search for: contrabassboy

Ivo, Harry is asking about CPU usage of the DEcoder, not the ENcoder. And I believe FLAC is designed to use as little CPU as possible for decoding, thereby encouraging hardware manufacturers to include FLAC support. Encoding, however, is another matter, always done on a computer, and requiring a good measure of CPU. Greg M. --- Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves <justivo@gmail.com> wrote: > The

2007/7/24, Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves <justivo@gmail.com>: > > On 7/24/07, Greg M. <contrabassboy@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Ivo, Harry is asking about CPU usage of the DEcoder, > > not the ENcoder. > > Sorry, my bad. > > I believe that FLAC's decoding is somewhat faster than most other > lossless formats, as FLAC is a much less complex format. Maybe somebody kno...

...r "worse" than other formats. We're talking about several moving targets here, all of which influence each other. Brian Willoughby Sound Consulting On Jul 25, 2007, at 11:21, Harry Sack wrote: 2007/7/24, Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves <justivo@gmail.com>: On 7/24/07, Greg M. <contrabassboy@yahoo.com> wrote: > Ivo, Harry is asking about CPU usage of the DEcoder, > not the ENcoder. Sorry, my bad. I believe that FLAC's decoding is somewhat faster than most other lossless formats, as FLAC is a much less complex format. Maybe somebody knows some comparison tables with s...

I just tried this with Goldwave.. it decoded the file, i edited out some stuff, and saved the file (flac format) and the tags appear to be intact. Greg M. --- Tomas Valusek <tvalusek@seznam.cz> wrote: > Hello, > > and what if I want to preserve FLAC tags while I'm > editing its contents? > Is there a way e.g. to cut silent block from FLAC > and preserve tags? By