Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: WavPack 4.5 beta available (Read 58165 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

WavPack 4.5 beta available

Reply #50 –
Perhaps its related to empty space, meaning the more tunes (=lower bitrate) the more empty space for the CPU to rest (=more battery life). That makes sense. Otherwise I can't see how 'wall to wall' music encoded to 270 bps would be any more efficient than 384 bps except that you wouldn't get all the music at 384 as you would at 270. This all assumes that the other parameters are the same.

I'll take your guys word for it because I'm pretty much a neophyte here but it still doesn't make much sense. No matter, the number of tunes one can fit on a given volume probably trumps most other issues anyhow for portable use. I think its worth figuring out the smallest bitrate one can stand...especially with correction files where you can always get back to square one.

peace

dog

WavPack 4.5 beta available

Reply #51 –
4.50 final has been released.
Here is a link to the news thread.
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.

WavPack 4.5 beta available

Reply #52 –
Thanks for your hard work, WavPack never let me down and its cutting edge features are a pleasure to work with.

Keep up the good work.

WavPack 4.5 beta available

Reply #53 –
Thank you very much for the Update.

I Actually Need to Say Thanks for All the Years of using WavPack,
and so many years after it is STILL the only Lossless Format that can be used with professional audio data compression.

The only thing I Do Miss , is a Cutting Edge Directshow Decoder.

I, Like so many others, have never liked winamp , and Id Like to be able to use this latest version and enjoy all it has to offer, in Media Centre , Zoom Player ,
and other Directshow Based applications.

With a Great Directshow Decoder, preferrably released with updated capabilities for every new version that demands a decoder update , I think the Format will show susbstantial growth in Popularity , and reach a wider user base.

Please Consider it !
Thanks again !

WavPack 4.5 beta available

Reply #54 –
ffdshow's WavPack support was indeed insufficient, and has been removed temporarily. But how about CoreWavPack? IIRC it even decodes a file encoded with --optimize-mono so it's almost up-to-date, I think. But admittedly it may not be cutting-edge...

WavPack 4.5 beta available

Reply #55 –
Quote from: B0RK on
and so many years after it is STILL the only Lossless Format that can be used with professional audio data compression.

nonsense like that doesn't fly here...  FLAC is supported in sound forge/vegas/sonar/audacity, it's used by EBU as the lossless distribution scheme for euroradio, most lossless sales are in FLAC, etc.

WavPack 4.5 beta available

Reply #56 –
Quote from: jcoalson on
Quote from: B0RK on
and so many years after it is STILL the only Lossless Format that can be used with professional audio data compression.

nonsense like that doesn't fly here...  FLAC is supported in sound forge/vegas/sonar/audacity, it's used by EBU as the lossless distribution scheme for euroradio, most lossless sales are in FLAC, etc.


While I am also a Flac Fan, & admire & truly thankful for your wonderful work,
Let's agree to disagree about what flies where.

I have been in pro audio all my life one way or the other, will not bore you with the details, but let's just say that I had the misfortune of dealing with insane backup jobs.

Wavpack has been The Format used because of it's efficiency and ability to store / keep the metadata intact , Flac still has a problem with that to this very second.

As you know, Most professional Audio Data NEEDS to keep it's meta data intact.
I have enjoyed Both Wavpack & Flac in My personal music collection,

(Enjoyed Flac a lot more only after I found a replacement for the buggy Old CoreFlac Decoder, & btw Flac could use it's own reference inhouse Directshow decoder as well) ,

but For Work & Pro Audio Archive Jobs I Did , it was & Still is Wavpack.

WavPack 4.5 beta available

Reply #57 –
Quote from: jcoalson on
Quote from: B0RK on
and so many years after it is STILL the only Lossless Format that can be used with professional audio data compression.

nonsense like that doesn't fly here...  FLAC is supported in sound forge/vegas/sonar/audacity, it's used by EBU as the lossless distribution scheme for euroradio, most lossless sales are in FLAC, etc.
I definitely agree with your point and do consider your work pretty brilliant, still Am I the only one who has noticed you've recently taken a decisively more aggressive approach at defending and promoting FLAC?
WavPack 5.3.0 -b384hx6cmv / qaac64 2.69 -V 100

WavPack 4.5 beta available

Reply #58 –
Quote from: B0RK on
Wavpack has been The Format used because of it's efficiency and ability to store / keep the metadata intact , Flac still has a problem with that to this very second.

As you know, Most professional Audio Data NEEDS to keep it's meta data intact.

Doesn't --keep-foreign-metadata take care of that?

WavPack 4.5 beta available

Reply #59 –
Quote from: B0RK on
I Actually Need to Say Thanks for All the Years of using WavPack,
and so many years after it is STILL the only Lossless Format that can be used with professional audio data compression.


I can only agree here. WavPack's flt currently is the only filter for Adobe Audition which takes care of all regions, CUEs and other metadata from file you're working on.
Gabber, Jazz and IDM

WavPack 4.5 beta available

Reply #60 –
Quote from: skamp on
Quote from: B0RK on
Wavpack has been The Format used because of it's efficiency and ability to store / keep the metadata intact , Flac still has a problem with that to this very second.

As you know, Most professional Audio Data NEEDS to keep it's meta data intact.

Doesn't --keep-foreign-metadata take care of that?


Flac can do so with partial success , (& I did Try ..) but it's implementation is incomplete.
Wavpack has been bullet proof for these pro tasks.

Even if Flac did get the foreign metadata right, Id still choose Wavpack for the pro jobs.

Reason is, in some Jobs, Wavpack's (brilliant) Hybrid Lossy+Correction File Method, has proved itself priceless for me, as it allowed to backup big projects and keep a reusable playable catalog of the Files(!) and do it in a Single Step (!).

I guess the one thing that wavpack lacks is good marketing.

A Reference inhouse Directshow decoder will be truly a great way to make the format more popular.
I truly Feel The Format has been in development for too long to go on without it.

Regarding Directshow playback Flac, the situation is slightly better , but If it had not been for some talented 3rd party coders doing a better job with Flac decoders then the old buggy coreflac, I would have never used/enjoyed my flac files.

I never made sense to me having Genius Lossless Format Encoders Developed 'Inhouse', but then leaving the Decoding out there "in the Wild " so to speak.

If I remember correctly, First Time I Could work with Wavpack in something like Wavelab,
was indeed thanks to a 3rd party (Hope my memory serves me right).

I truly feel that Perfect PC playback out of the formats was , & still is not guarenteed this way.

Anyway I got sidetracked by the previous posts.

So What im saying is:

Can't avoid thinking what a Reference Bulltproof Directshow Decoder (not to mention if it was bundled with Windows) could have done for the Wavpack format.

PLEASE consider it.

WavPack 4.5 beta available

Reply #61 –
Quote from: B0RK on
Wavpack has been The Format used because of it's efficiency and ability to store / keep the metadata intact , Flac still has a problem with that to this very second.

need more info (maybe in another thread).

Quote
As you know, Most professional Audio Data NEEDS to keep it's meta data intact.

flac does keep it's metadata intact.  it also optionally keeps wave and aiff metadata intact.

let's turn it around: when decoding from flac to wave, wave cannot keep all flac's metadata intact.  therefore wave cannot be used for professional audio work.  except for (just like flac) it actually is used quite widely in professional audio work, because maintaining other formats' metadata is not a widespread requirement in the vast universe of professional audio work.

p.s. I don't think I'm getting defensive about flac, more getting defensive about hydrogenaudio where people are coming by stating opinion as fact (check my tours of duty on some recent audiophool threads).  there are plenty of other megaforums for that, the reason I stay on HA is the stringent set of rules we play by.  I defend wavpack too from time to time
 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020