View Full Version : Flac compression options - what are the consequences toSlimserver?

Jason Holtzapple
2004-02-23, 05:42
--- Simon Turner <simon (AT) brighton (DOT) co.uk> wrote:
> I am just about to rip all my CDs to Flac. I want to make sure I get this
> right.
> I would naturally tend to use the --best compression setting (equates
> to -8). This setting produces smaller flac files but at the cost of a
> slightly longer encoding time (I think). The default Flac compression
> setting appears to be -4.
> If I use this high setting is there any overhead as far as Slimserver goes?
> i.e. is there likely to be a considerable difference (or any?) in the amount
> of processing power required by Slimserver to decode it and stream the wav
> to the Squeezebox (if this is what happens).

Flac files use about the same amount of processor time to decode
regardless of compression setting.

So go ahead and use --best - unless you've got a really slow
processor like my Via C3 - I use compression -6 with that. There's
a huge jump in encode time between -6 and -7 and only a
very small decrease in file size.


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.