Results : 10.6378 bits; 3.96x; 01:17.07; [I]Feedback : Extant clips: 759;
If the file has samples exceeding the maximum value associated with the number of bits to remove, i.e. above the maximum sample value of 32767-(2^(bits-to-remove)-1) then the sample will be considered to be an extant clip...
IMO you should stick to quality yielding 400..550k (min economic profile.. max extreme) . Generally 4:1 compression works great but i recommend 3:1 when considering rare problematic samples or transcoding to other lossy formats.
The music I'm currently playing is quite easy to encode, except piano music, these are even bigger, sometimes, this is expected behaviour, however I don't really get it how this technically works.
... Are there any samples available where Lossywav is failing at xtra portable mode? ...
I was thinking like you when I was using lossyWAV.But if you don't mind the disk space (nowadays hardly a problem for archiving the music) I'd keep the original compressed with a lossless format like FLAC.Brings you ease of mind when converting the lossy way. As for this as you can't hear an issue with herding_calls (the problem is with the long-stretched tone, and I can hear it best with volume pretty restricted) or other samples: you don't need to worry using economic or below. In case you should ever run into trouble you can still re-encode.
"Code converted from Delphi to C++"If I may ask, does this we might see lossyWAV for other OSes?
Is there any other source repository than this?https://github.com/rtollert/lossywav
I recently did a few tests with lossyWav 1.4.0 in combination with FLAC 1.3.1.I noticed that with files of 96kHz (or 88kHz) sample rate, the compression was consistently better with 1024 sample blocks than with the lossyWav default, 512 sample blocks. Of course the block length of both lossyWav and FLAC should be 1024 in that case.Does that make sense? Double sample rate, double the number of samples per block?BTW those 96kHz files happened to have a bitdepth of 24.
When using 96KHz with 512 sample blocksize is like 44.1 (or 48 because it's close) with a 256 sample blocksize...Am I right?
Quote from: Fairy on 10 January, 2015, 03:40:26 PMWhen using 96KHz with 512 sample blocksize is like 44.1 (or 48 because it's close) with a 256 sample blocksize...Am I right?Indeed you are - 44.1/48 kHz use 512 samples per codec-block; 88.2/96 kHz use 1024; 176.4/192 kHz use 2048 and 352.8/384 kHz would use 4096.I should really add this to the wiki....
I think I may have found a bug in v1.4.0. When I use version v1.3.0 and feed the resulting lossy wav to WMAEncode, it works fine. When I feed the output of lossyWAV 1.4.0 to WMAEncode, I get the error "Unexpected EOF in reading WAV header" from WMAEncode.I tried using the --ignorelength parameter with WMAEncode, it didn't make a difference. The only variable that makes a difference is the lossyWAV version number.I am not using any custom params with lossyWAV, just -q preset.