WavPack Source Code, Released under the BSD software license. |
  |
WavPack Source Code, Released under the BSD software license. |
 Dec 14 2002, 06:13
Post
#1
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 333 Joined: 2-February 02 Member No.: 1233  |
WavPack sourcecode released under the BSD software license:
http://www.wavpack.com Thank you David Bryant. This post has been edited by JohnV: Dec 14 2002, 10:33 |
 |
 
|
|
Dec 14 2002, 15:59
Post
#2
|
|
 xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer Group: Developer Posts: 3713 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Bracknell, UK Member No.: 111 |
Win32 binaries of WavPack 3.97a available from my others page.
-------------------- John
---------------------------------------------------------------- My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/ |
|
|
|
|
Dec 14 2002, 16:10
Post
#3
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 315 Joined: 29-September 01 Member No.: 53 |
This is great news.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 14 2002, 22:49
Post
#4
|
|
|
FLAC Developer Group: Developer Posts: 1526 Joined: 27-February 02 Member No.: 1408 |
QUOTE (Annuka @ Dec 14 2002 - 12:13 AM) WavPack sourcecode released under the BSD software license: Cool, maybe now I can find and fix that 'infinite newlines' bug I have with it on NT so I can finally update the FLAC comparison page. Oh yeah, and see how WavPack works Josh |
|
|
|
|
Dec 16 2002, 01:26
Post
#5
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 964 Joined: 29-December 01 Member No.: 830 |
QUOTE (jcoalson @ Dec 14 2002 - 04:49 PM) ... so I can finally update the FLAC comparison page. Great! When you update the comparisons Josh, would you consider adding an "audiobook" track for comparison? I find FLAC is generally able to give a compression ratio around 0.2230 for spoken-word encoding, whereas WavePack's rate hovers around 0.2550. Not a huge difference, but it means FLAC saves 12-13 Mb/hour.... - M. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 9 2003, 07:11
Post
#6
|
|
 WavPack Developer Group: Developer (Donating) Posts: 1225 Joined: 3-January 02 From: San Francisco CA Member No.: 900 |
I want to thank all of you for your support.
Unfortunately, a couple of developers were not so happy with the WavPack sources because I used a bunch of static variables which make multithreading difficult. Well, I was afraid that eliminating them would hurt performance, but I was quite surprised when I found that it did no such thing. So, I have posted a replacement set of sources that should be completely thread-safe. Also, I have compressed the self-extraction stub using UPX (thanks to john33 and Roberto for the idea) so now the overhead for that is only 26K per file. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 9 2003, 16:11
Post
#7
|
|
|
xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer Group: Developer Posts: 3713 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Bracknell, UK Member No.: 111 |
3.97b binaries (ICL6 compiles) posted at my 'Others' page at Mirror 1.
-------------------- John
---------------------------------------------------------------- My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/ |
|
|
|
|
Jan 12 2003, 10:01
Post
#8
|
|
|
FLAC Developer Group: Developer Posts: 1526 Joined: 27-February 02 Member No.: 1408 |
QUOTE (jcoalson @ Dec 14 2002 - 04:49 PM) Cool, maybe now I can find and fix that 'infinite newlines' bug I have with it on NT so I can finally update the FLAC comparison page. OK, finally got around to this (took me a couple of hours to get it to build). For me the problem appears to be caused by the code that shows the progress on the window title (display_progress()). If I remove that guy, problem solved. I have no idea why. The data points I have: 3.91 binaries: both wavpack.exe and wvunpack.exe had the problem 3.96 binaries: only wvunpack.exe had the problem 3.97a compiled from stock sources: only wvunpack.exe had the problem Bryant, hope you're watching! QUOTE (jcoalson @ Dec 14 2002 - 04:49 PM) Oh yeah, and see how WavPack works The code is very interesting. I have not delved too deep but it looks like a novel method. It seems it would be hard to prove that nothing in there is patented though. But such is the way in the U.S.A. After running my big batch o' tests, the compression in the 'high' mode has improved a lot: in between MAC 3.96 "normal" and flac 1.0.4 "-5". The encoding time is about the same as FLAC but decode time is twice as long as FLAC. The normal mode is 50% faster than flac -5 and about as fast decoding, with about 1% better compression. I will have the full results on the comparison page when 1.0.5 comes out. After that, Bryant, if you're conducive to the idea it might be fun to try a WavPack+FLAC hybrid. Josh |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th June 2013 - 02:16 |
