3 ms·
If it's lossless, then it'll handle noise the same as the raw wav file. Am I missing something?
by JTon 12y ago
If it's lossless, then it'll handle noise the same as the raw wav file. Am I missing something?
- eru 12y agoFLAC may take more bits than the wav. (It'll still be lossless.)
- lultimouomo 12y agoI'm guessing he meant that FLAC could actually inflate the file size (which is very probable).
- dredmorbius 12y agoProbably, but not by much -- you'd add the size of the data header. Depending on the compression block size, that could be repeated multiply to the file as a whole. But yes, compressing random values makes little sense. Doing it losslessly increases data size. Doing it lossily decreases randomness.
- nitrogen 12y agoIf the samples don't occupy the full range, then a Huffman table or related encoding could reduce the storage requirements. Ignoring encoding overhead, at most ~12 bits per sample are needed if everything works as the author intended, or ~14.8 bits using the range from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9272071 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9272071