IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Closed TopicStart new topic
Which lossless audio codec do you use?
Which lossless audio codec do you use?
Which lossless audio codec do you use?
ALAC [ 15 ] ** [3.46%]
FLAC [ 228 ] ** [52.66%]
WavPack [ 140 ] ** [32.33%]
YALAC [ 2 ] ** [0.46%]
Monkey's Audio [ 36 ] ** [8.31%]
Shorten [ 0 ] ** [0.00%]
WMA Lossless [ 6 ] ** [1.39%]
TTA [ 0 ] ** [0.00%]
OptimFROG [ 5 ] ** [1.15%]
Other (post details below) [ 1 ] ** [0.23%]
Total Votes: 534
  
Fandango
post Apr 24 2006, 20:06
Post #26





Group: Members
Posts: 1549
Joined: 13-August 03
Member No.: 8353



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Apr 23 2006, 10:10 PM) *
- I liked the red icon rolleyes.gif


Me, too. But FLAC's golden-orange one isn't bad either. laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tgoose
post Apr 24 2006, 21:35
Post #27





Group: Members
Posts: 407
Joined: 12-April 05
Member No.: 21399



FLAC for support and for trading, since it's pretty much standard amongst trading communities (and yes, I'm talking about legal ones!). I used to encode the odd thing I actually ripped for myself (not much, since I have a CD player right next to my computer anyway...) in TTA because it was pretty fast, although YALAC will probably take over that if it's as good as it sounds and gets both Linux and foobar2000 support.

This post has been edited by tgoose: Apr 24 2006, 21:37
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
satorippoi
post Apr 24 2006, 22:44
Post #28





Group: Members
Posts: 74
Joined: 10-February 06
Member No.: 27682



The results are simply astonishing - Flac and WV are leaders...ALAC and APE are far behind...TTA and SHN have no votes...

Here in Russia people are mailny fond of APE...and it is hard to make them think different...
As for me, it is WavPack...because of high decoding speed and embedded cue-sheet...

p.s. And yes, David is a great guy...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Yaztromo
post Apr 24 2006, 23:23
Post #29





Group: Members
Posts: 236
Joined: 28-July 03
From: England, UK
Member No.: 8031



Monkeys Audio

1) Good compression at normal and fast speed

2) The excellent Windows front-end.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xmixahlx
post Apr 25 2006, 00:27
Post #30





Group: Members
Posts: 1394
Joined: 20-December 01
From: seattle
Member No.: 693



#1 wavpack (new encodes)
#2 flac (older encodes that i'm not going to convert for reasons of laziness)

i switched because wavpack seems to be more actively and interactively developed smile.gif


later


--------------------
RareWares/Debian :: http://www.rarewares.org/debian.html
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
negritot
post Apr 25 2006, 02:35
Post #31





Group: Members
Posts: 209
Joined: 2-January 04
Member No.: 10890



I use ALAC because it's the easiest to use with iTunes, and my lossless files are only for personal use.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Firon
post Apr 25 2006, 03:35
Post #32





Group: Members
Posts: 830
Joined: 3-November 05
Member No.: 25526



I still see Monkey's Audio as the majority out there, unfortunately.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Apr 25 2006, 17:19
Post #33





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



Considering only the FLAC and WavPack votes, the "Do you use FLAC or WAVPACK?" poll has a split of 56% to 44% in FLAC's favour, but in this thread the split is 62% to 38%... It would be nice to have enough votes that a more consistent conclusion could be made. rolleyes.gif

Also, why is Yalac an option, and who chose it?! blink.gif I hope it was TBeck.


Look, an elephant! ohmy.gif


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Apr 25 2006, 17:30
Post #34





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



The YALAC choice surprised me as well, but it makes sense, considering the life expectancy of a poll (12...24 months). Who knows... in one month, YALAC may appear as a valid choice (but if people are moving to this encoder, they can't vote for a second time...).


Where's the elephant? Or is it a new name suggestion for yalac (after monkeys and frogs, rats and penguins)?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TBeck
post Apr 25 2006, 17:42
Post #35


TAK Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1098
Joined: 1-April 06
Member No.: 29051



QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Apr 25 2006, 06:19 PM) *
Also, why is Yalac an option, and who chose it?! blink.gif I hope it was TBeck.

Look, an elephant! ohmy.gif


No, No.

And i didn't pay for this vote! whistling.gif

Thomas
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Apr 27 2006, 13:38
Post #36





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Apr 25 2006, 04:30 PM) *
The YALAC choice surprised me as well, but it makes sense, considering the life expectancy of a poll (12...24 months). Who knows... in one month, YALAC may appear as a valid choice (but if people are moving to this encoder, they can't vote for a second time...).
A very good point. It's inclusion may be justified in this poll's lifetime.

Personally I would prefer it if polls were closed after a short period of time, e.g.: one month. I think of a poll as a snapshot at a particular time. With this in mind I would rather see a new poll 1st January each year, that lasted for one month. This gives you an indication of preference at a given point in time.

By leaving polls open for one to two years (the last lossless poll was left open for over twenty months I think), by my limited logic the results get poluted over time, by new members voting.

The Yalac situation is a great example. Right now it has no right to be in the poll, but in six months maybe it will. However a noob looking at the poll in one year will think Yalac is not popular, but it may be as various members who voted in the poll's beginning have switched since that time. At least its exclusion would highlight to the noob that there must be a reason it was excluded (it is in alpha).

QUOTE (guruboolez @ Apr 25 2006, 04:30 PM) *
Where's the elephant? Or is it a new name suggestion for yalac (after monkeys and frogs, rats and penguins)?
laugh.gif Sorry, that was just me being weird. My post was a semi-bump, and the content was semi-diversionary. When I want to divert my kid's attention I always shout "Look, an elephant!" and point in the opposite attention to the one in which they shouldn't be looking...

Is this post an elephant post? Who knows... this poll seems to be fading into the distance all too quickly though.

QUOTE (TBeck @ Apr 25 2006, 04:42 PM) *
And i didn't pay for this vote! whistling.gif
biggrin.gif

Edit: The other poll still has a FLAC/WavPack split of 56% to 44%, this one is now 61% to 39%.

This post has been edited by Synthetic Soul: Apr 27 2006, 13:45


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Apr 27 2006, 14:56
Post #37





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Apr 27 2006, 01:38 PM) *
Personally I would prefer it if polls were closed after a short period of time, e.g.: one month. I think of a poll as a snapshot at a particular time. With this in mind I would rather see a new poll 1st January each year, that lasted for one month. This gives you an indication of preference at a given point in time.

You have my vote. I'd also like to something less uncoordinated. A limited electoral time is also preferable in my opinion. One or maybe two polls per year, open for 2 or 4 weeks - with a fixed period. Therefore, comparison between polls would be more pertinent.

I like the idea of having two polls by year to get a better representation of changes. Such solution would be more acceptable for new members frustrated because they can't vote: in worst case they have to wait 5 months and not 11.
I noticed that dual-polls are possible since last IPB update. Why about creating a dual lossy/lossless poll instead of two separates one? It could be experimented.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
a_aa
post Apr 27 2006, 15:31
Post #38





Group: Members
Posts: 42
Joined: 19-June 05
From: Bergen, Norway
Member No.: 22841



FLAC. Why? Well, why not...?

As long as it is lossless, I can always easily change to a not-seen-yet-outstanding lossless format to come - it's really not very important wich one I use at the moment...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post Apr 27 2006, 15:33
Post #39





Group: Members
Posts: 2439
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



I like Monkey extreme high for archiving purposes cause it yields a very good compression rate while being fast enough on encoding and decoding. Do this at the moment.

I like wavPack because of it's high quality (at 350+ kbps) productive lossy mode (usable with Rockbox) and the possibility of backing up a correction file to get a lossless archive. Think again about using it in the future for high quality CDs (but probably then without the correction file).


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Shade[ST]
post Apr 27 2006, 15:42
Post #40





Group: Members
Posts: 1189
Joined: 19-May 05
From: Montreal, Canada
Member No.: 22144



I'm the one who voted YALAC, because I currently have more YALAC archives on my computer than any other lossless format. I'm basically just waiting until the source code gets opened, to take a look (even if it's delphi -- I did some pascal in my youth tongue.gif), and make a plugin for foobar wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Apr 27 2006, 15:44
Post #41





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Apr 27 2006, 01:56 PM) *
I like the idea of having two polls by year to get a better representation of changes. Such solution would be more acceptable for new members frustrated because they can't vote: in worst case they have to wait 5 months and not 11.
That makes a lot of sense. I really don't see it to be a major problem to vote in a poll twice a year. I see it as your duty as a member, almost like a questionnaire a supplier might send out to clients.

QUOTE (guruboolez @ Apr 27 2006, 01:56 PM) *
One or maybe two polls per year, open for 2 or 4 weeks - with a fixed period.
With this new version of IPB you can set opening and closing times for a thread. Someone could create the poll one day to open at midnight that night and close 2/4 weeks later. As you say though, this needs to be co-ordinated; there's no point in twenty of us creating such a timed poll. Perhaps a thread a week in advance to alert users a new poll is coming...

QUOTE (guruboolez @ Apr 27 2006, 01:56 PM) *
I noticed that dual-polls are possible since last IPB update. Why about creating a dual lossy/lossless poll instead of two separates one? It could be experimented.
That would also make sense.

As I posted in the other thread, I was actually going to start this poll myself, but ran out of time. The reason I ran out of time was that I was messing about with additional questions for the poll. I started off including a poll regarding how people rip (tracks for archive; tracks for playing; image for archive; image for playing; etc.) but decided that it was really irrelevant to the lossless poll. I was then leaning toward questions regarding the reason for the choice (best compression rate; excellent compression with a reasonable speed; good compression and good speed; speed all the way; hardware support; other) and maybe a "What other features do you look for" poll (containing options regarding tagging; multichannel; kudos; error tollerance; etc.).... you might see why I ran out of time! dry.gif Next time I'll start one when I'm not upstairs on the premise that I am getting ready to go out... it's less stressful for both me and my wife...


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Apr 27 2006, 16:00
Post #42





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



Maybe a pre-poll discussion might be opened to collect ideas about what may be a unified structure for all future polls. I didn't thought about ripping habits and it's indeed a good idea to join it in addition to the commonly used audio formats. Maybe different people could add interesting ideas, and maybe could we fix a date for the first poll, choosing people responsible of them (admins or mods only, members, etc...), put a sticky about the voting period, the planning and the conditions for creating a poll, etc...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DARcode
post Apr 27 2006, 19:14
Post #43





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 682
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Italy
Member No.: 18968



QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Apr 23 2006, 10:08 PM) *
[...]WavPack seemed to have decent compression rates, error tollerance, multichannel support, and I was just really impressed with the way that David reacted to users' requests.[...]
Amen.


--------------------
WavPack 4.70.0 -b384hx6cmv/qaac 2.43 -V 100
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
PoisonDan
post Apr 27 2006, 20:40
Post #44





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 678
Joined: 10-December 01
From: Belgium
Member No.: 622



QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Apr 25 2006, 06:19 PM) *
Look, an elephant! ohmy.gif

Look, behind you! A three-headed monkey!

/me wonders how many of the HA crowd will recognize this one. rolleyes.gif


--------------------
Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lanosk
post Apr 27 2006, 22:18
Post #45





Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 24-April 06
Member No.: 29954



QUOTE (PoisonDan @ Apr 28 2006, 07:40 AM) *
Look, behind you! A three-headed monkey!

/me wonders how many of the HA crowd will recognize this one. rolleyes.gif


Guybrush biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Xenion
post Apr 28 2006, 01:51
Post #46





Group: Members
Posts: 1042
Joined: 23-May 02
From: DE
Member No.: 2107



Wavpack for Me
Fast, Perfect Cue-Sheet Support, Cool
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
miscellanea
post Apr 28 2006, 02:45
Post #47





Group: Members
Posts: 229
Joined: 4-February 05
Member No.: 19579



I'm using FLAC and WavPack but mainly WavPack now.


--------------------
Non-profit Netlabel : Bump Foot
http://www.bumpfoot.net/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Supacon
post Apr 28 2006, 04:20
Post #48





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 543
Joined: 19-March 04
From: Alberta, Canada
Member No.: 12841



Wow... wavpack is really starting to sound like the way to go.

I really do like my fast decompression time in FLAC though, because when I need to decode and lossily encode 400 CDs at once, that can nearly make a day's difference in time.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Shade[ST]
post Apr 28 2006, 04:39
Post #49





Group: Members
Posts: 1189
Joined: 19-May 05
From: Montreal, Canada
Member No.: 22144



I think Wavpack has a compression option which makes it even faster to decode than FLAC, no? I just know I've had great experience with Wavpack.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MusicLover
post Apr 28 2006, 07:54
Post #50





Group: Members
Posts: 327
Joined: 1-November 02
Member No.: 3669



I use Monkey's Audio - speed is not an issue for me, since I have a modern pc (everything used to be quite ok with an old one, though) - it's Extra High mode has a good compression rate and I cannot find any pluses over Monkey by Wavpack or FLAC...
I don't care about an error robustness since I have never ever had any issues with Monkey. It is being developed, BTW... 4 b2 came recently.
I understand that it is fashionable to use Wavpack, but I'm not much into Haute Couture wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Closed 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: 22nd November 2014 - 17:56