Lokutus01
Oct 20 2005, 15:14
Hallo,
I have a little question concerning flac and encoding high-resolution-material: 16bit/44,1 does compress pretty good with flac, most of the times only a few percent worse than monkey-audio or others......
.... no I tried to compress 24bit/96KHz-material and somehow flac needs more than double the space compared to monkey: I tried to use "-best"-compression, but it made no difference (latest version).
can somebody help me or do I have to switch format?
cheers
Andreas
Alex B
Oct 20 2005, 16:31
I've no idea why the size difference is so big.
Because you have found Monkey's Audio better for the purpose you could just use it. There are no rules against having both formats side by side on your PC. I can't see any practical differences besides the size unless you have HW devices that support 24/96 FLAC (are there any?).
markanini
Oct 20 2005, 18:19
You could also give WavPack a try. I think it may be more optimised for high res audio.
i am sure it has something to do with the frequency, maybe flac endodes it and ape only goes to 44khz... i don't know
Duble0Syx
Oct 20 2005, 20:36
QUOTE(markanini @ Oct 20 2005, 04:19 PM)
You could also give WavPack a try. I think it may be more optimised for high res audio.
I can confirm it works quite well with high res/multichannel audio. Have a good number of 32-bit Stereo and 24/96 6 channel files compressed with WavPack using -hx2m. Not compared to monkey's audio because it's too slow encoding/decoding. But the 6 channel files were much smaller than the same files encoded as flac. Using the extra option with wavpack makes a huge difference with high res audio it seems. Very nice compression, plus FLAC can't do 32-bit AFAIK.
FLAC does 32-bit LPCM, but it doesn't handle floating-point data.
markanini
Oct 21 2005, 02:52
QUOTE(bubka @ Oct 21 2005, 03:44 AM)
i am sure it has something to do with the frequency, maybe flac endodes it and ape only goes to 44khz... i don't know
Monkey's Audio and FLAC are both lossless formats. You shouldnt pollute threads with unhelpfull and confusing replies.
CosmoKramer
Oct 30 2005, 03:09
I have some audio files @ 32-bit LPCM, 88.2 kHz. Unfortunately FLAC 1.1.2 won't compress these files., it complains about the "32-bitness". I have converted it to packed 24-bit but there is no difference. So the question is, what version of FLAC (and what possible other tools) do you guys use to compress these kind of files?
QUOTE(CosmoKramer @ Oct 30 2005, 11:09 AM)
what version of FLAC (and what possible other tools) do you guys use to compress these kind of files?
I use WavPack. It definitely compresses high resolution audio much better than FLAC. The next version of WavPack (currently in beta) compresses such content even better.
CosmoKramer
Oct 30 2005, 05:51
QUOTE(skamp @ Oct 30 2005, 11:27 AM)
I use WavPack. It definitely compresses high resolution audio much better than FLAC. The next version of WavPack (currently in beta) compresses such content even better.
Thanks for the suggestion. I tried WavPack and it works great.
jcoalson
Oct 30 2005, 09:57
QUOTE(CosmoKramer @ Oct 30 2005, 04:09 AM)
I have some audio files @ 32-bit LPCM, 88.2 kHz. Unfortunately FLAC 1.1.2 won't compress these files., it complains about the "32-bitness". I have converted it to packed 24-bit but there is no difference. So the question is, what version of FLAC (and what possible other tools) do you guys use to compress these kind of files?
the current FLAC encoder does not support 32 bit. 24-bit is fine but to encode 88.2 kHz you need to use the --lax option.
Josh
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.