Which lossless audio codec do you use? Options

[krmathis]

I think its time for an updated "Which lossless audio codec do you use?" thread!

Place a vote for your prefered lossless audio codec above.
Feel free to post the reason you prefer it over the others as well...

[Sebastian Mares]

WavPack because of its fast encoding and decoding. The compression ratio is not bad either and my Ubuntu supports it as well.

[goodnews]

FLAC due to the very good software support. I don't want to have to re-encode or transfer to another lossless format in the future if it can be avoided. I think FLAC (and ALAC) have the best software support currently. Strength in numbers is the reason I picked FLAC I guess. Plus its free and open unlike ALAC.

[atici]

Wavpack -hmx1 single file image with embedded cuesheet.

This post has been edited by atici: Apr 23 2006, 21:06

[Synthetic Soul]

WavPack.

I switched from Monkey's Audio to WavPack in 2005. My main consideration is compression rate, but I was concerned by the lack of error tollerance with Monkey's. On consideration I realised that the difference of a few percent between MAC Extra High and WavPack High was negligable when considering my archive of 100-150 GB.

WavPack seemed to have decent compression rates, error tollerance, multichannel support, and I was just really impressed with the way that David reacted to users' requests.

I've said for a while that I will be interested to see the results of this poll. In the last poll WavPack received a measily 15% of the votes. I believe it will be a lot higher this time: it's basically going to be FLAC or WavPack to come top. FLAC may still take it, but WavPack will sure be close.

[guruboolez]

I was originally a Monkey's user, which offered (and still offer) excellent ratio at excellent speed. Then I was looking for formats offering a higher decoding speed: opening these files then appeared as a much more confortable process on Cool Edit/Audition (opening time could be 4 time faster between WavPack or FLAC compared to MAC -normal) and faster decoding also mean faster transcoding.

FLAC and WavPack were the fastest ones (with Shorten... unbeatable but outdated); WavPack finally had my preference, because:
- the tagging system is much more conveniant for my purpose (i.e. much faster)
- seeking was even better than FLAC (which is already very good)
- I got better encoding ratios
- I liked the red icon
- David is a very nice guy (it's not a necessary condition: I also used MPC in the past ...)

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Apr 23 2006, 21:11

[jmartis]

Today I've voted in one lossless poll, now here's another! My decision hasn't changed though... WavPack.

[edit: typo]

This post has been edited by jmartis: Apr 23 2006, 21:52

[DreamTactix291]

Lots of lossless polls at once

Hasn't changed though. WavPack still for me for the same reasons I posted just minutes ago.

[Josef K.]

- I got better encoding ratios

Could you please tell the difference? I don't want to infirm your statement at all, I'm just curious. I've got huge Flac collection and if I could save say 2% (6 GB in my case) of space by reencoding, I will seriously consider to do it. (It must be horrible work anyway)
So: what do you think? Is it worth to reencode (or transcode...) from Flac to WavPack?
Thanks for response.

[vitos]

Heh, the day of lossless polls.

I used to be Monkey's Audio user because of its strong compression. However I became unsatisfied with its low decompression speed when I started regular conversions to lossy formats for my portable flash player. Also growing collection and shrinking HDD space made me think to use lossy formats for some less critical music.

Then I found WavPack. A lot faster with small compression loss (vs Monkey's) and with hybrid option. And this format is still evolving, whereas any news for Monkey are hardly possible.
My spell: -b360cmx

[Shade[ST]]

I've got huge Flac collection and if I could save say 2% (6 GB in my case) of space by reencoding, I will seriously consider to do it. (It must be horrible work anyway)
So: what do you think? Is it worth to reencode (or transcode...) from Flac to WavPack?
Thanks for response.

Wait until YALAC final comes out : it's blazing fast, and has great compression ratios (just look at the YALAC threads, and at synthetic soul's posts.

[seanyseansean]

David is a very nice guy (it's not a necessary condition: I also used MPC in the past ...)

Was that really necessary?

[keytotime]

I'm also waiting for YALAC to come out.

[Supacon]

Like guruboolez, I used to use Monkey's audio because it first seemed the obvious choice. Good compression speed, and high efficiency. It's probably got the highest compression speed to compression ratio of any codec.

After transcoding my collection several times, however, I decided that I should switch to FLAC because its decompression time is much much faster which outweighs the small size increase. FLAC seems to be one of the most popular and supported codecs which is a big plus (although I don't think it makes a huge amount of difference in my application).

I think that wavpack offers great advantages, like better compression and still good speed, but I don't think anything quite has as good of a balance between decompression speed and efficiency as FLAC does yet. I'd probably use WavPack in lieu of monkey's now if I needed better compression.

YALAC looks really promising too, and when finalized, I'd switch to that in a heartbeat if it doesn't have any huge disadvantages over the other codecs.

[Triza]

FLAC because

1) Extremely thorough testbed. So I can be assured that if my compile passes the tests, then it must be OK.

2) --verify option, which decodes the encoded singnal during the encoding to ensure that no SW or other errors occurred.

3) Inbuilt MD5 signature over the audio content, which is essential to be able to carry out truly reliable integrity check.

4) Vorbis tagging. I love it and since my choice of lossy is vorbis, this makes convesion very trouble free.

5) Good error recovery.

6) Cross-platform. This is an absolute must for me.

7) Good command line interface. This is an absolute must for me.

8) Widespread. Best SW/HW support.

9) Stable. No compatibility breaks. Few but reliable releases.

10) Excellent PC HW tester. If you have a flaky HW FLAC is likely to exhibit corruptions.


Maybe Wavepack or others have these, but in 2003 it did not. I do not like changes. Also 2% size difference does not cut it for me. In fact I always use compression level 5.

[flcpge]

I also use FLAC. Too lazy to learn anything else right now, but that may change in the future.

This post has been edited by flcpge: Apr 24 2006, 00:11

[haregoo]

FLAC for faster/stable decoding speed.
Thanks developers & john33's faster encoding compile.

I will switch to YALAC when get matured.

[Mirage2k]

ALAC. I'm on a Mac--'nuff said. Although I guess now with Max it wouldn't be as much of a chore to maintain and transcode from a FLAC library as it used to be.

[iGold]

FLAC for vorbis comments and good command line support.

I wrote shell script for Linux to encode from one .flac with embedded cuesheet to per-track .ogg files copying common and per-track .flac comments (my own scheme compatible with foorbar 0.9 one) to the result files. The ability to decode specified track from such .flac only with command line switch is very handy for me, also common tagging format with ogg vorbis allows easy transfer of metadata.

[micimaci]

WavPack, but lookin forward to YALAC

[Zurman]

Monkey 3.99 High, because of its good ratios. I'm planning to switch to wavpack one day though.

[zombiewerewolf]

Wavpack for me.

The first lossless encoder I used is LA because it got the first rank in encoding ratio.
After encoded 2 albums, I quitted, cannot stand its slowness.

I was looking for a new format for archiving my collection.
I read this page on wiki section and choose the one that has more green colour.

Wavpack caught my attention (no orange colour). It has very fast speed in both encoding and decoding. So I tried and love it since.

[man]

I used Monkey's Audio [high] for 3 years.

Then I changed 16 months ago to WavPack [-m -x4] because of :

- fast decoding speed,
- still with a very good compression ratio,
- very fast seeking making the payer more responsive (seek can be controlled from remote control)

ReplayGain supported by the Winamp plug-in was also a reason, it can be used by Meedio, my interface of choice.

This post has been edited by man: Apr 24 2006, 17:41

[jcoalson]

another interesting thing so far... compared to the last poll, the FLAC percentage is the same (ALAC too) but wavpack has pretty much eaten up everyone else.

[guruboolez]

...and compared to an earlier poll it seems that Monkey's was replaced by WavPack in the heart (and hard drive) of non-flac HA.org users

ALAC score is pretty low compared to the absolute number of iPod supporting this format.

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Apr 24 2006, 19:21