reply #5 –
OptimFROG gives good compression, and along with WavPack it provides a hybrid mode.

TTA is new and I haven't tested it, but it seems quite good (quick and good compression, but not as fast to decode as FLAC).

Personally, I have been using FLAC of late because it decodes quickly (good for transcoding to mp3, mpc, etc), has some hardware support, and can be used in a MKA container.

best lossless codec

Reply #6 –
I would argue for FLAC for many of the reasons cited already.  Open source, hardware support, well supported in general, etc.

The higher compression ratio of certain codecs like Monkey's is nice, but at the file sizes were talking about (375mb or so per album) 5-10mb either way is kind of negligible.  And while compression is important storage is cheap, and if you are going to buy a 120gb drive its $10 more for a 160gb drive.  You encode once so the time to compress is also relatively unimportant AFAIC.  However, you decode ALL the time, so you'll be taking advantage of that feature every time you play a song.

So IMHO the real factor is decode time.  This is important for transcoding as previously stated, but it is MORE important for playtime.  FLAC is decoded and starts playing over twice as fast as the next codec, and way faster than than when compared to most other lossless alternatives.

You can get more information and decide for yourself at the Flac comparison page, http://flac.sourceforge.net/comparison.html.

Of course I also use RAR for archiving instead of ZIP, so I'm like some kind of format alien here in the states.

-rt

best lossless codec

Reply #7 –
Another vote for FLAC.

best lossless codec

Reply #8 –
Like Eli says, it depends on your priorities.

I put platform compatibility at #1, because if I can't play it, it's a worthless format to me.

For this reason, I use FLAC.  It plays in my home and in my car.  And it transcodes cleanly to Ogg Vorbis for my handheld PC (as would any lossless format for this last item, though).

best lossless codec

Reply #9 –
I had my 850 cd collection encoded in Monkey's Normal and when surfing the net would get dropouts. I have an M-Audio Delta 410, a P4 2.4ghz processor and 1 gig of ram. The PC is hooked up via the SPDIF to my HT processor. These dropouts were unacceptable to me so I switched to Flac -5. Voila`, no more dropouts! I'm a Flacman now.

best lossless codec

Reply #10 –
While other formats may give superior compression, I think it's worth the extra couple MB to know that I'm using a 100% free (speech) format. Free = future proof. If APE stops being maintained, your music collection in APE becomes obsolete. If FLAC stops being maintained, you have the source code and can put FLAC support into whatever audio program you use in the future. If you think that is silly, just look at your analog audio collection, records, 8-track, cassettes and the like.

FLAC also gives far superior compression/decompression rates, and decompression time does not go up with increased compression ratio. Most of the codecs on the FLAc comparison page that rank above FLAC in compression ratio also decode at less than 2x realtime, which will cause problems if you're using the computer for something else while you listen to music in the background. Some of them even decode at less than realtime, even down to only a small fraction of realtime, making them completely useless for listening to music.

best lossless codec

Reply #11 –
Quote
If APE stops being maintained, your music collection in APE becomes obsolete.

How come? Specially considering Monkey's Audio sources are open?

Quote
If FLAC stops being maintained, you have the source code and can put FLAC support into whatever audio program you use in the future.


Only if you are a skilled programmer, that is. A VERY skilled one, considering the amount of complains coming from developers about their problems working with the FLAC libraries.

Quote
If you think that is silly, just look at your analog audio collection, records, 8-track, cassettes and the like.


I have players for records and cassetes.

And I can easily find an 8-track machine at the public library here.

And in case you happen to have some wax cylinders laying around: Drop by 2Bdecided's house to listen to them.

A critique by yours truly and others on this subject:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=166166

Quote
Most of the codecs on the FLAc comparison page that rank above FLAC in compression ratio also decode at less than 2x realtime


 

Are you using a Pentium 166?

Quote
Some of them even decode at less than realtime


Only on a computer from last century.

best lossless codec

Reply #12 –
Just for something completely different, I suggest Wavpack. It's fast, it's flexible and the source is freely available. (oh, just like Flac?) 

Some people struggle with the utility of the hybrid mode, and that's fair enough.

Say you have some music which you want to be lossless, or nearly there, but space/bandwidth is a little tight or it is music that isn't crucial but nice to have on hand. Rip it and store it as a 400 kbit Wavpack, and then try transcoding it, ABXing it, etc. You will find that you have compression that leaves all other lossless for dead (400 vs 800 kbits) yet you will be very hard pressed to ABX it, and it still transcodes into mainstream lossy formats without artifacts. Very cool. 

In reality 320 kbits is transparent for all intensive purposes and even lower is very acceptable.

I travel a lot, and sometimes, I like to grab some of my files using a high speed internet connection from a hotel or whatever. Geez it's sweet to be able to download my wavpack lossies (or hybrids minus the correction file) and enjoy some fresh tunes, enjoying incredible quality and post encoding options without the full lossless bandwidth. Or even just drag a heap of the lossies onto a DVD-RW or two before I depart. 

On the other hand, you can not really make a bad choice of lossless encoder. You can always try one, and if you don't like it, losslessly encode across to another format, and so on, no harm done.

If I were you, I'd stop wasting time worrying about such matters and just get on with it, you can always change your choice later.

Den.

best lossless codec

Reply #13 –
Quote
If FLAC stops being maintained, you have the source code and can put FLAC support into whatever audio program you use in the future. If you think that is silly, just look at your analog audio collection, records, 8-track, cassettes and the like.
to echo rjamorim, I have within a five range from my chair devices to play:  8 tracks, 33/45/78 vinyls, Tapes and standard redbook CDs. The only thing I am missing is a reel-to-reel player and I would have a working model in a heartbeat  if the right deal came along through whatever means. The only one I can get to right now was my great-grandfathers that is least 50 years old and not functioning currently

but anyways, my personal preference is FLAC now for many moons.

latest edit: changed LPs to the proper general term vinyls

best lossless codec

Reply #14 –
The sources for Monkey's Audio are now, for all practical purposes, open. The only skirmish are over Ashlands somewhat homemade license, which calls for a certain amount of hairsplitting (at least from some).

Monkey's Audio compression levels -c1000 'till -c4000 plays back just fine on any newer CPU. 3.99 now have ape2 tags, better errorhandling, unicode support and embedded md5 hash... (It took 4 updates after going final to get it right, though....)

With fb2k you can embed the cuesheet in CUESHEET tag with artist/filenames for singlealbum files. Flac only lets you store tracknumber.

Monkey's Audio gives good payback in terms of compression ratios vs. speed. There are good Linux support for v 3.97.
3.99 are already supported on Java. People are working on porting it to Linux/BSD and Mac OS X as of now. Hopefully we'll see results soon...

--------------------------

FLAC are a very good format. Wavpack are a very promising format, will test it again when 4.0 goes final. Just felt like having a little rant on behalf of MA, since I've used it since I discovered there was something more useful than WavZip, and since there's such an overweight of FLAC zealots in this thread.... 

What it all boils down to is what's been said before: They've all got pros and cons, you'll have to decide for yourself what fits your spesific needs best.....

"ONLY THOSE WHO ATTEMPT THE IMPOSSIBLE WILL ACHIEVE THE ABSURD"
        - Oceania Association of Autonomous Astronauts

best lossless codec

Reply #15 –
Flac is not quite good in compression compare to Monkey's Audio, OptimFrog, LA

If you want both good speed and compression.....go for Monkey's Audio

If you want super high compression and intended to just store the audio
then go for LA ....Don't even think of playing back LA files.

They are so CPU hungry even on decoding
(PLAYBACK) on my P4 1.4GHz
LA normal  30-40%
LA high      50-60%
Monkey's Audio Extra High  0-3%

best lossless codec

Reply #16 –
I vote for Wavpack, because bryant is just the chillest guy ever. 

best lossless codec

Reply #17 –
I go for WMA Lossless. Yes, it is Microsoft. I don't see why that bars it from being a candidate. It is still no more or less lossless(!) than any of the other options.

best lossless codec

Reply #18 –
Quote
I go for WMA Lossless. Yes, it is Microsoft. I don't see why that bars it from being a candidate. It is still no more or less lossless(!) than any of the other options.

Because everyone looses when M$ gets one more monopoly ;-)

best lossless codec

Reply #19 –
Quote
I go for WMA Lossless. Yes, it is Microsoft. I don't see why that bars it from being a candidate. It is still no more or less lossless(!) than any of the other options.

Big minus: No support on Linux/BSD.
"ONLY THOSE WHO ATTEMPT THE IMPOSSIBLE WILL ACHIEVE THE ABSURD"
        - Oceania Association of Autonomous Astronauts

best lossless codec

Reply #20 –
As already said: You should use a codec that suits your needs.

I´m using FLAC because it suits my needs very well. I usually rip CDs to FLAC and tag them properly. Then I "transcode" the FLACs to Ogg Vorbis (oggenc does read FLAC and preserves the tags) and store them on DVD. As a side note: I´m using Linux which narrows the choice of codecs a bit.

best lossless codec

Reply #21 –
Quote
I go for WMA Lossless. Yes, it is Microsoft.
your'e right WMA=Microsoft... fine, have fun.
>>I don't see why that bars it from being a candidate<<
nobody said so untill then.
>>It is still no more or less lossless(!) than any of the other options.<<<
soooo?
Nothing but a Heartache - Since I found my Baby ;)

best lossless codec

Reply #22 –
I am a FLAC user myself.

People mentioned a lot of good reasons in favour of FLAC (HW support, cross-platform, etc, open source), but what also made me a FLAC user is that it has a regression testbed beyond the --verify option of course, so I can pretty well test the binary before  I start out to use it. This tests takes hours to run, but it gives you a peace of mind when  you are worried that some compiler optimalization may break something.

FLAC met a lot of my requirements (such as cross-platform, open-source, fast decode, etc), ok it is slightly larger then the others, but that is negligible. However this regression testbed was one of the reasons  that made stop the search. This also suggests a professional developer behind it, which is comforting. Maybe the other formats has this feature, too.  I do not know. I stopped the search and I am happy with my decision.

best lossless codec

Reply #23 –
Quote
I vote for Wavpack, because bryant is just the chillest guy ever.


My vote also goes for Wavpack.
Just a thought...

best lossless codec

Reply #24 –
Quote
Quote
If FLAC stops being maintained, you have the source code and can put FLAC support into whatever audio program you use in the future.


Only if you are a skilled programmer, that is. A VERY skilled one, considering the amount of complains coming from developers about their problems working with the FLAC libraries.

here we go again
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=15198