QUOTE
-V -8 -T "artist=%a" -T "title=%t" -T "album=%g" -T "date=%y" -T "tracknumber=%n" -T "genre=%m" %s --best --verify
Full Version: Is This A "good" command line setup? (FLAC)
This is my commandline used in EAC for flac.exe My question would be is this inclusive using its full potential of flac to get the best results. I just want to be sure that I am not leaving out anything important.
-8 is the same as --best, and -V is the same as --verify.
You don't have to repeat those parts.
Apart from that, it looks quite fine.
You don't have to repeat those parts.
Apart from that, it looks quite fine.
If you really want to use the full potential of FLAC, there is another string that creates smaller files.
flac.exe --super-secret-totally-impractical-compression-level
(which uses: --lax -P 4096 -b 4608 -m -l 32 -e -E -p -q 0 -r 0,16)
As you see it compresses files better than -8/--best, but takes 30x the compression time!
Solaris
flac.exe --super-secret-totally-impractical-compression-level
(which uses: --lax -P 4096 -b 4608 -m -l 32 -e -E -p -q 0 -r 0,16)
QUOTE(http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=14472)
Edit: Warning...this setting results in vvvveeeeeerrrrryyyyy sssllllooowwwwwwww processing. My P4 2.0GHz takes 1 minute to compress 5% of a 7-1/2 minute track, hence ~20 minutes for the whole track (and that's only one song, mind you).
Edit 2: Compared with simply using -8, the above setting compressed my sample track at a ratio of 99.829% compared to an instance compressed with -8 (48931KB vs. 49015KB), and the latter compressed much more quickly (40 seconds vs. 20 minutes). The moral of the story...use -8
Edit 2: Compared with simply using -8, the above setting compressed my sample track at a ratio of 99.829% compared to an instance compressed with -8 (48931KB vs. 49015KB), and the latter compressed much more quickly (40 seconds vs. 20 minutes). The moral of the story...use -8
As you see it compresses files better than -8/--best, but takes 30x the compression time!
Solaris
QUOTE(solaris @ Apr 28 2004, 04:46 UTC)
If you really want to use the full potential of FLAC, there is another string that creates smaller files.
flac.exe --super-secret-totally-impractical-compression-level
(which uses: --lax -P 4096 -b 4608 -m -l 32 -e -E -p -q 0 -r 0,16)
As you see it compresses files better than -8/--best, but takes 30x the compression time!
flac.exe --super-secret-totally-impractical-compression-level
(which uses: --lax -P 4096 -b 4608 -m -l 32 -e -E -p -q 0 -r 0,16)
QUOTE(http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=14472)
Edit: Warning...this setting results in vvvveeeeeerrrrryyyyy sssllllooowwwwwwww processing. My P4 2.0GHz takes 1 minute to compress 5% of a 7-1/2 minute track, hence ~20 minutes for the whole track (and that's only one song, mind you).
Edit 2: Compared with simply using -8, the above setting compressed my sample track at a ratio of 99.829% compared to an instance compressed with -8 (48931KB vs. 49015KB), and the latter compressed much more quickly (40 seconds vs. 20 minutes). The moral of the story...use -8
Edit 2: Compared with simply using -8, the above setting compressed my sample track at a ratio of 99.829% compared to an instance compressed with -8 (48931KB vs. 49015KB), and the latter compressed much more quickly (40 seconds vs. 20 minutes). The moral of the story...use -8
As you see it compresses files better than -8/--best, but takes 30x the compression time!
Most interesting! I was unaware of this extra-compression, albeit, as the name implies already, impractical setting in FLAC.
Just for the records, would it please the gentlemen Speek and Hans Heijden to perform some encoding/decoding speed and compression ratio testing with this setting? I'm particularly curious to know whether thus encoded FLACs still decode equally as fast as in any other compression level.
Edit: added hyperlinks and changed time mention from CET to UTC.
QUOTE(Polar @ Apr 28 2004, 10:42 PM)
I'm particularly curious to know whether thus encoded FLACs still decode equally as fast as in any other compression level.
FLAC's compression settings don't affect decoding times linearly. That means that even if you choose low compression, that won't speed up decoding. It also means that you can crank up the compression without worrying about decoding times.
Hmm.. I just remember the type of juice I hate, and use -V8
don't bother using --super-secret-totally-impractical-compression-level, it's mainly for testing. it will decode a little slower than if encoded with -8, probably noticable slower on a low power device.
Josh
Josh
Off Topic, sorry:
Hey Polar, I tried replying to your PM but I get this messsage:
Enable your PMs
Hey Polar, I tried replying to your PM but I get this messsage:
CODE
The following errors were found
This member has chosen not to be contactable by the board Messenger
This personal message has not been sent
This member has chosen not to be contactable by the board Messenger
This personal message has not been sent
Enable your PMs
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.