3 ms·
Actually, FLAC doesn't have a very good compression ratio (e.g. see [1]). It does have features that are very important for audio streams: it can be quickly res
by robryk 11y ago
Actually, FLAC doesn't have a very good compression ratio (e.g. see [1]). It does have features that are very important for audio streams: it can be quickly resynced and AFAIK decompression proceeds at nearly-constant speed.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7893171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7893171
- gillianseed 11y agoEven so, I would be very surprised if FLAC did not outperform general purpose compressors if the test is done on a wider range of music than a single piano piece (which should be very compressable overall as audio goes). edit: went and did a test on a couple of tracks, using brotli: bro --quality 11 --window 24 against flac -8 (best settings in both cases) satie - gymnopedie no 1: wav: 41.6mb brotli: 28.1mb flac: 14.7mb ram jam - black betty: wav: 41.8 brotli: 35.8 flac: 26.5 vangelis - tao of love: wav: 29.4 brotli: 23.0 flac: 13.4 meat load - paradise by the dashboard light: wav: 89.3 brotli: 78.3 flac: 58.5 certainly not a massive test, and there are likely general purpose compressors which does a better job than brotli, still I feel rather convinced that they will not do better than FLAC other than in extreme cases such as the piano piece you linked to.