Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
26th August 2009, 00:38 | #9261 | Link |
Kid for Today
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
|
APE compresse way better than FLAC for stereo, and WavPack is usually slightly better than FLAC for 5.1 audio.
there really isn't anything good about FLAC, except hardware compatiblity.. plus eac3to won't let you choose the FLAC encoding strength? it's stuck on "5" apparently. |
26th August 2009, 01:04 | #9262 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Brazil
Posts: 745
|
Quote:
as my target is compress 5.1 multichannel, ape can't be used and WV even giving more compression than flac give me problems compressing stereo, i never did tests with 5.1 multichannel. Paul McCartney E.Arguments are in flacs too then is cool, agree? http://flac.sourceforge.net/news.html |
|
26th August 2009, 01:23 | #9263 | Link | |
Unavailable
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: offline
Posts: 1,480
|
raquete wrote:
Quote:
P.S.: Did you read the PM I sent you @ VideoHelp ? |
|
26th August 2009, 01:55 | #9264 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Brazil
Posts: 745
|
Quote:
excessively-loud sources not means clips but something like loudness war(is what you mean? ) as i encode my own cds, is impossible that EACopy or any wave editor(audition/sound forge) used to rip will encrease the levels of the source. i check everything with big patience(sorry, i'm really bored with audio) : the waveforms after extracteds and after encodeds...and lots more details. i posted the result of audition waveform statistics showing "Possibly Clipped: 1" because was selected few seconds around the first clip that i found from WV but the wave source don't have this clip. the top of the waveform turn from sine to straight line. do you want samples and pictures from this waveforms with clips? i can post. sometimes i need one entire month to encode a single album in 5.1(DVD-A & DVD-Video with audio too), i don't like of "more or less" results. now answer me: if you find clips in the results of any encoder, what you will do? cheers! edit: idea...as what we are talking about now nothing have to do with eac3to, we must open a new thread about encoders, his features, problems and advantages to don't mess this thread as the program here works very very fine, agree? Last edited by raquete; 26th August 2009 at 02:27. |
|
26th August 2009, 05:39 | #9265 | Link | |
User of free A/V tools
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SK
Posts: 826
|
Quote:
No, it's stuck on 8=best as been stated by madshi before and proven true by testers (like me and raquette) also. |
|
26th August 2009, 11:42 | #9266 | Link |
Kid for Today
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
|
oh ok?! but last time I transcoded it to "8" w/ dBPowerAmp and the file was smaller
well DVDA-Explorer works just fine w/ WavPack and crashes w/ FLAC for me, so that kinda closes the deal(files are not >2GB)...FLAC for HD audio BD tracks(in eac3to), WavPack for DVD-A and APE for CDDA comparing TrueHD to 384kb/s AC3 is like comparing 64kbit MP3 to WAV...I'm such a lossless whore these days |
26th August 2009, 17:54 | #9269 | Link | |
RipBot264 author
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,814
|
Quote:
__________________
Windows 7 Image Updater - SkyLake\KabyLake\CoffeLake\Ryzen Threadripper |
|
26th August 2009, 21:31 | #9271 | Link |
User of free A/V tools
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SK
Posts: 826
|
Atak_Snajpera,
it's not always that you get smaller files with 1.2.1 vs 1.2.0 Try with some 24-bit resolution samples and perhaps you'll see some improvement. It also happened to me that 1.2.0 produced same size as 1.2.1 when compressing down-sampled 16-bit sources. |
27th August 2009, 11:36 | #9272 | Link | |
RipBot264 author
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,814
|
Quote:
__________________
Windows 7 Image Updater - SkyLake\KabyLake\CoffeLake\Ryzen Threadripper |
|
27th August 2009, 13:19 | #9273 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Brazil
Posts: 745
|
Atak_Snajpera,
i asked because seems too short the flac final size 798MB "only" as your source is wave 1h 35 min with 6.1 channels can have round 3GB, i mean must be too big size source to result in 798MB. i'm losing details somewhere, i can be wrong and i'm confused. cheers. |
27th August 2009, 14:26 | #9274 | Link |
RipBot264 author
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,814
|
MY SOURCE IS NOT WAVE 6.1! It was encoded directly from DTSMA without any temporary wave files! What part you don't understand now? 16 bit files compress alot better than 24bit.
__________________
Windows 7 Image Updater - SkyLake\KabyLake\CoffeLake\Ryzen Threadripper |
27th August 2009, 14:53 | #9275 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Brazil
Posts: 745
|
Quote:
of course 16b encode alot better than 24b. in the end, what size have your source? (have a way to measure i think) after know the size source we can tell about flac compression, right? |
|
27th August 2009, 18:17 | #9277 | Link | |
RipBot264 author
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,814
|
Quote:
__________________
Windows 7 Image Updater - SkyLake\KabyLake\CoffeLake\Ryzen Threadripper |
|
27th August 2009, 21:31 | #9280 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Near LA, California, USA
Posts: 1,545
|
^FLAC even beats True-HD when it comes to lossless compression. True-HD, to my knowledge, does not have a lossy core. The only thing it has that FLAC doesn't is metadata telling True HD decoders how to downmix. I can't imagine that the metadata would put so much size on a file.
__________________
Pirate: Now how would you like to die? Would you like to have your head chopped off or be burned at the stake? Curly: Burned at the stake! Moe: Why? Curly: A hot steak is always better than a cold chop. Last edited by Revgen; 28th August 2009 at 00:03. |
Tags |
eac3to |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|