On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 10:06:51PM -0400, ben...@winamp.com wrote: > > Flake is a completely independent codebase. When I used it years ago, I > remember it being not only better compression but significantly faster as > well. I believe some of the techniques used in libflake were added to > libFLAC in 1.1.4. However, some of the improved compression in flake was > due to options that are outside the FLAC 'subset', such as larger > blocksize, greater number of prediction coefficients, and higher-order > Rice codes.
When I tested flake, it was almost shockingly fast (compared to what I was used to with FLAC) but the tightest compression options didn't produce .flac files that could play on every playback device and/or software that I tested. It is a shame that development has stopped. The next official release of the FLAC command line should really have a "-9" option for absolute maxed-out big-memory CPU-burning compression. Most general purpose compression tools have "-9" as the tightest option for compression. -- -Dec. --- (no microsoft products were used to create this message) "Mosaic is going to be on every computer in the world." - Marc Andreessen, 1994 _______________________________________________ flac-dev mailing list flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
