What's your lossless codec of choice? |
Hydrogenaudio Forum Rules - No Warez. This includes warez links, cracks and/or requests for help in getting illegal software or copyrighted music tracks!
- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war.
- No Hateful or Disrespectful posts. This includes: bashing, name-calling or insults directed at a board member.
- Click here for complete Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service
  |
What's your lossless codec of choice? |
 Nov 27 2004, 01:46
Post
#76
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 61 Joined: 6-October 04 Member No.: 17513  |
What does the -SS setting do? I haven't heard of that one in FLAC before
 What's the apparent cut of point of benefits in FLAC (i.e. what's the level at which compression gains become very minimal/non-existent, while decode times seem to rise) Thought it was around 2-, -3. But the dot points on an earlier graph weren't numbered, so I couldn't tell -------------------- <==== Hydrogen Audio Bomb
|
 |
 
|
|
Nov 27 2004, 03:54
Post
#77
|
|
 Group: Developer Posts: 432 Joined: 22-February 04 From: San Diego, CA Member No.: 12180 |
QUOTE (Ivegottheskill @ Nov 26 2004, 05:46 PM) What does the -SS setting do? I haven't heard of that one in FLAC before What's the apparent cut of point of benefits in FLAC (i.e. what's the level at which compression gains become very minimal/non-existent, while decode times seem to rise) Thought it was around 2-, -3. But the dot points on an earlier graph weren't numbered, so I couldn't tell  You can figure out for yourself what the cutoff point is. Look at my previous graphs on this thread, for example, or look at this thread for my complete test. All my graphs' x-axis is encoding ratio (less is better) and y-axis is decoding speed (more is better). As for "-SS", I'm sure you can figure it out too. 
-------------------- "We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!" - Vroomfondel, H2G2
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 30 2004, 05:17
Post
#78
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 61 Joined: 6-October 04 Member No.: 17513 |
I use FLAC (good support and decompression times, my iAUDIO M3 also supports it now). However I voted La, because in every test (at least the ones I've seen) it has the best compression ratio's over any other lossless codec.
Hence theoretically making it the best for archiving purposes. Since lossless can be relatively easily transcoded I could turn it into a FLAC or lossy file for my DAP. On the overall scale however, it's hard to disagree that FLAC is one of the best formats around -------------------- <==== Hydrogen Audio Bomb
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 30 2004, 09:28
Post
#79
|
|
 Group: Members (Donating) Posts: 3474 Joined: 7-November 01 From: Strasbourg (France) Member No.: 420 |
QUOTE (Ivegottheskill @ Nov 30 2004, 05:17 AM) However I voted La, because in every test (at least the ones I've seen) it has the best compression ratio's over any other lossless codec. www.foobar2000.net/lossless OptimFROG has a --bestnew mode, which is not always tested (much slower than LA -high). Apparently, this extra mode compress better than LA (at least with most classical CD). |
|
|
|
|
Dec 1 2004, 03:28
Post
#80
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 21 Joined: 30-November 04 From: SoCal-SGV Member No.: 18423 |
WavPack 4.2 beta 3 using -hxm or -hb320xcm (hybrid). Native plugin support for Nero!
-------------------- IBM T42 2378-FZU
Audigy 2 ZS Notebook Shure E4 Earphones foobar2000 0.9 b8 |
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2004, 18:16
Post
#81
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 70 Joined: 28-June 03 Member No.: 7432 |
flac..... compression: 6
I like the format because it offers lossless-quality  seriously: I decided for it, because most people use it and the differences to the 20 other lossless formats are rather small, it de-/encodes fast, offers fair compression and offers all the important features like fingerprinting, good tagging, etc. |
|
|
|
 Dec 13 2004, 11:14
Post
#82
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 1 Joined: 24-August 04 Member No.: 16488 |
I use FLAC, Monkey Audio and Wavpack
Monkey Audio is speedy in encoding and has higher compression ratio and is the most popular one. FLAC is fast in decoding, which i think is more important than encoding speed, especially when you convert lossless files to uncompressed or lossy ones. Both FLAC and Wavpack are opensource. Wavpack archieves good encoding speed and high compression ratio at the same time, but only available on win32 platform(any Linux version ?) . Input must be raw pcm, it seems... |
|
|
|
|
Dec 13 2004, 11:51
Post
#83
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 266 Joined: 12-February 04 Member No.: 11970 |
QUOTE (Ray @ Dec 13 2004, 10:14 UTC) Monkey Audio is (...) the most popular one. A questionable opinion, if you look at the results of this very poll.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 13 2004, 13:42
Post
#84
|
|
 Rarewares admin Group: Members Posts: 7515 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Brazil Member No.: 81 |
QUOTE (Polar @ Dec 13 2004, 07:51 AM) A questionable opinion, if you look at the results of this very poll. It's unwise to extrapolate the results of most polls held at HA. If the polls here were representative, MPC would be the most popular format by far and nearly noone would be using WMA. This post has been edited by rjamorim: Dec 13 2004, 13:45 -------------------- Get up-to-date binaries of Lame, AAC, Vorbis and much more at RareWares:
http://www.rarewares.org |
|
|
|
|
Dec 14 2004, 02:00
Post
#85
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 4 Joined: 14-November 04 Member No.: 18127 |
FLAC. For me it's all about hardware compatibility.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 15 2004, 16:59
Post
#86
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 4 Joined: 15-December 04 Member No.: 18689 |
Flac for me, used to be shn but i definitly like the quick decoding with flac
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 26 2005, 03:57
Post
#87
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 447 Joined: 26-January 05 From: LynchburgVA(US) Member No.: 19325 |
QUOTE (picmixer @ Aug 3 2004, 07:14 PM) Momentarily I am using Monkey's Audio standard. Good file size and perfect internal cuesheet support with foobar2000 are what won me over. Although I am currently thinking about switching to wavpack. It seems a very nice compromise between compression ratio and decoding speed for me. Also internal cue sheet support works just as well with foobar2000 thanks to Case. Furthermore I just somehow apperciate all the work Briant has put into this and was very impressed by the new 4.0 release. with his latest beta, you dont even need wapet for wavpack to support internal cue sheet now. wavpack is great. definately the best lossless for me. edit: clarification This post has been edited by VCSkier: Mar 26 2005, 03:58 -------------------- a windows-free, linux user since 1/31/06.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 26 2005, 13:02
Post
#88
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 11-January 03 From: Gallia Cisalpina Member No.: 4524 |
I originally voted Monkey's Audio but now I'm switching to WavPack (the process is quite painless with foobar).
Slightly worse compression but much faster decoding and seeking. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 30 2005, 04:59
Post
#89
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 294 Joined: 28-July 04 Member No.: 15838 |
At the moment, my lossless codec of choice is WavPack.
I converted 20 gb of my FLACs into WavPack, and I got over a gigabyte of space back. 
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 23 2005, 09:21
Post
#90
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 191 Joined: 6-February 02 From: 310 Member No.: 1273 |
I've been using APE, becuz of hte compression ratio. On my CPU (3.2Ghz P4) i dont see any differences in APE/FLAC on decode and i think the encode time for both are somewhat the same. APE(high)/FLAC(8) tho FLAC is a lil longer.
However after reading some more, i've come to maybe consider FLAC for its corruption tollerance stuff ... |
|
|
|
|
Oct 9 2005, 11:01
Post
#91
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 32 Joined: 8-October 05 Member No.: 24986 |
FLAC. Nothing but FLAC. I've got the Monkey's Audio codec installed on dBpowerAMP, but only for one reason: so that if I acquire any file in Monkey's Audio, I can convert it to FLAC immediately.
Edit: I've just stumbled upon the thread starter's request to state reasons for one's preference. So: Freedom and features. FLAC is free software, a good thing to propagate. It's the same reason why I use OpenOffice.org and its file formats, PNG rather than GIF, Vorbis and not MP3 etc. Regarding features, FLAC's frame-based encoding and, particularly, the resultant streamability of the files are big wins as far as I'm concerned. This post has been edited by Involarius: Oct 12 2005, 00:45 -------------------- FLAC – all your bit are belong to you
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 9 2005, 11:57
Post
#92
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 53 Joined: 26-July 05 Member No.: 23534 |
Wavpack for me, because it does not remove the RIFF sub-chunk data on the Wav files which makes it pretty convenient for musicians who want to backup the building blocks of their sound files, or samples and loops(which might be the main reason why Riff sub chunk data comes in really handy.)
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 1 2006, 10:56
Post
#93
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 5-December 03 Member No.: 10203 |
I'm a FLAC-er, all the way. On my iPod, I just can't bring myself to use Apple Lossless; I feel guilty enough getting an iPod in the first place, with all the other sheeple. I'll be switched before I let myself get sucked into Apple any more than I already am, by using their proprietary lossless format.
What's more, the PhatBox by PhatNoise, a removable hard-drive-based car audio player, supports FLAC. Plus, at some point, I want to get a streaming media server and the best ones support FLAC. Though Sonos, maker of some really cool audiophile-quality media serving products, supports Apple Lossless as well as FLAC. To my knowledge, Sonos offers the only products that, out of the box, support all Apple formats, Windows Media Audio, AND open-source formats FLAC and Vorbis. Sonos is at: http://www.sonos.com/?tref=logohome Very, very tempting... 
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 13 2006, 23:23
Post
#94
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 111 Joined: 27-January 06 Member No.: 27371 |
QUOTE (Julien @ Oct 9 2005, 11:57 AM) Wavpack for me, because it does not remove the RIFF sub-chunk data on the Wav files which makes it pretty convenient for musicians who want to backup the building blocks of their sound files, or samples and loops(which might be the main reason why Riff sub chunk data comes in really handy.) Same here. Though I won't be using RIFF chunks, why not have them instead of removing the data? Hence, my preference of Wavpack > FLAC |
|
|
|
|
Mar 8 2006, 09:35
Post
#95
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 14-January 06 Member No.: 27099 |
Flac all the way, Its open-source, incredibly fast, multi platform, supported on hardware devices. What more can you ask for in a codec.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 11 2006, 00:39
Post
#96
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 27 Joined: 15-October 05 Member No.: 25136 |
I chose FLAC, because of the numerous platforms it as ported to, including hardware players. Also because it is free and takes little resources when decoding.
Not WavPack because you can't tell whether it's lossless or hybrid just by looking at the file extension. Others may not bother, but I do. Otherwise, it is a very promising codec packed with features and I guess it would come second for me. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 11 2006, 00:46
Post
#97
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 1495 Joined: 31-January 04 Member No.: 11664 |
QUOTE (Rasqual @ Mar 10 2006, 03:39 PM) I chose FLAC, because of the numerous platforms it as ported to, including hardware players. Also because it is free and takes little resources when decoding. Not WavPack because you can't tell whether it's lossless or hybrid just by looking at the file extension. Others may not bother, but I do. Otherwise, it is a very promising codec packed with features and I guess it would come second for me. Wow that's a poor argument against Wavpack considering that plugins report the compression type. Besides, how on earth do you end up in lossy mode unless you specify a bitrate ? |
|
|
|
|
Mar 11 2006, 01:56
Post
#98
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 106 Joined: 1-December 05 Member No.: 26127 |
I have to say FLAC. As far as I know there really isnt any one uber dominant lossless codec, so I had might as well support the one that is open source. Others are probably open source, but heh, I prefer FLAC.
-------------------- And if you believe theres not a chance to die...
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 15 2006, 02:51
Post
#99
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 304 Joined: 5-August 05 Member No.: 23715 |
It used to be FLAC, but I need to be able to embed a cuesheet into an image (including title tags) in one step, so it is WavPack all the way for me now.
-------------------- foobar2000 + EAC + Burrrn = Happiness
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 15 2006, 07:42
Post
#100
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 731 Joined: 26-October 05 From: Various networks Member No.: 25371 |
Monkey's Audio @ Insane compression level for me. I use lossless audio for archival purposes, not for playback, so compression percentage performance is paramount to me.
-------------------- EAC>1)fb2k>LAME3.99 -V 0 --vbr-new>WMP12 2)MAC-Extra High
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th May 2013 - 11:37 |
