Encoding "too fast"??

[gutted]

I've just started ripping to FLAC format, using EAC and Flac v1.1.12 (I think)

Odd thing is, though, that even when using option "-best" to get best possible compression, I'm finding that encoding to FLAC using flac.exe is actually faster than encoding to MP3 using LAME.

I've got a relatively powerful machine (1GB ram, and running at just over 3GHz) but the comparison between flac and MP3 encoding is on the same machine.

The flac files play ok on my SB1 but just wondering if there is anything I can do to test/confirm that the flac really is best compression and really is encoded properly. I've ripped around 20 CD singles so far, and got a long way to go... But will hold off further ripping until I (hopefully) get some advice from you guys

Cheers!

[adhawkins]

Hi,

In article <gutted.2fcugb1160303702 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>,
gutted<gutted.2fcugb1160303702 (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
> The flac files play ok on my SB1 but just wondering if there is
> anything I can do to test/confirm that the flac really is best
> compression and really is encoded properly. I've ripped around 20 CD
> singles so far, and got a long way to go... But will hold off further
> ripping until I (hopefully) get some advice from you guys

FLAC has a test option I believe, run that on the file you've created.
Alternatively, uncompress the FLAC afterwards and compare the WAV file you
get with the original. They should be identical.

Andy

[andyg]

FLAC encoding is *much* faster than mp3.

[Mark Lanctot]

Try the test option and try compression level 8 if you want to see longer times for some reason. ;-)

Even then, encoding in FLAC is only slightly slower than MP3 encoding for me.

The compression level is almost exponential, level 8 takes WAY more time than the default (5?). Also note that compression level 8 doesn't save that much more space over 5, at least not that much more that it's worth the substantial extra time investment. But it's not like my processor is doing anything else, so I don't mind.

[radish]

Odd thing is, though, that even when using option "-best" to get best possible compression, I'm finding that encoding to FLAC using flac.exe is actually faster than encoding to MP3 using LAME.

That's not odd at all - you're comparing two entirely different processes. FLAC compression is much faster than MP3 compression because there's a lot less work involved.

[bonze]

That's not odd at all - you're comparing two entirely different processes. FLAC compression is much faster than MP3 compression because there's a lot less work involved.

There's a lot less information to be 'lost'

[gutted]

Thanks for the replies, everyone.

For some reason, I had it in my head that MP3 encoding was somehow faster than FLAC encoding. That's probably where I got confused

Indeed - I've got the "--best" option set (equivalent to compression level 8) and the eoncoding process is a lot faster than I'd imagined.

I've now got 2 PCs and a laptop ripping/encoding at the same time. 77 CD singles down, and only around 200 to go. Then a further 300 or so CD albums. Then around 100 compilations and mix CDs. Or something like that. It's a lot, at any rate

Sigh.

If I'd planned ahead a few years back, and considered that disk space might eventually get cheaper, I should have started encoding in a lossless format back in the day. As it is, I started enconding as MP3 and the very first CDs I ripped were at 128kbps to save disk space