Home of the Squeezebox™ & Transporter® network music players.
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Neuss in Germany
    Posts
    33

    CueTools Flake versus Flac

    Hello,

    I use the FLAKE.exe Encoder http://cue.tools/wiki/CUETools and am very pleased with it, because it really encodes fast WAV to FLAC and the files are always a little bit smaller, compared to the latest FLAC.exe reference encoder.

    Now I have done some testing with the FLAKE switch –vbr 4.
    So far, I have not found any incompatibility even with old device, like old mobile phones or HIFIDELIO, SB3, Boom, or Tagging software MusicBrainz 2.0, MP3TAG, Foobar.

    -vbr 4 leads to even smaller files. A complete Pop Album is about 20 MB smaller.

    Is anyone else of you using this command switch?

    Did anyone had problems with –vbr 4?


    Controllers Hardware: 1XTouch,2XRadio,1XBoom,1XSB3,piCorePlayer
    Controllers Software: squeezelite, Squeeze Player
    Steuerung: Squeeze Comander
    Plugins: Dynamic Mix; Custom Browse, TrackStat; Custom Scan; MusicInfoSCR; LazySearch 2..

    LMS 7.9 (UBUNTU 10.04) und MusicIP Server like:
    http://powersat.de/showthread.php?49...sungsvorschlag

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,597
    Quote Originally Posted by squeezebox_Fan View Post
    Did anyone had problems with –vbr 4?
    hmm that reminds me on my early days - ripping 4 or 5 Albums listen carefully to all the tracks and decided yeah i found it...
    After ripping , cutting and tagging some 100 Vinyls - bm. I had to ripp most of that again (because i deleted the wav files)

    Ripping VBR always needs carefully listening after decoding and i am in no way an audiophoolish President of the More Money than Brainsclub.

    If you have this or the CD - try it.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,242
    Assuming lossless shouldn't make any difference... Don't think there is such a thing as fixed bit rate flac so vbr is normal flac.


    Transcoded from Matt's brain by Tapatalk
    Last edited by drmatt; 2018-10-07 at 10:45.
    --
    Hardware: 3x Touch, 1x Radio, 2x Receivers, 1 HP Microserver NAS with Debian+LMS 7.9.0
    Music: ~1300 CDs, as 450 GB of 16/44k FLACs. No less than 3x 24/44k albums..

  4. #4
    Senior Member Wombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,136
    Quote Originally Posted by drmatt View Post
    Assuming lossless shouldn't make any difference... Don't think there is such a thing as fixed bit rate flac so vbr is normal flac.
    I also don't get what the first posts are exactly about. 20MB reduction for flac with only adding variable blocksize sounds a bit much.
    FLAC as a standard has defined a variable blocksize feature. This was never implemeted but experimeted with in the flake encoders.
    I think to remember Josh Coalson the inventor of FLAC dropped the idea because of not much compression advantages and problems implementing it correctly to all hardware solutions.
    Last edited by Wombat; 2018-10-07 at 11:05.
    Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,242
    Quote Originally Posted by Wombat View Post
    I also don't get what the first posts are exactly about. 20MB reduction for flac with only adding variable blocksize sounds a bit much.
    FLAC as a standard has defined a variable blocksize feature. This was never implemeted but experimeted with in the flake encoders.
    I think to remember Josh Coalson the inventor of FLAC dropped the idea because of not much compression advantages and problems implementing it correctly to all hardware solutions.
    Frankly reducing a complete album by 20MB doesn't sound like it's worth any CPU cycles. I thought it referred to variable bitrate level 4, didn't spot the reference to variable blocksize.


    Transcoded from Matt's brain by Tapatalk
    --
    Hardware: 3x Touch, 1x Radio, 2x Receivers, 1 HP Microserver NAS with Debian+LMS 7.9.0
    Music: ~1300 CDs, as 450 GB of 16/44k FLACs. No less than 3x 24/44k albums..

  6. #6
    Senior Member Mnyb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Västerås Sweden
    Posts
    16,471
    I would try to be as standard as possible regarding encoders , i even use -5 (or sometimes default -8) compression and no exotic seldom used settings . You want to make flac files that are compatible with almost any old hardware with very old decoders built in .
    There have been non standard flac implementations in the past causing problems .

    Heck i would even avoid seldom used features that are in the specification from way back ,as typiclly sloppy sw development in embedded decoders and whatnot is probably not tested with every possible variant of flac file .

    Disk space is a non issue for most and if it is use ogg or mp3 and make some real space savings.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3 sub.
    Bedroom/Office: Boom
    Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
    Misc use: Radio (with battery)
    iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
    (spares Touch, SB3, reciever ,controller )
    server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

    http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

  7. #7
    Senior Member Wombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,136
    Quote Originally Posted by Mnyb View Post
    I would try to be as standard as possible regarding encoders...
    Exactly like we saw in the other thread and the ffmpeg flac implementation most likely causes problems because of using a different blocksize as the reference flac encoder for 24/96 material.
    btw. CUEtools flake -8 against -8 --vbr 4 is more like pointless "1" MB per album smaller from judging a bunch of albums i threw in.
    Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    181
    i used to use FLAC, and i still love it, but i switched to ALAC m4a basically b/c that works natively with all apple gear. almost everything that can natively play FLAC can play ALAC, but not having apple play FLAC (the bigger vice versa) wasn't gonna be a good solution for me, (not that i love apple, but...)

    the drawback is that ALAC doesn't seem to have any built in CRC checks (i could be mistaken) but i can live with that. the other issue, which could be a pro or con depending on how you look at it, is that creating ALACs doesn't seem to have as many options or paths, like those stated above for FLAC.

    EDIT: when i did use FLAC, i used the highest compression setting, 8 i think, and saw very little difference but no problems either.
    Last edited by BJW; 2018-10-11 at 10:19.
    Using: Win7 64 + LMS 7.9 & Duet & ipads w/the logitech app, and ipeng on an ipod
    http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.ph..._Artists_logic & http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/Compilations

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Neuss in Germany
    Posts
    33

    Thanks for sharing your oppinion

    Thank you for sharing your oppinion to my question.

    I guess, I will keep the standard FLAC settings.


    Controllers Hardware: 1XTouch,2XRadio,1XBoom,1XSB3,piCorePlayer
    Controllers Software: squeezelite, Squeeze Player
    Steuerung: Squeeze Comander
    Plugins: Dynamic Mix; Custom Browse, TrackStat; Custom Scan; MusicInfoSCR; LazySearch 2..

    LMS 7.9 (UBUNTU 10.04) und MusicIP Server like:
    http://powersat.de/showthread.php?49...sungsvorschlag

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •