What FLAC compression level are people using these days? |
  |
What FLAC compression level are people using these days? |
 Aug 19 2012, 11:14
Post
#26
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 231 Joined: 6-April 09 Member No.: 68706  |
Back when I used flac, I used the strongest mode of flake (because it was stronger than the original).
|
 |
 
|
|
Aug 19 2012, 11:38
Post
#27
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 310 Joined: 15-August 09 Member No.: 72330 |
It depends of the computer I use.
With a quad core, I don't mind the additional time to compress at the 8 level. While with a dual core, I prefer to use the 5 level. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 19 2012, 12:08
Post
#28
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 339 Joined: 24-November 08 Member No.: 63072 |
Is there any senseful reason to use anything else than 8 nowadays when it comes to libFlac?
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 19 2012, 13:07
Post
#29
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 15 Joined: 24-June 08 Member No.: 54802 |
3-4x longer encoding time for 0,5% saved disk space, maybe?
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 19 2012, 16:47
Post
#30
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 310 Joined: 15-August 09 Member No.: 72330 |
QUOTE (detmek @ Aug 19 2012, 12:07)  3-4x longer encoding time for 0,5% saved disk space, maybe? With a powerful machine, the additional encoding time is not a big matter i.e it's still enough fast. Unless you have too much stuff to encode. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 19 2012, 17:38
Post
#31
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 15 Joined: 24-June 08 Member No.: 54802 |
Well, using level 8 during ripping isn't a problem as ripping is way slower then FLAC transcoding. But, I don't think it's... ecological to transcode hundreds of FLAC albums.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th May 2013 - 09:14 |
