IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> 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

5 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 >  
Closed TopicStart new topic
What's your lossless codec of choice?
What's your lossless codec of choice?
What's your lossless codec of choice?
Apple Lossless [ 36 ] ** [5.03%]
FLAC [ 377 ] ** [52.73%]
La [ 4 ] ** [0.56%]
Monkey's Audio [ 130 ] ** [18.18%]
OptimFROG [ 7 ] ** [0.98%]
Shorten [ 0 ] ** [0.00%]
TTA [ 8 ] ** [1.12%]
WavPack [ 106 ] ** [14.83%]
WMA Lossless [ 14 ] ** [1.96%]
other (please specify)/I'm not into lossless at all [ 33 ] ** [4.62%]
Total Votes: 950
  
Ivegottheskill
post 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 huh.gif

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
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Omion
post 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  huh.gif

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. wink.gif


--------------------
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!" - Vroomfondel, H2G2
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ivegottheskill
post 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
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post 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).
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
adamlau
post 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
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Lokutus01
post 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 laugh.gif

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.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ray
post 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...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Polar
post 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.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rjamorim
post 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
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
adamin
post 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.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jcrab66
post 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
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
VCSkier
post 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.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gallvs
post 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.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
unfortunateson
post 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. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
edekba
post 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 ...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Involarius
post 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
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Julien
post 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.)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
weirving
post 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... dry.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rain
post Feb 13 2006, 23:23
Post #94





Group: Members
Posts: 112
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
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lossman
post 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.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rasqual
post 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.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
shadowking
post Mar 11 2006, 00:46
Post #97





Group: Members
Posts: 1523
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 ?


--------------------
Wavpack -b450x1
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xequence
post 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...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lextune
post 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
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
LANjackal
post 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
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 >
Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st April 2014 - 12:21