best lossless format

[TechVsLife]

I notice that you still recommend Monkey's for lossless:

http://www.dbpoweramp.com/spoons-audio-guide-formats.htm

I read that Monkey's has significant problems with handling errors and corruption, and also doesn't have multichannel support. Why wouldn't FLAC or WMA Lossless or Wavpack be better choices (all have good error handling, and multichannel support)? Monkey's seems to have somewhat faster encoding (not decoding), and slightly better compression (less than 1% vs wma lossless) but I couldn't find any other advantages.

[Spoon]

Re: best lossless format

I have switched over myself to wavpack, those pages you linked to are quite old and need updating.

[LtData]

Re: best lossless format

If I may, what advantages does WavPack hold over Monkey's Audio?

[TechVsLife]

Re: best lossless format

If I may, what advantages does WavPack hold over Monkey's Audio?

The crucial advantage is robustness at handling errors or corruption in the file (Monkey's fares poorly at handling errors); that outweighs any other consideration for me. Then FLAC, WavPack and WMA lossless also all have multi-channel and streaming support, and Monkey's doesn't.
I believe FLAC is the fastest at decoding, but WavPack is alone in having a hybrid mode (can produce separate lossy+correction files=together form lossless).

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Lossless_comparison

[Pain_Man]

Re: best lossless format

The crucial advantage is robustness at handling errors or corruption in the file (Monkey's fares poorly at handling errors); that outweighs any other consideration for me. Then FLAC, WavPack and WMA lossless also all have multi-channel and streaming support, and Monkey's doesn't.
I believe FLAC is the fastest at decoding, but WavPack is alone in having a hybrid mode (can produce separate lossy+correction files=together form lossless).

For archiving .wav files, I prefer APE. It's simple app allows "decompression" quickly and performs the operation on up to 5 files simultaneously (here's an app for which the CoreDuo2 definitely improves performance).

If one's primary goal is not the robustness at error handling, then I don't think there's much difference between the formats. Pls correct if I'm wrong, but with APE I don't think this should be a problem if the file one is "compressing" is already error free.

I'm not sure, unless one is creating one's own music, what is the real utility of having multi-channel capability supported. I have a program that converts any music file from 2-channel to 5.1 channel. Of course, all it's really doing, is outputting the same 2 front channels to the rear "surround" channels. (Again, if I'm wrong, pls let me know which app or how to do it!)

I've created a number of wav-->5.1 Dolby DVDs for a variety of music types (from Rush to Tull to Bach and Vivaldi). The sound good, but no better than setting my surround sound receiver to output in Dolby 5.1 mode (there by saving the time creating the discs).

If one has created one's own music, I can understand wanting to create a truly immersive sound quality (such as 5.1 does; an awesome example of what brilliant engineering can do can be heard on Rush's concert DVD, Rush in Rio). After, one'll have the masters to be able to play with. If you're source file is your CDDA, what can ya really do? :confused:

Hopefully, the day will come with 6-channel (or 8) will be the standard way of creating recorded music (Quadrophonic's triumph from beyond the Graveyard of Misfit Technologies; if you're too young to remember that term...wikipedia gives it exhaustive treatment here: Quadraphonic )

I have a program called True Audio Analyzer (of course, same guys who created the lossless TTA format) that checks CDDAs to see if they were created from lossy or lossless original files.

Here's the app's webpage and download site: True Audio Analyzer Page/Dwnld

I have found that TTA can't tell the diff between lossless file formats (and I've tested WavPack, Monkey's, TTA & FLAC) & the "uncompressed" (why is the compressed audio on pressed CDDA's called this?).

So how TAA reads a CDDA created from a lossless format is pretty much my primary test for the quality of a lossless codec.

Interestingly, WavPack's highest quality Lossy format (640kpbs) is analyzed as a lossless format by TAA. Which shows the quality, in my admittedly non-technical opinion, of WavPack.

[TechVsLife]

Re: best lossless format

If one's primary goal is not the robustness at error handling, then I don't think there's much difference between the formats. Pls correct if I'm wrong, but with APE I don't think this should be a problem if the file one is "compressing" is already error free.

Well, there could be 1,001 reasons that could cause file errors or corruption, e.g. sector defects on the hard drive, memory corruption (gamma rays, software conflicts, power surges etc), write failures (power or hardware failure), bugs in encoding software or in OS or in drivers or in firmware etc. The reports may be exaggerated, but I still prefer something with a better reputation at gracefully handling errors in the file.

Even if one thinks one will never have a need for multichannel (I've always been happy with hi-fi stereo, didn't need quad etc.), it's a sign of how much recent work has been put into the format, which may reflect on how well it may be supported in the future (new devices, software, etc.).

I'm not saying there's a good reason to recode everything, or even change one's habits (there so rarely is), but if you're starting out, I'd say FLAC or Wavpack or WMA Lossless are better choices.