Musepack R8

[SnTholiday]

Does anyone have any information on a new release of Musepack, or is it a
"dead" format as so many on HDA seem to think. Whether people believe it is dead or not, I am still using it to rip my CD collection since I don't have a lot
of HD space and don't use MP3 portables. Does anyone else use it?

[Spoon]

Re: Musepack R8

Lossy wise at 128kbps or above, musepack is hard to beat. Regardless if it is still under development.

[SnTholiday]

Re: Musepack R8

Lossy wise at 128kbps or above, musepack is hard to beat. Regardless if it is still under development.

That's good to hear. Some seem to think if a codec is not currently under development it is "dead". If Musepack is already one of the best lossy codecs, if not the best, why is any further development needed?

[LtData]

Re: Musepack R8

And, if you check the Musepack web site, there is still development, looks like mostly bug fixes and the like.

[xoas]

Re: Musepack R8

If Musepack is already one of the best lossy codecs, if not the best, why is any further development needed?

As LtData points out, one reason is to fix bugs.
The other reason is because mp3, Ogg Vorbis, and even mp4/aac are continuing to improve their performance at higher bitrates, even as they also struggle to reduce the bitrate at which transparency is achieved (the point at which you would be unable to distinguish the converted lossy format file from the original source). I somewhat switched from Musepack to ogg vorbis after the AuToV and Lanceer ogg codecs were released as these made a significant improvement in the quality of ogg vorbis files and also increased the conversion speed for ogg a great deal. Ogg also got a big boost from a celebrated listening test a few years ago. I will still use Musepack sometimes but often I will convert to lossless and then to mp3 for my wma/mp3 players (my car's wma/mp3/cd player and my iRiver H10 which supports wma and mp3).
Still, if Musepack works for you, go with it.

Best wishes,
Bill