Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: FLAC v1.3.2 Final (Read 46224 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: FLAC v1.3.2 Final

Reply #75 –
Thanks for the build again, why is sox.exe included too now?

Re: FLAC v1.3.2 Final

Reply #76 –
Quote from: eahm on
Thanks for the build again, why is sox.exe included too now?
A little mistake when adding the files to the archive....... ;) :D

Re: FLAC v1.3.2 Final

Reply #78 –
Hmm, I'm kinda wondering, if FLAC will ever be expanded beyond 8 channels. I was looking into shoe-horning more channels into FLAC, breaking the spec, but I've only seen projects that gave up.

Re: FLAC v1.3.2 Final

Reply #79 –
Quote from: polemon on
Hmm, I'm kinda wondering, if FLAC will ever be expanded beyond 8 channels. I was looking into shoe-horning more channels into FLAC, breaking the spec, but I've only seen projects that gave up.
FLAC in Matroska?
Memento: this is Hydrogenaudio. Do not assume good faith.
 

Re: FLAC v1.3.2 Final

Reply #82 –
Quote from: polemon on
Quote from: Porcus on
FLAC in Matroska?
Good call. I'll check it out if it works for me. Would be nice if more hardware supported Matrsoska, though.

Would be quite a scenario if your hardware does support FLAC and does support > 8 channels, but not Matroska ...
ffmpeg has experimental support for FLAC-in-mp4, but I don't know if anything would play it.
If WavPack is an option, then I see a list of 18 channels at http://www.wavpack.com/wavpack_doc.html

Should maybe the Lossless comparison wiki article be updated with channel limitations?
https://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Lossless_comparison
Memento: this is Hydrogenaudio. Do not assume good faith.

Re: FLAC v1.3.2 Final

Reply #83 –
Quote from: Porcus on
Would be quite a scenario if your hardware does support FLAC and does support > 8 channels, but not Matroska ...
ffmpeg has experimental support for FLAC-in-mp4, but I don't know if anything would play it.
If WavPack is an option, then I see a list of 18 channels at http://www.wavpack.com/wavpack_doc.html

Management decision, so to say. I use FLAC to save the panadapter section of my ham radio receiver. Using FLAC makes it relatively easy, because I can handle it like any other sound file in things like Audacity, and I can still use the 655MHz bandpass FLAC allows to encode the entirety of my 10MHz window maximum of baseband. Why the >8 Channels I hear you ask? Because I'm using up to 20 of these windows side-by-side (20 receivers). Putting them all into one file (as they're recorded simultaneously), is just more convenient.

Re: FLAC v1.3.2 Final

Reply #84 –
Quote from: polemon on
Management decision, so to say. I use FLAC to save the panadapter section of my ham radio receiver. Using FLAC makes it relatively easy, because I can handle it like any other sound file in things like Audacity, and I can still use the 655MHz bandpass FLAC allows to encode the entirety of my 10MHz window maximum of baseband. Why the >8 Channels I hear you ask? Because I'm using up to 20 of these windows side-by-side (20 receivers). Putting them all into one file (as they're recorded simultaneously), is just more convenient.

Huh, now you made me read specs ... So FLAC has max 8 channels (so obviously not intended for multitrack recording, hm? To the level where they could not afford even a full byte?). Good news is that you can set the number of samples to zero for "unknown", since then you are not bound by the less-than-an-hour 2^36 samples for 20 MHz sampling rate.
WavPack on the other hand provides for custom sampling rates and 256 channels - but is not supported by Audacity. According to https://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/FFmpeg_integration#table , Audacity can read WavPack by way of ffmpeg - but not write. IDK whether that is an ffmpeg limitation, but the ffmpeg doc says it only supports WavPack encoding at 32-bits integer, and that was maybe not what you wanted.
But same source claims Audacity can read & write .mka by way of ffmpeg, so why not try your luck at FLAC ...
Memento: this is Hydrogenaudio. Do not assume good faith.

Re: FLAC v1.3.2 Final

Reply #85 –
@Porcus Yeah, I thought I'd use MPEG-4 ALS, too, but it seems that there's very little software support. MPEG-4 SLS is a similar problem, also it seems the specs aren't fully determined.

I was looking into WavPack, too. 1Hz - 16.777MHz sampling rate, 256 channels.

The more obscure formates, like True Audio are a lot better: 0 (DC) - 4GHz sampling rate, up to 65535 channels (same specs as MPEG-4 ALS). Unfortunatelly, those formats are also not the best when it comes to software support. I mainly handle them in command line, too, as in this case latency isn't really much of an issue, etc. For Recording I use either FFmpeg or SoX.

Re: FLAC v1.3.2 Final

Reply #86 –
One other thing I forgot to mention in my previous post:

I prefer command line programs doing one thing but doing that rather convenient. I know FFmpeg is fully featured and everything, combines everything into one thing, nice, etc. but tbh. I prefer having a flac, opusenc, or an mkvmerge.

SoX is almost always my go-to solution, when something has to be rigged up there and then. I found myself numerous times having to fix something up, so it "just records" or "just converts" something. Having something "just stream" a video, I did that a couple times with FFmpeg. Some things I can only do with FFmpeg, short of using libavf and libavcodec in my own program.
 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019