IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
APE vs FLAC
Which do you prefer
You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Total Votes: 480
Guests cannot vote 
JEN
post Jul 2 2003, 11:10
Post #1





Group: Banned
Posts: 1131
Joined: 19-September 02
Member No.: 3407



And please tell me why smile.gif
And which settings do you use?

This post has been edited by JEN: Jul 2 2003, 11:13
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mac
post Jul 2 2003, 11:38
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 650
Joined: 28-July 02
From: B'ham UK
Member No.: 2828



APE -extra high because it's smaller smile.gif

If flac wouldn't bloat my collection by another 2gb (which I don't have) I'd switch for the speed and compatability.


--------------------
< w o g o n e . c o m / l o l >
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dev0
post Jul 2 2003, 11:39
Post #3





Group: Developer
Posts: 1679
Joined: 23-December 01
From: Germany
Member No.: 731



FLAC is perfect for my needs, since it's crossplatform, free software and etree.org uses it. It has been proven "stable" for a long time and I don't care about 1-4% more compression when using lossless.

dev0


--------------------
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DonP
post Jul 2 2003, 11:57
Post #4





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1471
Joined: 11-February 03
From: Vermont
Member No.: 4955



For a while dbpoweramp wasn't copying the tags when converting between FLAC and other formats, but
that has been fixed. I prefer FLAC because it works with my player on Linux. I use the standard setting
as it is much faster than the high and not much difference in size.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Freaky
post Jul 2 2003, 12:58
Post #5





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 42
Joined: 15-June 03
From: ~Middlesbrough
Member No.: 7196



FLAC, 'cos it's fast (encoding, decoding, and seemingly seeking), well supported, well specified, and comes free with warm, fuzzy open feelings.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
smack
post Jul 2 2003, 13:16
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 187
Joined: 16-January 02
Member No.: 1046



APE extra-high
The higher compression ratio is what makes it better than FLAC for me. I have archived my entire CD collection on hard disk and APE saved a few GigaBytes of storage space.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
WILU
post Jul 2 2003, 13:21
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 475
Joined: 14-March 03
From: Tychy, Poland
Member No.: 5486



I also use APE extra high. Plays smooth on my system and I don't care about encoding and decoding times.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
megar
post Jul 2 2003, 13:42
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 42
Joined: 22-May 03
From: Besancon, France
Member No.: 6749



APE too, because of the file size, and because it is widely recognized.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sshd
post Jul 2 2003, 14:02
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 207
Joined: 16-June 03
Member No.: 7218



FLAC - it works fine and does everything I need.

Monkey's Audio does that too, except the linux port cannot decode MAC 3.80 files - and I have 200+ cds full of them. That is simply annoying.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DonP
post Jul 2 2003, 14:03
Post #10





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1471
Joined: 11-February 03
From: Vermont
Member No.: 4955



QUOTE (smack @ Jul 2 2003 - 07:16 AM)
APE extra-high
I have archived my entire CD collection on hard disk and APE saved a few GigaBytes of storage space.

Not that higher compression is a down side, but just how much are you saving per CD? 50 mB? Less? More?
That's about 5 cents. Life is short. Time is money. It might make sense to rip to a fast setting and
at some point transcode to a higher compression in a background/low-priority job.

For now I am generally just using lossless for things that are a pain to rerip, like vinyl.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mac
post Jul 2 2003, 15:16
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 650
Joined: 28-July 02
From: B'ham UK
Member No.: 2828



QUOTE (DonP @ Jul 2 2003 - 01:03 PM)
Not that higher compression is a down side, but just how much are you saving per CD?  50 mB? Less? More?
That's about 5 cents.  Life is short.  Time is money.    It might make sense to rip to a fast setting and
at some point transcode to a higher compression in a background/low-priority job.

For now I am generally just using lossless for things that are a pain to rerip, like vinyl.

It's not like I sit here watching the encode process, it sits in the background whilst I do other things, so encode speed matters the least to me. For me, an average album is ~400mb, and on the couple I tested with, I found FLAC cost me an an extra 20mb (5%?) so 50 albums = 1gb wasted.. sad.gif


I forgot to mention, APE coming bundled with a Cool Edit filter that works seemlessly is why I've stuck with APE for my own projects! I can decode/encode without a single glitch, whereas the FLAC filter is still in need of work it seems..


--------------------
< w o g o n e . c o m / l o l >
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DonP
post Jul 2 2003, 16:15
Post #12





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1471
Joined: 11-February 03
From: Vermont
Member No.: 4955



QUOTE (Mac @ Jul 2 2003 - 09:16 AM)
I found FLAC cost me an an extra 20mb (5%?) so 50 albums = 1gb wasted.. sad.gif

OK, 2 cents/album.

As I said, the main reason I lean to Flac is I can play it on Linux. If Ape works better with CoolEdir for
you that's a good reason too.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bonzi
post Jul 2 2003, 16:31
Post #13


A/V Moderator


Group: Members
Posts: 278
Joined: 22-February 03
Member No.: 5132



I prefer flac using -8. It doesn't really bother me too much that ape or other lossless codecs have better compression ratios since flac can do a lot of other things such as streaming, better error correction, cross platform, and encoding and decoding is faster. I only have maybe like 20 albums or so in lossless so its not a big deal if I don't get the highest compression.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dev0
post Jul 2 2003, 16:35
Post #14





Group: Developer
Posts: 1679
Joined: 23-December 01
From: Germany
Member No.: 731



Using Case's cool_flac works perfectly fine for me.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wynlyndd
post Jul 2 2003, 16:39
Post #15





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 89
Joined: 25-March 03
From: Houston, TX
Member No.: 5654



surprised no one mentioned FLAC is streamable?


--------------------
"Droplets of Yes and No, in an ocean of Maybe"
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kerminen
post Jul 2 2003, 16:41
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 88
Joined: 6-February 03
Member No.: 4884



Flac here.

I haven't use ape much, so I don't feel like judging that codec. I just don't know enough.

What I really like in flac are test-option, it's always nice to know that your archive is ok. Tags and replaygain are a must, and very easy to do with flac. If I have understood correctly, error-handling is better in flac than in ape. ???. And I really really really want to rip to lossless only once!!!

PS There is Cool Edit filter for flac, too, at

http://www.saunalahti.fi/~cse/html/other.html

that's the homepage of the maker of "tag", the most popular tagging software (according to a recent HA poll wink.gif )

I can put my signature under Freaky's testimonial, well put there.

j


--------------------
HA Folding
http://fah-web.stanford.edu/teamstats/team32639.html
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
woody_woodward
post Jul 2 2003, 16:50
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 348
Joined: 21-August 02
Member No.: 3138



I use APE just because I stumbled on to it first. For me it's tweedle dum, and tweedle dee.
If I had started using FLAC I'm quite sure I would be equally happy.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Case
post Jul 2 2003, 17:02
Post #18





Group: Developer (Donating)
Posts: 2214
Joined: 19-October 01
From: Finland
Member No.: 322



QUOTE (wynlyndd @ Jul 2 2003 - 06:39 PM)
surprised no one mentioned FLAC is streamable?

Monkey's Audio is streamable too.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rpop
post Jul 2 2003, 17:13
Post #19





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 332
Joined: 20-May 03
From: Pittsburgh, USA
Member No.: 6718



I use LA, simply because it compresses better than any other one I've seen. For most people the small size difference doesn't matter, but I often end up with less that 100 MB free space on my hard drive so I want to compress it as much as possible.

Edit: Yes, I suppose speed is a BIG disadvantage of LA.

This post has been edited by rpop: Jul 2 2003, 20:15


--------------------
[url=http://noveo.net/ph34r.htm]Happiness[/url] - The agreeable sensation of contemplating the misery of others.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Corsair
post Jul 2 2003, 17:14
Post #20





Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 16-October 01
From: Serbia
Member No.: 304



I use FLAC because it has everything I need: it's free, open, has good compression, fast compression/decompression, robust file format, fine tagging. And since X-Fixer did some awesome work on Winamp 2 FLAC plug-in (by adding GUI, replaygain support and other neat stuff), I'm all set. smile.gif

FLAC's default compression is what I use because size isn't that important - I have only about 100 CDs and there's still room for at least 50 albums on my HD (which is 60GB). Considering that I buy a couple of CDs per month and as HDs get cheaper and bigger by the minute, I don't think space is going to be an issue ever again...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Differenciam
post Jul 2 2003, 17:42
Post #21





Group: Members
Posts: 453
Joined: 15-January 03
Member No.: 4577



I use APE since I had got it running before FLAC(a coinflip thing, they're both lossless so I didn't know what to try first), and I already got used to converting it, ripping to it, etc. I would try FLAC but I don't see why I should switch atm, since even if I had done the dual boot with the penguin again I don't use the computer for music anyway, just ripping/encoding it, for which I'd probably run to the windows partition to do. biggrin.gif

I HAVE heard that FLAC doesn't get errors as easily as APE, so I've been reading up on this a bit more. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wynlyndd
post Jul 2 2003, 17:45
Post #22





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 89
Joined: 25-March 03
From: Houston, TX
Member No.: 5654



QUOTE (Case @ Jul 2 2003 - 11:02 AM)
QUOTE (wynlyndd @ Jul 2 2003 - 06:39 PM)
surprised no one mentioned FLAC is streamable?

Monkey's Audio is streamable too.

Ah my mistake. I thought I remembered that being a major distinction. Hrm...maybe I'll think about APE instead then when I get around to archive my CDs.


--------------------
"Droplets of Yes and No, in an ocean of Maybe"
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ErikS
post Jul 2 2003, 17:49
Post #23





Group: Members
Posts: 757
Joined: 8-October 01
Member No.: 247



QUOTE (wynlyndd @ Jul 2 2003 - 05:45 PM)
Ah my mistake. I thought I remembered that being a major distinction. Hrm...maybe I'll think about APE instead then when I get around to archive my CDs.

Why would this be a major factor in deciding between lossy codecs? Do you usually stream music at megabit rates?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gecko
post Jul 2 2003, 18:03
Post #24





Group: Members
Posts: 938
Joined: 15-December 01
From: Germany
Member No.: 662



For everyday use, I use Monkey's at the high setting. I think it's a good compromise between speed and size. If I feel geeky, I use optimfrog (of course with (u5t0/\/\ 1337 different command line on each run) which has won my sympathy, dunno why.

Monkey's has another built in bonus: APE tags. smile.gif

Almost every lossless codec I've seen is interesting on it's own, and since I rarely use lossless compression at all, I do not rely on any format speciffic features anyway. I use lossless for test samples and to temporarily free up some space.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Soulfire
post Jul 2 2003, 18:23
Post #25





Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 24-December 02
Member No.: 4226



I use Wavepack, very fast encoding and very good compression.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

4 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: 31st August 2014 - 03:39