TAK 2.3.0 - Page 5

Topic: TAK 2.3.0 (Read 88809 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: TAK 2.3.0

Reply #100 – 2018-04-02 15:59:41

Does this decoder support multi-channel-audio? I don't think so, but i may be wrong. And this would be sad, because TAK's multi-channel-encoder is really strong. I also put a lot of work into the decoders error robustness; hydrogenaudio's users helped a lot in testing this.

I would estimate the effort to prepare the encoder release as at least 3 times more than the decoder release (bad english..). Therefore omitting the decoder would not save so much time. And i prefer to start with something smaller.

And i also thought about the reintroduction of the dedicated LossyWav-codec which was part of an earlier beta release.

But maybe things will change when i start the work.

Re: TAK 2.3.0

Reply #101 – 2018-04-02 17:22:40

It does support multichannel audio, also decoder is multi-threaded and code is better and faster than reference one.
Only missing is TAK 1.X support.

Re: TAK 2.3.0

Reply #102 – 2018-04-02 17:56:09

IIRC ffmpeg is faster only because it's multithreaded. Single-threaded ffmpeg is about 2x slower than TAK

(about code quality... I thought that TAK is closed-cource?)

Re: TAK 2.3.0

Reply #103 – 2018-04-03 09:46:27

Quote from: TBeck on 2018-04-01 23:57:52

For other historical reasons i would have loved to publish my back-to-work release at April 1st. It was april fools day when i first posted about TAK (named YALAC then) and not many readers believed me. Nostalgia...

Got to pity the doubters. Not really...

TAK+CUE still used for all CD backups here, the best 16-bit 2-ch archival format (IMO). Yes, I'm admitting to collecting discs still. Maybe it's lossless audio paranoia that I don't bother with purchasing music online whether it's lossy or otherwise. Maybe someday but even then there's still too many indie/private CD's where finding a second copy is nearly impossible.

Good to see your posts, Thomas! Looking forward to running another speed comparison in the nest version.

Re: TAK 2.3.0

Reply #104 – 2018-04-03 13:45:45

Quote from: lvqcl on 2018-04-02 17:56:09

IIRC ffmpeg is faster only because it's multithreaded. Single-threaded ffmpeg is about 2x slower than TAK

(about code quality... I thought that TAK is closed-cource?)

How you calculated that numbers, i think that -t parameter does not decode at all, it just check CRC of every frame.