Martijn van Beurden wrote: > With the patch I mailed earlier today, I found out a few > adjustments could be made to the compression level settings.This > retuning speeds up the encoding and improves compression, while > not changing anything decoding-wise. > > Currently, compression settings are as follows > > -5, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -r 5 -A tukey(0.5) > -6, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -r 6-A tukey(0.5) > -7, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -e -r 6-A tukey(0.5) > -8, -l 12 -b 4096 -m -e -r 6-A tukey(0.5) > > I suggest the following, in case my previous patch is accepted > > -5, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -r 5 -A tukey(0.5) > -6, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -r 6-A tukey(0.5);partial_tukey(2) > -7, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -r 6-A > tukey(0.5);partial_tukey(2);punchout_tukey(3) > -8, -l 12 -b 4096 -m -r 6-A > tukey(0.5);partial_tukey(2);punchout_tukey(3) > > See this graph for comparison: > > http://www.audiograaf.nl/misc_stuff/setting-visualisation.pdf > > This data was acquired with a reasonably large dataset (one > track from each album with which the comparison on > http://xiph.org/flac/comparison.html was made, so 43 tracks from > 43 different CDs), which I think is quite nicely balanced. > > It looks like -6 will be almost as good as -8 is now, but much > faster. -7 will be a bit slower and -8 will be a bit faster, but > both will compress beter than -8 does now.
This all sounds great! > I dropped -e because > it's compression improvement isn't worth the slowdown, but it is > easy for the user to add this anyway. I think we should keep -e but may print a warning. The reason to keep it is so that we do not break some random flac frontend that has this as an option. Cheers, Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/ _______________________________________________ flac-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
