Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: OptimFROG stability (Read 25251 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

OptimFROG stability

Reply #25 –
Quote from: Porcus on
If not: Sure you can't get foobar2000 + TAK to work with FreeBSD+Wine? Considering how slow OptimFrog decoding is, you might even save CPU time.

WINE is a translation layer, not a classic emulator or virtual machine, it is just a set of libraries.  It costs almost nothing in CPU time.  If TAK is faster than OF when both are in Windows it almost assuredly will be when TAK is running through WINE and OF is native.
Quote from: Porcus on
By the way, since you mention ZFS: Myself I tried WinXP + foobar2000 virtualized under OpenSolaris, without success. I also tried NexentaStor virtualized (with raw drive access) on a WinXP box. I couldn't get realtime music playback in either, though I didn't try very hard before I gave up. YMMV.

foobar2000 runs through WINE just fine in all my experience on *nix.  I don't know why one would bother to launch a VM for it...
Creature of habit.

OptimFROG stability

Reply #27 –
Quote from: _m²_ on
Thank you greynol.

You're welcome.

Quote from: _m²_ on
Hmm... checking seems the right thing to do. The only problem is that ofr decompression takes time and will push the slowness by anither notch.

This is precisely why I wrote:
Quote from: greynol on
This should give you a good idea about OptimFROG's performance.
You can't just pretend that decoding time isn't an issue.  I did that with Monkey's Audio a while back and despite getting warnings from people far and wide I pushed on, later only to regret my bull-headed decision; and I was only using the high preset.

OptimFROG stability

Reply #28 –
Quote from: greynol on
Quote from: greynol on
This should give you a good idea about OptimFROG's performance.
You can't just pretend that decoding time isn't an issue.  I did that with Monkey's Audio a while back and despite getting warnings from people far and wide I pushed on, later only to regret my bull-headed decision; and I was only using the high preset.
I concur, the problem with APE and OFR in their strongest compression modes have ultra-slow decoding (I think OFR slightly lessened) basically because of their "symmetric" designs (also true for that other ultra-compressor I can't remember the name of). For those who don't know, this symmetric design equates to relatively equal performance (time) for decoding as it took to encode. I think WAVPack is by default symmetrical but can be asymmetric with -hx or similar switches.

At any rate, I did not ever find any problems with OFR causing corruption, although I haven't tested for a while and don't know if anything gets mangled using different file systems (can't imagine why, but it would be disastrous for the codec).

@greynol: I think MAC got less efficient when the best-compression war got into high gear. At any rate, I am still primarily using a outdated version of APE at default -c2000 setting that I found was the most efficient, and- to this day- still pretty comparable to TAK in encoding speed, falling a bit short on compression ratio and slower at decompression, of course. Why keep using this old software? Because I want the library to be homogeneous  I guess I'm not paranoid enough to believe some of the FUD out there
"Something bothering you, Mister Spock?"

OptimFROG stability

Reply #29 –
Quote from: Porcus on
Are you sure that OptimFrog does out-compress TAK on your particular material?

I have a rather large collection that's not biased towards any genre, I could bet 100 to 1 it will be stronger.

Quote from: Porcus on
If not: Sure you can't get foobar2000 + TAK to work with FreeBSD+Wine?

Yeah, I thought about it and I'm sure I could make it work. I'd fist start with XMMS because it claims compatibility with Winamp plugins, but somehow I'm sceptical...nontheless I would surely find some fairly good player that would work on Wine. But I don't want it, I prefer to use something supported natively.

Quote from: Porcus on
By the way, since you mention ZFS: Myself I tried WinXP + foobar2000 virtualized under OpenSolaris, without success. I also tried NexentaStor virtualized (with raw drive access) on a WinXP box. I couldn't get realtime music playback in either, though I didn't try very hard before I gave up. YMMV.

I considered a similar, though reversed setup several months ago.
A Windows host, Solaris guest, communication via SMB or so. But I'm really dissatisfied with where Windows is heading and after a bit of using Linux / playing with BSD I'm sure they are viable choices. For me better ones than Windows.
Quote from: jetpower on
Quote from: _m²_ on
I am talking about  compression ratio. And I don't need more drives, my current ones are  well sufficient. I'm just a compression hobbyist and like when things  are small.

then:
http://www.lossless-audio.com/
or if you're extreme/patient
http://encode.ru/threads/1137-Sac-(State-o...dio-Compression


Yeah I gave both a thought. With SAC it was a very short one, amount of work needed to make it useful is simply too large. With LA I needed a short research, but, like I said already, I decided against it because ID3v1 tags are insufficient for me.

Quote from: greynol on
Quote from: _m²_ on
Hmm... checking  seems the right thing to do. The only problem is that ofr decompression  takes time and will push the slowness by anither notch.

This is precisely why I wrote:
Quote from: greynol on
This should give  you a good idea about OptimFROG's performance.
You can't just  pretend that decoding time isn't an issue. I did that with Monkey's  Audio a while back and despite getting warnings from people far and  wide I pushed on, later only to regret my bull-headed decision; and I  was only using the high preset.

Judging by Synthetic Soul's benchmark I estimate that highnew would use 18-21% of one of my cores. I'm intend to use bestnew, possibly later backing off slightly with compression mode and/or seek length. Might be wrong, but I don't expect troubles with decompression speed. I don't think that converting my current collection will be a problem either, I will just leave a computer running for a weekend or a couple. I'm somewhat afraid about encoding new albums; I use image+cue setup, so I will have full slowness of ofr using only 1 core. But singlethreaded TAK -p4m is blazing fast for my on my 5 years old PC, so I think ofr will be OK on the new one.

OptimFROG stability

Reply #30 –
Quote
I'm intend to use bestnew, possibly later backing off slightly with compression mode and/or seek length. Might be wrong, but I don't expect troubles with decompression speed.


According to my tests on Core2 2400 MHz, OFR bestnew mode has 2.2x realtime encoding speed and 3.7x realtime decoding speed. (highnew: 5.0x and 7.6x, respectively).

OptimFROG stability

Reply #31 –
Quote from: lvqcl on
Quote
I'm intend to use bestnew, possibly later backing off slightly with compression mode and/or seek length. Might be wrong, but I don't expect troubles with decompression speed.


According to my tests on Core2 2400 MHz, OFR bestnew mode has 2.2x realtime encoding speed and 3.7x realtime decoding speed. (highnew: 5.0x and 7.6x, respectively).


Wow! Then it can be said that OFR has a very real energy consumption and carbon footprint...

OptimFROG stability

Reply #32 –
Quote from: lvqcl on
Quote
I'm intend to use bestnew, possibly later backing off slightly with compression mode and/or seek length. Might be wrong, but I don't expect troubles with decompression speed.


According to my tests on Core2 2400 MHz, OFR bestnew mode has 2.2x realtime encoding speed and 3.7x realtime decoding speed. (highnew: 5.0x and 7.6x, respectively).


Just for the sake of comparison, could you give the encoding and decoding speed of the most popular lossless codec FLAC, at say -6 or -8, on that Core2 2400 ?

OptimFROG stability

Reply #33 –
IIRC I posted them somewhere but cannot find that post...
Results, again:

Code: [Select]
Codec           compression(%)    encoding/decoding(x realtime)
FLAC
0               74.256            254          376
1               72.973            236          360
2               72.716            201          366
3               71.228            205          358
4               69.569            170          339
5               69.342            131          337
6               69.339            127          339
7               69.307             53          341
8               69.162             36          325

TAK
p0              69.342            308          359
p0e             68.941            181          361
p0m             68.882            105          359
p1              68.368            239          350
p1e             68.207            141          350
p1m             68.119             80          351
p2              67.725            170          319
p2e             67.496             78          315
p2m             67.416             48          317
p3              67.381             83          286
p3e             67.289             56          284
p3m             67.249             31          285
p4              67.230             46          244
p4e             67.144             37          244
p4m             67.117             20          248

WavPack
fast            70.537            188          232
fast x1         70.338            126          233
fast x2         70.233             91          233
fast x3         70.172             54          233
fast x4         70.108             22          232
fast x5         70.095             18          232
fast x6         70.090             15          233
normal          69.280            155          186
normal x1       68.879             95          188
normal x2       68.811             62          188
normal x3       68.787             33          188
normal x4       68.635              8.4        188
normal x5       68.614              5.8        189
normal x6       68.565              2.9        188
high            68.443            117          140
high x1         68.274             68          142
high x2         68.230             41          142
high x3         68.206             21          142
high x4         68.054              5.2        143
high x5         68.030              3.9        142
high x6         68.014              2.7        143
ex.high         68.056             93          112
ex.high x1      67.974             51          111
ex.high x2      67.941             29          111
ex.high x3      67.932             14          111
ex.high x4      67.880              3.4        112
ex.high x5      67.859              2.2        112
ex.high x6      67.851              1.6        112

Monkey's Audio                                        
fast            68.471            112           84
normal          67.396             75           63
high            67.153             63           54
extra high      66.695             29           28
insane          66.443              8.8          8.3

ALAC            70.143            100          121

WMAL            68.079             43           50

TTA             68.928            141          149

LA                                        
normal          65.907              7.9          9.4
high            65.717              5.7          6.4

OptimFrog                                        
fast            67.552             37           49
normal          67.000             25           33
high            66.862             16           21
extra           66.814             10           14
best            66.785              6.1          8.0
highnew         66.246              5.0          7.6
extranew        66.170              3.9          6.1
bestnew         65.922              2.2          3.7
exp. fast       67.463             12           42
exp. normal     66.908             11           29
exp. high       66.770              8.7         20
exp. extra      66.722              6.7         13
exp. best       66.693              4.6          7.7
exp. highnew    66.162              4.0          7.4
exp. extranew   66.087              3.2          6.2
exp. bestnew    65.841              2.0          3.7

OptimFROG stability

Reply #35 –
Quote from: lvqcl on
IIRC I posted them somewhere but cannot find that post...
Results, again:
edit: nevermind, I should have read hyperlinked post above.
Code: [Select]
Codec           compression(%)    encoding/decoding(x realtime)
...
Monkey's Audio                                        
insane          66.443              8.8          8.3

LA                                        
normal          65.907              7.9          9.4
high            65.717              5.7          6.4

OptimFrog
...
best            66.785              6.1          8.0
highnew         66.246              5.0          7.6
extranew        66.170              3.9          6.1
bestnew         65.922              2.2          3.7
...
exp. best       66.693              4.6          7.7
exp. highnew    66.162              4.0          7.4
exp. extranew   66.087              3.2          6.2
exp. bestnew    65.841              2.0          3.7
Yikes! (Don't let California know if this is the lossless program you use.  /sarcasm)
"Something bothering you, Mister Spock?"

OptimFROG stability

Reply #36 –
Quote from: lvqcl on
IIRC I posted them somewhere but cannot find that post...
Results, again:


I see.  So FLAC is about 7 times faster than OptimFROG in encoding speed, and about 50 times faster in decoding.

What's the advantage of OptimFROG again?

Oh, and as for this:

Quote
I am talking about compression ratio. And I don't need more drives, my current ones are well sufficient. I'm just a compression hobbyist and like when things are small.


I have a single external 2 TB hard drive that cost me $130 USD.  On it I have stored FLAC encodings of more than 2000 CDs.  That's two thousand audio CDs.  Along with those FLAC encodings are both MP3 and AAC transcodes of those FLACs.  The 3 most supported formats of 2000 CDs on one external drive.  I still have about 500 GB of space free.  The FLACs of those 2000 CDs took up only about 800 GB.  The MP3 and AAC transcodes took up about 250 GB each.

I purchased a duplicated drive, copied the contents of the first drive to it, and have it stored someplace else.

OptimFROG stability

Reply #38 –
Quote from: WonderSlug on
FLAC encodings of more than 2000 CDs.


... i.e., about 2 months of music. Or one month of transcoding, with speeds like reported above. Add another couple of weeks for  decode+verify.

Compare FLAC -6 speeds from same table: Half a day for encoding. Plus 4 hrs for decode+verify.

OptimFROG stability

Reply #41 –
A tad off topic and maybe silly too, but I've just realized how competitive The True Audio (TTA) codec is.
WavPack 5.6.0 -b384hx6cmv / qaac64 2.80 -V 100

OptimFROG stability

Reply #42 –
Nah, you can't really go wrong with lossless, I think that message has always been clear. It's just the matter of being aware of the pros & cons of each program since the idea is to stick to one instead of re-encoding every few months. Decoding performance is a very important factor, unless one does not plan to frequently access the audio files. Compression is always highly regarded given that the trade-offs are not substantial. With OFR in high compression modes, there is a high price in decoding performance, and if the idea is to have a frequently accessed library I would recommend another codec. For archival to be put in the dungeon and accessed 3 times a year, OFR high compression is fine.
"Something bothering you, Mister Spock?"
 

OptimFROG stability

Reply #43 –
Quote from: Destroid on
For archival to be put in the dungeon and accessed 3 times a year, OFR high compression is fine.

...and if recovery time is not an issue...

OptimFROG stability

Reply #44 –
Just how much space do you estimate OFR would save? Would it really be worth all that extra time? Dungeon or no, it seems a bit like you want  ‘maximal’ compression (clearly not really possible) for its own sake, forsaking a lot of practicality and compatibility.

OptimFROG stability

Reply #45 –
Quote from: dv1989 on
Just how much space do you estimate OFR would save? Would it really be worth all that extra time? Dungeon or no, it seems a bit like you want  ‘maximal’ compression (clearly not really possible) for its own sake, forsaking a lot of practicality and compatibility.


Got home, will be building the computer today. There are some hardware incompatibilities, I might need a new wifi card. I expect to have workable OS either tomorrow or later this week.
Then there will be a lot of testing, I have to ensure I can do everything I need to before I start converting...and I already noticed some troubles, after using foobar I assumed that it's usual for players to support media databases, replaygain, cue files, flexible tagging and Unicode...turns out I was wrong. So I have to test XMMS with several plugins, a couple of forks of it (some with own plugins) and Amarok claims compatibility with XMMS plugins. Though most mention visualisation which makes me wonder if playback ones work too. If neither does what I need I will have to rethink the whole deal.... :|
I may end up using foobar+ofr (--experimantal?). Of foobar+tak. Or some unix player with ape. One thing is sure, I'm not going to use anything weaker than what I have now and if good unix players don't support it, I won't use them.

As I got lvqcl data by hand, I did some *rough* estimations of how much time will it take and how much will be saved. As I mentioned earlier, I intend to use bestnew at first. And I didn't mention, but I want to use --optimize best.
Assumptions:
*My Athlon is as fast as lvqcl's Intel clock for clock.
*It doesn't run into new bottlenecks when using all 4 cores.
*Decompressing taks, script overhead and such are negligible
*I have 0.5 TB of music stored as TAK. It's not entirely true, I didn't make the tak transition fully because of Unicode related issues, so I have some flacs too. And I don't know how much music do I have because a good part of my collection is taken by artwork scans.
*lvqcl's test files are representative. I doubt it because LA scored too well compared to other tests that I've seen.

And I did the calculations yesterday, now I'm writing from memory, so they may be a bit off
ofr encode+decode is 1.39x realtime of lvqcl's CPU, ~7.2x realtime when using 4 cores of my CPU.
A week straight to compress whole library. I won't be running my computer 24x7 and I will be doing other stuff in the meantime, so it's likely to take 1 month. With --optimize best much more.
It saves almost exactly 2% over TAK. 2% of already compressed size, not original size.
10 GB saved over entire collection. 2 copies on ZFS + backup, so 30 GB in total. Total of 192 MB saved per hour of computations.

OptimFROG stability

Reply #46 –
A polite request for a mod to close this thread.

The OP's question has already been answered for all intents and purposes.  I can't see any reason to further discuss one random person's obsession with doing something completely pointless, impractical, and time/energy consuming.

OptimFROG stability

Reply #48 –
Quote from: Remedial Sound on
I can't see any reason to further discuss one random person's obsession with doing something completely pointless, impractical, and time/energy consuming.

I don't see any rules of this forum being broken except possibly a very polite TOS #2 violation and other posts of a similar nature.

OptimFROG stability

Reply #49 –
Quote from: _m²_ on
I'm considering converting my collection for OptimFROG, but seeing that the latest version is alpha...,

Good News,
Florin Ghido is back and released a new beta stable version (4.910b).
The speed of encoding/decoding at normal settings is good but very slow at high, extra and best compression modes.

www.losslessaudio.org
loquor mee menti: factus de materia, cinis elementi...