Strongest FLAC compression possible?, FLAC;compression;best compression |
  |
Strongest FLAC compression possible?, FLAC;compression;best compression |
 Nov 24 2012, 03:13
Post
#1
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 156 Joined: 22-July 12 Member No.: 101637  |
Currently, I'm ripping my entire CD collection and compressing into FLACs. I'm interested in making the FLACs as small as possible and have no concern whatsoever for encoding time.
To achieve this, I'm currently using -V -p -l 12 -b 4096 -m -e -r 8. (Those who use FLAC regularly will note these settings are even stronger than -8. I tried using -r 16 which the documentation states is supported, but anything over -r 8 caused an error in my tests.) My question is: what settings, if any, would allow for even better compression? |
 |
 
|
|
Nov 24 2012, 03:17
Post
#2
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 4135 Joined: 2-September 02 Member No.: 3264 |
You could try flake, or cudaflac. They might be able to squeeze a little more compression out.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 24 2012, 03:33
Post
#3
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 156 Joined: 22-July 12 Member No.: 101637 |
QUOTE (saratoga @ Nov 23 2012, 20:17)  You could try flake, or cudaflac. They might be able to squeeze a little more compression out. Thanks! I'm not interested in flake since the current version doesn't support metadata (though it'd be great to see the optimizations applied in the reference FLAC). And it's my understanding that "cuda flac" is a class of Nvidia GPU-based encoders. If so, is there a specific one you'd recommend? |
|
|
|
|
Nov 24 2012, 10:27
Post
#4
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 1063 Joined: 4-May 04 From: France Member No.: 13875 |
QUOTE (BFG @ Nov 24 2012, 03:13) I'm interested in making the FLACs as small as possible and have no concern whatsoever for encoding time. FWIW, FLAC -8 is only 0.35% smaller than FLAC -5 on my music collection, and the difference between -8 and your settings is probably going to be a lot smaller than that. It's just not worth it. Also, see FLACCL. This post has been edited by skamp: Nov 24 2012, 10:28 -------------------- Save my friend from going homeless: http://outpost.fr/url/308w
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 24 2012, 10:41
Post
#5
|
|
 Group: Developer Posts: 2986 Joined: 2-December 07 Member No.: 49183 |
QUOTE Also, see FLACCL. This wiki page is a bit outdated: CUETools 2.1.4 contains FlacCL encoder ver. 0.4. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 24 2012, 11:41
Post
#6
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 1471 Joined: 30-November 06 Member No.: 38207 |
The metadata could of course be transferred to flake-encoded files afterwards, if you are a bit handy.
But those who are truly obsessed with compression, should maybe consider other codecs than FLAC, which was optimized for decoding speed. There is really no way to improve over FLAC without sacrificing some degree of compatibility, but if that is no issue, then ... TAK. -------------------- geocities.com/hydrogenaudio: http://goo.gl/tqYZj
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 1 2012, 19:08
Post
#7
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 1315 Joined: 3-January 05 From: Argentina, Bs As Member No.: 18803 |
Additional settings "-A tukey(0.5) -A flattop" should bring a bit more compression gain.
http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk/comparison/lossless/ |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2012, 18:21
Post
#8
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 156 Joined: 22-July 12 Member No.: 101637 |
QUOTE (IgorC @ Dec 1 2012, 12:08) Additional settings "-A tukey(0.5) -A flattop" should bring a bit more compression gain. http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk/comparison/lossless/ Thanks for the suggestion. Not knowing anything about the different -A options, I've left it at default in the past. I don't suppose you're aware of a website that discusses the different algorithms in depth? |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2012, 19:18
Post
#9
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 4135 Joined: 2-September 02 Member No.: 3264 |
If this is for portable use, you may want to experiment with lossyflac, as it will remove some of bits wasted storing noise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 24th May 2013 - 23:43 |
