IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Uncompressed FLAC in dbpoweramp
thesurfingalien
post Nov 22 2011, 17:26
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 138
Joined: 26-February 11
Member No.: 88533



Hi All,

I am wondering if anyone can tell me some more about the uncompressed FLAC format that has popped up in the latest version (béta?) of dbpoweramp. Since I can not find any information about this on the FLAC website, I am curious if this is just a straight WAV packed in a FLAC wrapping.

Are there, besides tagging, other advantages I have missed?

Thnks,
Peter
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JJZolx
post Nov 28 2011, 23:58
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 396
Joined: 26-November 04
Member No.: 18345



> I am curious if this is just a straight WAV packed in a FLAC wrapping.

I wouldn't think so, since FLAC files are made up of audio frames, each with a header and footer. Perhaps if you stripped those as well as the metadata you'd have something resembling the raw PCM.

http://flac.sourceforge.net/documentation_...t_overview.html
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JJZolx
post Nov 30 2011, 19:21
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 396
Joined: 26-November 04
Member No.: 18345



A question, though, for anyone who knows....

When encoding with no compression, as with:

--disable-constant-subframes --disable-fixed-subframes --max-lpc-order=0

Would the FLAC file have a lot fewer frames, or even just a single audio frame?

This post has been edited by JJZolx: Nov 30 2011, 19:28
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kohlrabi
post Nov 30 2011, 21:32
Post #4





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 1030
Joined: 12-March 05
From: Kiel, Germany
Member No.: 20561



QUOTE (thesurfingalien @ Nov 22 2011, 17:26) *
Are there, besides tagging, other advantages I have missed?

Which other advantages. Is there a single advantage over regular FLAC?

EDIT: Did some decoding tests on my hardware, FLAC uncompressed decoded at about 570x realtime, FLAC -0 at 565x realtime. Compression speed was the same for both uncompressed and compressed at 380x realtime.

This post has been edited by Kohlrabi: Nov 30 2011, 21:37


--------------------
Ceterum censeo Masterdiskem esse delendam.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Nov 30 2011, 21:45
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 1022
Joined: 7-October 01
Member No.: 235



These speeds may be already the maximum your systems I/O system can handle so you won´t measure much differences. Here on my machine with FlacCL the only limiting factor is some memory and SSD limitations.

Uncompressed Flac most likely is only made available for the audiophiles that already use wav for soundwise advantages. For them all compressed PCM sounds worse as AIF or WAV already. Can´t await when they report how much better uncompressed Flac sounds now over AIF and worst of all WAV wink.gif
I guess spoon only wants to satisfy these audiophile customers to have a more a comfortable, taggging capable format. Since spoon is active here he may answer this and the technical aspects behind. It must be some flac with all kinds of format specific features disabled.

This post has been edited by db1989: Dec 3 2011, 15:42
Reason for edit: removing unnecessary full quote of above post
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JJZolx
post Nov 30 2011, 21:53
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 396
Joined: 26-November 04
Member No.: 18345



QUOTE (Wombat @ Nov 30 2011, 13:45) *
It must be some flac with all kinds of format specific features disabled.


Pretty sure it's the same as encoding using flac.exe with the options that I listed above.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Nov 30 2011, 22:07
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 1022
Joined: 7-October 01
Member No.: 235



Add a blocksize of 4608 and you are right wink.gif

This post has been edited by db1989: Dec 3 2011, 15:42
Reason for edit: as above
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tuffy
post Nov 30 2011, 22:10
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 111
Joined: 20-August 07
Member No.: 46367



QUOTE (JJZolx @ Nov 30 2011, 12:21) *
A question, though, for anyone who knows....

When encoding with no compression, as with:

--disable-constant-subframes --disable-fixed-subframes --max-lpc-order=0

Would the FLAC file have a lot fewer frames, or even just a single audio frame?

The reference encoder will put the same number of channel-independent samples in each frame, typically 4096, unless you tell it otherwise. So the total number will be the same as a compressed file.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Porcus
post Nov 30 2011, 22:55
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 1842
Joined: 30-November 06
Member No.: 38207



Probably a useful thing if you want to rip a lot of DTS CDs on a computer with an old and slow CPU?


--------------------
One day in the Year of the Fox came a time remembered well
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Nov 30 2011, 23:40
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 4925
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (JJZolx @ Nov 30 2011, 16:53) *
QUOTE (Wombat @ Nov 30 2011, 13:45) *
It must be some flac with all kinds of format specific features disabled.


Pretty sure it's the same as encoding using flac.exe with the options that I listed above.


What are you actually trying to do with those settings?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kohlrabi
post Dec 1 2011, 10:37
Post #11





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 1030
Joined: 12-March 05
From: Kiel, Germany
Member No.: 20561



QUOTE (Wombat @ Nov 30 2011, 21:45) *
These speeds may be already the maximum your systems I/O system can handle so you won´t measure much differences. Here on my machine with FlacCL the only limiting factor is some memory and SSD limitations.


QUOTE (Porcus @ Nov 30 2011, 22:55) *
Probably a useful thing if you want to rip a lot of DTS CDs on a computer with an old and slow CPU?


From the valid point by Wombat I assume that this could only be true if you are not I/O limited on your system. I'm very well tempted to test the files again on my Sansa Clip+, but even that is probably too fast to show any meaningful difference. rolleyes.gif


--------------------
Ceterum censeo Masterdiskem esse delendam.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Porcus
post Dec 3 2011, 00:23
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 1842
Joined: 30-November 06
Member No.: 38207



QUOTE (Kohlrabi @ Dec 1 2011, 10:37) *
QUOTE (Porcus @ Nov 30 2011, 22:55) *
Probably a useful thing if you want to rip a lot of DTS CDs on a computer with an old and slow CPU?


From the valid point by Wombat I assume that this could only be true if you are not I/O limited on your system.


That's decoding, not encoding.


--------------------
One day in the Year of the Fox came a time remembered well
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: 2nd September 2014 - 17:47