IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
lossless mp3 - mp3HD, backwards compatible with standard mp3
menno
post Mar 23 2009, 14:54
Post #51


Nero MPEG4 developer


Group: Developer (Donating)
Posts: 1218
Joined: 11-October 01
From: LA
Member No.: 267



QUOTE (SebastianG @ Mar 23 2009, 00:38) *
QUOTE (lvqcl @ Mar 22 2009, 19:48) *
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....st&p=544529

QUOTE (SebastianG)
That's why SLS also operates in the frequency domain which is incompatible to the MP3 filterbank.



I actually didn't test it. So, this was me guessing. The argument is that MP3 uses two filterbanks that are concatenated (PQMF + MDCT + alias reduction) and SLS is based on the MDCT only. But maybe this concatenation is "similar enough" to what a plain MDCT would produce given a good window function. But maybe they really use an integer MP3 decoder and update the time domain data using the "HD" data. I don't know.


It's not impossible to make a lossless PQMF, DTS MA has this for example. Add lossless IntMDCT and lossless alias reduction (possible because it is only some butterflies) and you have a lossless mp3 filterbank.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SebastianG
post Mar 23 2009, 16:02
Post #52





Group: Developer
Posts: 1318
Joined: 20-March 04
From: Göttingen (DE)
Member No.: 12875



QUOTE (menno @ Mar 23 2009, 14:54) *
It's not impossible to make a lossless PQMF, DTS MA has this for example. Add lossless IntMDCT and lossless alias reduction (possible because it is only some butterflies) and you have a lossless mp3 filterbank.

Hmm... sounds like there would be a lot of intermediate steps/roundings involved. The beauty of the MDCT is that you can factor it into a couple of butterflies and a type-IV DCT. This kind of DCT is an involution which makes "multidimensional lifting" applicable. The "multidimensional lifting" approach for a reversible integer-DCT is one of those that approximates the real-valued DCT pretty well. I don't yet see how the mp3 version could be as good w.r.t. approximating the real-valued filterbank.

The alternative would be using a deterministic integer mp3 decoder + correction in time where the spectral shape of the "correction" noise could be infered by the mp3 frame's side information (scale factors, code books).

Cheers!
SG
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wnmnkh
post Mar 26 2009, 02:08
Post #53





Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 24-July 07
Member No.: 45590



As concept this codec has great potential (maybe can bring lossless mainstream)

But it fails in practice. That hack is just facepalm.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
WUXGA
post Mar 26 2009, 02:50
Post #54





Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 14-March 09
From: California
Member No.: 67963



QUOTE (wnmnkh @ Mar 25 2009, 18:08) *
As concept this codec has great potential (maybe can bring lossless mainstream)

But it fails in practice. That hack is just facepalm.

Quite honestly, I don't think that lossless will ever be mainstream. Looking at listening tests lossy codecs seem nearly transparent to people at 128kbps and iTunes and Amazon mp3 are using 256kbps and I don't here complaints about audio quality.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
funkyblue
post Mar 27 2009, 03:28
Post #55





Group: Members
Posts: 322
Joined: 28-November 01
From: South Australia
Member No.: 555



I WAS all excited when I read about it on some website. I presumed they somehow made MP3 lossless, (as in I could encode stuff that would play in full quality on any MP3 player). Sigh. I just wish Apple and and Sony would support FLAC!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
monoton
post Mar 29 2009, 22:26
Post #56





Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 29-December 08
From: Germany
Member No.: 64965



Well... I don't get it... I extracted a correction file from a 190kbps and a 130kbps VBR encoded file (done with foobar factory settings and LAME 3.98.2) containing all the differences between the mp3 and the original wav and compressed that corrrection file with FLAC and the filesizes overall are almost on par:

Test track: AC/DC Smash N Grab
wav filesize: 41.4MB
complete flac file (lossless): 34.1MB
mp3 (190kbps VBR) + flac'ed correction file: 6.2MB + 29.6MB = 35.8MB
mp3 (130kbps VBR) + flac'ed correction file: 3.9MB + 31.7MB = 35.6MB

Test track: Orchestral track
wav filesize: 17.9MB
complete flac file (lossless): 11.3MB
mp3 (190kbps VBR) + flac'ed correction file: 2.6MB + 9.5MB = 12.1MB
mp3 (130kbps VBR) + flac'ed correction file: 1.8MB + 10.1MB = 11.9MB

Tho I had to correct those aligning issues described above manually (cropping a selection of the mp3 which was longer than the orignal wav both in the beginning and at the end... maybe using VBR caused this?). At least that way (if properly implemented) you'd be able to get back a lossless file and still have everything on mp3 as well without major sacrifices and spare the overhead of full flac plus mp3 files. Just a player that can stream both at once would have to be implemented as well and you'd be all set I guess.

This post has been edited by monoton: Mar 29 2009, 22:29
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
funkyblue
post Mar 30 2009, 02:47
Post #57





Group: Members
Posts: 322
Joined: 28-November 01
From: South Australia
Member No.: 555



Unless they invented a fully lossless MP3 format, that could be decoded by any MP3 player, then this new format is useless. FLAC all the way!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
doccolinni
post Jun 14 2009, 06:55
Post #58





Group: Members
Posts: 173
Joined: 28-May 09
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Member No.: 70204



While I agree with everyone who says that this is a completely useless format, I wonder if a proper lossless encoder which used FFT analysis and frequency domain representation for predictor might achieve more easily compressible residuals...

This post has been edited by doccolinni: Jun 14 2009, 07:44
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Jun 14 2009, 08:57
Post #59





Group: Developer
Posts: 3381
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



QUOTE
I wonder if a proper lossless encoder which used FFT analysis and frequency domain representation for predictor might achieve more easily compressible residuals...


QUOTE (jcoalson @ Jan 23 2009, 01:21) *
white noise cannot be compressed at all losslessly. you can make an audio file that cannot be compressed to even half size by any compressor simply by mixing a loud track with half-scale noise. what you describe is not a usable metric for evaluating compression because it is too dependent on the input.

state of the art lossless compression is close enough to the noise level of the input already.

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
doccolinni
post Jun 14 2009, 09:10
Post #60





Group: Members
Posts: 173
Joined: 28-May 09
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Member No.: 70204



QUOTE
white noise cannot be compressed at all losslessly. you can make an audio file that cannot be compressed to even half size by any compressor simply by mixing a loud track with half-scale noise.

Of course white noise won't compress well losslessly when it's basically completely random data! However, listening to music we can all very easily hear that what we hear is not random - or at least not even remotely as random as pure white noise. That's the reason why lossless audio compression works at all, actually.

As for whether or not better lossless audio compression than what's possible today can be achieved... I think it's possible. Look at for how long zip was the best general compressor available, and then rar came and blew it away. And then, 7zip came and blew both of them away. I think there's still room for improvement. As for how much more will be possible... that I really can't guess. If you forced me to estimate, I'd say (with great uncertainty) that at least 5% - 10% more is possible. But that's really a shot in the dark.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jcoalson
post Jun 14 2009, 20:00
Post #61


FLAC Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1526
Joined: 27-February 02
Member No.: 1408



frequency domain prediction has been tried. before lpac there was ltac. there are several older threads here about this.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
/mnt
post Jun 14 2009, 20:19
Post #62





Group: Members
Posts: 697
Joined: 22-April 06
Member No.: 29877



This format is just as useless as Pulseaudio.


--------------------
"I never thought I'd see this much candy in one mission!"
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
doccolinni
post Jun 14 2009, 22:06
Post #63





Group: Members
Posts: 173
Joined: 28-May 09
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Member No.: 70204



QUOTE (jcoalson @ Jun 14 2009, 21:00) *
frequency domain prediction has been tried. before lpac there was ltac. there are several older threads here about this.

Oh. Well I'm sort of new here so I apologise for not knowing that there already was a discussion about this.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
servimo
post Mar 7 2010, 22:46
Post #64





Group: Members
Posts: 146
Joined: 8-April 07
Member No.: 42330



I want to know if exists a plugin for foobar2000 for decoding mp3hd?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
servimo
post Mar 8 2010, 02:53
Post #65





Group: Members
Posts: 146
Joined: 8-April 07
Member No.: 42330



Found information about: Will there be suport for mp3HD? (lossless mp3)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Mar 8 2010, 03:44
Post #66





Group: Members
Posts: 4959
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (servimo @ Mar 7 2010, 20:53) *


AFAIK theres no decoder source available at all, let alone a plugin for foobar.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
NetRanger
post Apr 22 2013, 17:58
Post #67





Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 2-November 03
Member No.: 9605



Is this encoder still available somewhere out there or?

Have been trying 2 get my hands on it but the all4mp3 website is down.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
C.R.Helmrich
post Apr 22 2013, 23:22
Post #68





Group: Developer
Posts: 686
Joined: 6-December 08
From: Erlangen Germany
Member No.: 64012



The web site of the German IT magazine CHIP has apparently mirrored the encoder package to their servers. Haven't tried it though.

http://www.chip.de/downloads/mp3HD-Toolkit_13001528.html (click on "Zum Download")

Chris

This post has been edited by C.R.Helmrich: Apr 22 2013, 23:25


--------------------
If I don't reply to your reply, it means I agree with you.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
NetRanger
post Apr 22 2013, 23:59
Post #69





Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 2-November 03
Member No.: 9605



QUOTE (C.R.Helmrich @ Apr 23 2013, 00:22) *
The web site of the German IT magazine CHIP has apparently mirrored the encoder package to their servers. Haven't tried it though.

http://www.chip.de/downloads/mp3HD-Toolkit_13001528.html (click on "Zum Download")

Chris



Thnx a lot Chris

That 1 worked just fine smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mrmarbach
post Jul 19 2013, 19:46
Post #70





Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 24-August 11
Member No.: 93251



A label I am friendly with just started selling MP3HD downloads. ohmy.gif

I told them to stop that right now.

In the meantime, when I use XLD to convert to FLAC, is it using the full lossless component from the MP3HD files? I can't find a way to tell.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
eahm
post Jul 20 2013, 02:18
Post #71





Group: Members
Posts: 1080
Joined: 11-February 12
Member No.: 97076



And... why are people still using or ever used mp3HD??


--------------------
/lwAsIimz
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rotareneg
post Jul 20 2013, 06:17
Post #72





Group: Members
Posts: 194
Joined: 18-March 05
From: Non-Euclidean
Member No.: 20701



Because it's "HD".
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this 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: 17th September 2014 - 09:30