Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[gebo]

Hello to all of you,
I have started a thread about this theme at the German Forum a few days ago. As we could not solve the problem there yet, let me try it here again.
First of all, please excuse my poor English.

I realised that ripping a CD to FLAC in MC24 (64-bit for Windows) results in a much larger file size than ripping the same CD to FLAC in MC24 (32-bit for Windows) (with the same settings of the FLAC-Encoder).
For example let me point out the differences for the same track ripped to FLAC with MC 24 (32-bit) and MC24 (64-bit)

MC24 (32-bit) FLAC-file:
Bitrate: 939 kBit/s
file size: 26,8 MB

MC24 (64-bit) FLAC-file:
Bitrate: 1.370 kBit/s
file size:  39,3 MB

The ratio of the bit rates are the same as the ratio of the file sizes (939 : 1370 = 0,685;   26,8 : 39,3 = 0,682)  - this seems mathematically absolutely logical to me BUT what is the reason for the different bit rates?

The bit depth in both FLAC rips is shown in MC24 as 16-bit.

As FLAC is a lossless codec, the higher file size appears to me as an unnecessary wasting of memory space.

But that is not the main question. My main question is: What is the reason for the differences in bit rates (and file sizes) of FLAC-files ripped in MC24 (62-bit) and MC24 (32-bit)?

I am counting on your help.
Many thanks in advance!

[~OHM~]

well I gotta ask....same machine and same cd?

[gebo]

well I gotta ask....same machine and same cd?

Yes, for shure!

[AndrewFG]

FLAC is always lossless, but you can nevertheless select the degree of compression applied. This doesn’t affect the decoded bit stream at all, but does determine a) how hard the CPU has to work to encode/decode the file, and b) it’s size on disk. e.g. a FLAC with zero level compression is basically the same as a PCM file, requiring almost zero effort from the CPU to encode/decode, but taking the maximum space on disk. So check the compression settings on the MC23/24 encoding parameters..

[dtc]

FLAC is always lossless, but you can nevertheless select the degree of compression applied. This doesn’t affect the decoded bit stream at all, but does determine a) how hard the CPU has to work to encode/decode the file, and b) it’s size on disk. e.g. a FLAC with zero level compression is basically the same as a PCM file, requiring almost zero effort from the CPU to encode/decode, but taking the maximum space on disk. So check the compression settings on the MC23/24 encoding parameters..

FLAC 0 is about 40% compressed. FLAC 5 or 6 is only a few percent more compressed. The vast majority of compression happens with FLAC 0.  Each step after that does decreasing amounts of compression.  Decompressing to FLAC 0 and to FLAC 6 take essentially the same CPU. The larger CPU usage is seen when compressing, as each additional level of compression requires even more searching for patterns that can be compressed.

Uncompressed FLAC, which is different than FLAC 0, is really uncompressed. It is basically a WAV file with a FLAC header. It takes essentially no CPU to decompress since there is no compression. dBpoweramp does uncompressed FLAC, but MC does not. It starts at FLAC 0.

The only way I could see a 50% increase in size due to compression would be if the compression never happened. Otherwise, I would look elsewhere.

ADDED : Here is a reference with some sample compression times and sizes for anyone who is interested.

http://z-issue.com/wp/flac-compression-level-comparison/

[Hendrik]

I can reproduce this converting the same file with a freshly installed 32-bit or 64-bit, not sure what might be going on there. Will look at it soon.

[gebo]

FLAC is always lossless, but you can nevertheless select the degree of compression applied. This doesn’t affect the decoded bit stream at all, but does determine a) how hard the CPU has to work to encode/decode the file, and b) it’s size on disk. e.g. a FLAC with zero level compression is basically the same as a PCM file, requiring almost zero effort from the CPU to encode/decode, but taking the maximum space on disk. So check the compression settings on the MC23/24 encoding parameters..

The FLAC-Encoding Parameters are the same (Compression Level 6 etc.)
I also restored the recent backup of MC24 (64-bit) on MC24 (32-bit) to ensure the same settings in both versions of MC24 (32-bit and 64-bit).

Did someone test a FLAC-Rip with MC24 (32-bit and 64-bit) in practice? The comparison of the  results would show if my observations are right or faulty?

[gebo]

I can reproduce this converting the same file with a freshly installed 32-bit or 64-bit, not sure what might be going on there. Will look at it soon.

Many thanks Hendrik for your offer to check it out in practice.
I think this would be the best way to bring light into the darkness.

[40th.com]

First of all, please excuse my poor English.

The problem is not your English, but MSFT's compiler.  Here is the reason, in a nutshell, and the simple fix that JR needs to do:

https://github.com/xiph/flac/commit/94a61241b02064c7d9fe508f72a742f2a90b8492

See the March 1, 2018 comment by yours truly.

[JimH]

Thank you.

[Hendrik]

I've modified the patch in question and encoding FLAC files now properly compress as expected. Thanks for reporting and pointing to the issue.

[gebo]

The problem is not your English, but MSFT's compiler.  Here is the reason, in a nutshell, and the simple fix that JR needs to do:

https://github.com/xiph/flac/commit/94a61241b02064c7d9fe508f72a742f2a90b8492

See the March 1, 2018 comment by yours truly.

I've modified the patch in question and encoding FLAC files now properly compress as expected. Thanks for reporting and pointing to the issue.

Many thanks to 40th.com and Hendrik for solving the problem!!!

Does anybody know in which version of MC24 (64-bit) the patch (for ripping to FLAC) will be included?

[jfrancoisc]

On mac, media center 24 only proposes ALAC ripping (but has a FLAC converter in Tools/Advanced tools).
Why isn't possible to rip directly to FLAC format
 (I post here because it wasn't possible to create a new topic, and had no response to search "mac flac encoder ripping" and not possible to include a screen capture - this forum is not ergonomic - ).

[JimH]

Use the "New topic" button in the upper right corner of the index page.

Search only searches the location where you are.  Going up a level to search will often work better.