IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Ape versus Flac compression size?
Fryguy
post Apr 9 2006, 06:28
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 22-November 05
Member No.: 25922



Well I just converted an album (simon and garfunkel greatest hits if you care) from ape to flac using foobar (the convert menu).

I used flac level 8.

The albumsize of the ape version was 211mb, flac was 226mb.

I was under the impression that flac was in general superior to monkey?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dreamliner77
post Apr 9 2006, 06:38
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 2150
Joined: 29-June 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 2427



FLAC is considered "superior" for some other reasons than just file size.


--------------------
"You can fight without ever winning, but never win without a fight." Neil Peart 'Resist'
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Duble0Syx
post Apr 9 2006, 06:52
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 465
Joined: 2-May 04
Member No.: 13847



QUOTE (Fryguy @ Apr 8 2006, 09:28 PM) *
I was under the impression that flac was in general superior to monkey?

FLAC has lots of advantages over ape. Decoding is super fast for one thing. It also really nice on the CPU when playing. There are also several pieces of hardware supporting flac. If I recall, MAC also has some odd licensing for the source code, whereas FLAC is fully open sourced, or something like that. Multiplatform support for FLAC is easier and better than for MAC. Basically the only advantage of MAC over FLAC is the compression ratio. Speed of encoding/decoding and overall support and functionality falls short of FLAC. If size is your only concern something like LA or OptimFrog do more than MAC for compression if my brain isn't malfunctioning. biggrin.gif

EDIT: by the way, WavPack, IMO falls right in middle. Can encode/decode very fast. Decoding is a bit slower than FLAC, but compression is a bit better. Encodes much faster than MAC, even on High mode, although file size is still a bit larger. CPU useage is quite low on playback as well, comperable to flac.

This post has been edited by Duble0Syx: Apr 9 2006, 06:54
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
shadowking
post Apr 9 2006, 07:08
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 1523
Joined: 31-January 04
Member No.: 11664



Nope. MA is one of the most efficient compression machine out there. Compression is very good and decompression is also very competitive (read 'fast' in wiki comparison).

The CPU usage is critical if you want to use a DAP or a Commodore 64, but on a modern PC ? - C'mon.


--------------------
Wavpack -b450
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sld
post Apr 9 2006, 11:24
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 1016
Joined: 4-March 03
From: Singapore
Member No.: 5312



It matters if you're in a hurry to transcode files for use on a DAP in a severely limited timeframe.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
boombaard
post Apr 9 2006, 11:33
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 336
Joined: 7-February 05
From: Local Cluster
Member No.: 19647



QUOTE (sld @ Apr 9 2006, 11:24 AM) *
It matters if you're in a hurry to transcode files for use on a DAP in a severely limited timeframe.


so it matters if you're too lazy to plan ahead? tongue.gif
anyway, dubleOsyx: LA/OFR are far less interesting than MAC in that they're use about 10-15x more cpu just to decode (the ~1 to 2.5x encoding/decoding speeds), on the highest compression levels.. while MAC -c4000 at least still is playable while in the background.. compression isn't everything, it just counts for a whole lot when you've got a sizeable collection ;-) (that i also want to be able to play songs back from)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
emr
post Apr 9 2006, 11:36
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 93
Joined: 24-April 04
From: EU
Member No.: 13686



Performance comparison of lossless audio compressors
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alexxander
post Apr 13 2006, 09:16
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 457
Joined: 15-November 04
Member No.: 18143



http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?ti...less_comparison
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

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: 26th July 2014 - 06:24