Skip to main content
Topic: Lossless Compression (Read 20163 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lossless Compression

Reply #75
Quote
Secondly. I listen to rock most of the time and with MA i usually get compression larger than 65%. Is that normal? Does verifying got anything to do with it?


Thats perfectly normal.
Verifying doesn't have anything to do with it. It only takes some additional time in the process.

Slovenija gre naprej !!

Lossless Compression

Reply #76
SLOVENIAAAAA  + :drink: !!!

Lepo je vidt enga iz tako mejhne dezelice na temu forumu - sm smislu da sm edini)

Translation:  ( nice to see a person from such a small country on this forum - i thought i was the only one)



Anyway.... thanks!

Lossless Compression

Reply #77
Oh, yes, how stupid... I forgot:

So should i use verifying?

Lossless Compression

Reply #78
Quote
So should i use verifying


Well if you are not in a hurry...
I use it, but on my system no error ever occured yet.
But it could happen, if there is a bad sector somewhere or if something else goes wrong

[edit]
p.s. se mi zdi, da nisva edina, sem se enih par zasledil tukaj.

Lossless Compression

Reply #79
Quote
Originally posted by Air_Borne
SLOVENIAAAAA  + :drink: !!!

Lepo je vidt enga iz tako mejhne dezelice na temu forumu - sm smislu da sm edini)


Slovenija je majhne ampak ne tako kot mislis. Ali mogoce sem bil v Slovasko? Umm.. Ne vem...   

Lep pozdrav iz Svedske.

Sorry for my treatment of this beautiful language

Lossless Compression

Reply #80
Quote
Originally posted by JohnV
Here are some comparison pages:
FLAC's comparison: http://flac.sourceforge.net/comparison.html
Monkey's Audio 's comparison: http://www.monkeysaudio.com/comparison.html
Speek's comparison http://home.wanadoo.nl/~w.speek/comparison.htm


the latest comparison page (going out with the next FLAC release) is available via CVS from here:

http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs...n.html?rev=1.43

don't have time to do a long post here, but consider features, player support and decode time if you ever plan on listening on something besides your nGHz wintel box.  remember too, encoding only happens once.

Josh

Lossless Compression

Reply #81
Quote
Originally posted by jcoalson


the latest comparison page (going out with the next FLAC release) is available via CVS from here:

http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs...n.html?rev=1.43 


Sorry, the page is complete out of date.
Monkey' Audio source is available, FROG goes
OptimFROG, version numbers are increased,
compression increased.
Especially channel decorrelation has been enhanced
significantly. Not seldom APE and OFR outperforms
FLAC at 20% on files with strange stereo imaging.

Take a Ogg Vorbis -q4.99 file and compare FLAC
vice Monkey's Audio/OptimFROG.
--  Frank Klemm

Lossless Compression

Reply #82
Quote
Originally posted by jcoalson


the latest comparison page (going out with the next FLAC release) is available via CVS from here:

http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs...n.html?rev=1.43 

don't have time to do a long post here, but consider features, player support and decode time if you ever plan on listening on something besides your nGHz wintel box.  remember too, encoding only happens once.

Josh


File sizes of a random selection of my audio files (all files takes too much time):

80% rock, 20% classic music

Compressed
files          Size in GB
ofr-41.ofr      10.7727
ofr-44.ofr      10.7828
apenew-6        10.7901
ape-4          10.8232
ofr-11.ofr      10.8307
ofr-14.ofr      10.8459
rka-3+          10.9970
apeold-4        10.9979

ape-2          11.0057
rka-2+          11.0057
pac-5          11.1709
pac-3          11.2020
pacold-5        11.2491
rka-3-          11.3174
rka-2-          11.3265
apeold-2        11.3401
wv-h.wv        11.4777
flac-8          11.5011
flac-7          11.5143
pacold-3        11.5387
flac-5          11.5403
wvold-h.wv      11.6936

wv-f.wv        12.3165
shn            12.3475

sz2-4          13.4539
sz2-3          13.4562
sz2-8          13.4570

wav            23.1129

Yes, I know, this test has taken several kWh of
electricity.
--  Frank Klemm

Lossless Compression

Reply #83
Quote
Originally posted by Frank Klemm


Sorry, the page is complete out of date.
Monkey' Audio source is available, FROG goes
OptimFROG, version numbers are increased,
compression increased.
Especially channel decorrelation has been enhanced
significantly. Not seldom APE and OFR outperforms
FLAC at 20% on files with strange stereo imaging.

Take a Ogg Vorbis -q4.99 file and compare FLAC
vice Monkey's Audio/OptimFROG.

It sounds like FLAC is out of date, too.  Perhaps one of the disadvantages of "open source" projects, sometimes they move very slowly.

(please, nobody move to defend open source, because I'm not attacking it)

Lossless Compression

Reply #84
Yeah really!!
Why is FLAC updated so slowly. Is nobody working on it any more?

:confused:

Lossless Compression

Reply #85
Quote
Originally posted by Frank Klemm


Sorry, the page is complete out of date.
Monkey' Audio source is available, FROG goes
OptimFROG, version numbers are increased,
compression increased.


I was talking about the tables; I still have to update the verbiage for the release.  optimFROG is not THAT out of date but I cannot keep up with the releases as the full tests take several days to run.

And Frank, I am not debating compression ratio.  To anyone who only uses Windows for encoding and playback please use Monkey's Audio.

Quote
Originally posted by elfin
Yeah really!!
Why is FLAC updated so slowly. Is nobody working on it any more?

:confused:


Yes, just check the CVS logs.  I try to do releases only when there are major improvements.

Josh

Lossless Compression

Reply #86
Quote
Originally posted by jcoalson


And Frank, I am not debating compression ratio.  To anyone who only uses Windows for encoding and playback please use Monkey's Audio.


It also runs under Linux/IA32, DEC Alpha, IBM RS-6000.
At least the modified version you can download on my page.
FLAC do not work. The source is probably not the problem, but
the highly inportable stuff around I really hate.
--  Frank Klemm

Lossless Compression

Reply #87
Quote
Originally posted by Frank Klemm

It also runs under Linux/IA32, DEC Alpha, IBM RS-6000.
At least the modified version you can download on my page.


Maybe the codec does.  I said 'encoding and playback'.

Quote
Originally posted by Frank Klemm

FLAC do not work. The source is probably not the problem, but
the highly inportable stuff around I really hate.


Now Frank, you have no problem calling people to task for not adequately describing a problem.  Like here (#4) and here (#18) and here.  Yet here an elsewhere you make a bald assertion about 'FLAC not working'.  If you are talking about decoding to a pipe on Windows in flac 1.0.2 then fine, but that hardly qualifies as a program 'not working'.  You dismiss many more glaring things when talking about Monkey's Audio.

Quote
Originally posted by Frank Klemm

Not [now] seldom APE and OFR outperforms
FLAC at 20% on files with strange stereo imaging.


Again, you fail to mention anything to back this up.  I've never seen anything approaching 20% in compression ratio and no published comparison has either.

Josh

Lossless Compression

Reply #88
Well, i've asked that before:

Could anyone tell me if other lossless formats use tagging? Currently i've only tried Monkey's Audio, and it seems cool  ..

Lossless Compression

Reply #89
Quote
Originally posted by Air_Borne
Well, i've asked that before:

Could anyone tell me if other lossless formats use tagging? Currently i've only tried Monkey's Audio, and it seems cool  ..

WavPack supports ID3v1, FLAC supports it's own metatag and ID3v1 and ID3v2. But current Winamp plugin can't display FLAC's ID3v1 tags, don't know about others.

Lossless Compression

Reply #90
Quote
If you are talking about decoding to a pipe on Windows in flac 1.0.


just to point out that a recent flac 1.03 pre-release fixes this problem: see here

there's my plug  cheers, tonderai

Lossless Compression

Reply #91
Quote
Originally posted by jcoalson
As far as Sachankara's comparison, one sample does not tell you all that much.  If you are a jazz or classical or death metal listener your average results might be quite different.  No one has done what I would consider a comprehensive comparison.  I think the one on the FLAC page (limited though it is) is the only one that even crosses genres.
Well I do agree that one sample can't be used to represent compression variations, but with all the music I've compressed, the different formats have always had just about the same compression differential and has never made any large jumps... So to speak... Like APE always get around 3-4% better than FLAC, both using the highest compressions... Not even changing music genres made any significan difference when I've tested...

P.S. I do use FLAC these days because of my "multi platform friends" who doesn't use Windows, instead they use FreeBSD and various distributions of Linux...  I'll migrate to APE once there's multi platform support for the encoder...
Quote
Originally posted by Air_Borne
Well, i've asked that before:

Could anyone tell me if other lossless formats use tagging? Currently i've only tried Monkey's Audio, and it seems cool  ..
Yes you can tag FLAC with ID3v1/2 tags, but the Winamp plugin doesn't support reading them, it'll only ignore them... So it's up to the user to find a reasonable way of keeping the tags when "cross-converting"...

Lossless Compression

Reply #92
Quote
Originally posted by jcoalson


Again, you fail to mention anything to back this up.  I've never seen anything approaching 20% in compression ratio and no published comparison has either.

Josh


The files are on my harddisk. 700 KByte and above.
I don't think you're interested in the pure file sizes:

APE = 1167744 bytes
OFR = 1074065 Bytes
FLAC= 1426178 Bytes

APE = 1349104 Bytes
OFR = 1292163 Bytes
FLAC= 1800381 Bytes

Every compressor uses the best possible settings.

My webspace is full, everybody knows this and binaries
I send via email only on request.
--  Frank Klemm

Lossless Compression

Reply #93
Quote
Originally posted by Sachankara
Yes you can tag FLAC with ID3v1/2 tags, but the Winamp plugin doesn't support reading them, it'll only ignore them... So it's up to the user to find a reasonable way of keeping the tags when "cross-converting"...


The current winamp2 plugin (in CVS) will read id3v1 tags.

I don't have any plans to write id3v2 support in the plugins myself... but I'll take patches.

I plan to focus on Vorbis-style comments instead.  FLAC now (in CVS) has a vorbiscomment metadata block with support in the new metadata interface.

Josh

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019