3 ms·
I'm guessing he meant that FLAC could actually inflate the file size (which is very probable).
by lultimouomo 12y ago
I'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