IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Comparison of compression ratios between FLAC --best and TAK -p4, 5,074 songs compared
skamp
post Jun 25 2012, 09:19
Post #1





Group: Developer
Posts: 1454
Joined: 4-May 04
From: France
Member No.: 13875



This post made me wonder whether I had over-estimated TAK's compression capabilities, so I decided to run a benchmark on my entire music collection.

I used caudec to transcode my 5,074 FLACs (--best, version 1.2.1) to TAK (-p4, version 2.2.0), one album at a time. All songs are CD audio (16 bit / 44.1 kHz, stereo). I measured the size in bytes of all the files comprising the album, as WAV, FLAC and TAK files. I then calculated the compression ratio of the FLACs and the TAKs compared to the WAVs, as a percentage. Finally, I calculated the difference in ratios between FLAC and TAK: that value (also a percentage of the WAV file) is always negative, meaning TAK compressed better than FLAC in all cases. Here are the results, as a CSV file.

On average, TAK compressed 2.19% better than FLAC. Here's a list of the top 10 albums where the difference was the most significant:
  • Original Pirate Material by The Streets: -4.9%
  • Flat Beat (CD single) by Mr. Oizo: -4.6%
  • Tubular Bells 2003 by Mike Oldfield: -4.6%
  • Mothership Reconnection (CD single) by Scott Grooves: -4.5%
  • François by Desireless: -4.4%
  • The Man-Machine by Kraftwerk: -4.3%
  • Sublime by Sublime: -4.1%
  • Doggystyle by Snoop Dogg: -4.1%
  • Raising Hell by Run-D.M.C.: -4.1%
  • Wish You Were Here by Pink Floyd: -4.1%


Note: I used -p4 with TAK simply because I forgot about the existence about -p4m. I later tried it on a couple albums though, and while TAK -p4 is faster than FLAC --best, TAK -p4m is slower. Improvement in compression is unlikely to be much larger than 0.2%, from what I can tell.

This post has been edited by skamp: Jun 25 2012, 09:44


--------------------
See my profile for measurements, tools and recommendations.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 4)
Porcus
post Jun 25 2012, 10:46
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 1995
Joined: 30-November 06
Member No.: 38207



QUOTE (skamp @ Jun 25 2012, 10:19) *
I then calculated the compression ratio of the FLACs and the TAKs compared to the WAVs, as a percentage. Finally, I calculated the difference in ratios between FLAC and TAK: that value (also a percentage of the WAV file)


You've miscalculated a bit (see below). To correct this, calculate the ratio TAKbitrate/FLACbitrate, subtract 1 and then multiply by 100 %. You will probably get negative 3 point something.

Your figure measures an improvement of 2.19 percentage points, not 2.19 percents.
Percents: improvement over what-to-improve (i.e. the FLAC file).
Percentage points: difference between percents.
The most crucial point is that all comparisons use the same yardstick (and I suppose that most should, and most will, choose the percents).

This post has been edited by Porcus: Jun 25 2012, 10:49


--------------------
One day in the Year of the Fox came a time remembered well
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
skamp
post Jun 25 2012, 11:13
Post #3





Group: Developer
Posts: 1454
Joined: 4-May 04
From: France
Member No.: 13875



TAKs are on average 96.48% the size of the FLACs, so that's a 3.52% improvement over FLAC. That figure looks better indeed.

Edit: I've never used a spreadsheet in my life, so if you have some Excel-fu, feel free to download the CSV and calculate correct individual values for the "compression improvement" column by using the bytesize columns.

This post has been edited by skamp: Jun 25 2012, 11:19


--------------------
See my profile for measurements, tools and recommendations.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Jun 25 2012, 11:17
Post #4





Group: Developer
Posts: 3468
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



WAV bytes, sum: 227851632252
FLAC bytes, sum: 141786750976
TAK bytes, sum: 136796209152

(TAK/FLAC)-1 = -3.52%

{too slow again wink.gif }

This post has been edited by lvqcl: Jun 25 2012, 11:18
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
skamp
post Jun 25 2012, 11:31
Post #5





Group: Developer
Posts: 1454
Joined: 4-May 04
From: France
Member No.: 13875



Revised CSV with the last column showing the compression improvement of TAK over FLAC, in %. My BASH-fu is stronger than my spreadsheet-fu tongue.gif

This post has been edited by skamp: Jun 25 2012, 11:32


--------------------
See my profile for measurements, tools and recommendations.
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: 25th December 2014 - 20:37