similar to: Fix and question apodization functions

Martijn van Beurden wrote: > Hi, > > I was doing some speed and compression comparisons with various > apodization/windowing functions, and found out that the > definitions for the bartlett and bartlett_hann window in the > FLAC codebase have been wrong since their introduction. The > attached patch fixes that. How it affects compression ratio? > Furthermore, I found

Hi all, This patch adds two new apodization functions that I developed. From my own test results (on quite a diverse dataset) they outperform the current best apodizations by 0.05% - 0.1% (depending on the specifics) on compression. Here's a selection of the test results *Apodization functions* ,Compres, Speed partial_tukey(2) tukey(0.5) , 56.50 , 37.2x partial_tukey(3)

Currently apodization function is hardcoded, see commit <http://git.xiph.org/?p=flac.git;a=commitdiff;h=4e8fe85bceb245dfce07d1956b144e1cb6587c9f> FLAC is locale-dependent so "tukey(0.5)" doesn't work for locales with decimal comma. But "tukey(5e-1)" should be locale-independent so it is possible to re-add 'const char *apodization' member into

Hi Guys, Does having multiple apodization functions change something to the decoding process or does it only apply to the encoding process ? I have been able to gain almost 10% by using several apodization functions (it takes way more time to encode but this is quite a non issue in my use case) but I don't want to sacrifice any decoding speed as this is the bottleneck for me. Thanks,

Hi, > If I understand this correctly, these new apodization functions only > affect compression and that files compressed with these new functions > will still decode correctly with older versions of the FLAC decoder. > > Is that right? Yes, that is correct. These functions are used to window the audiodata, but only for the predictor stage. What these new function enable,

As we?re talking 1.3.1 release, I?ve been keeping track of a couple of changes that I feel should be included in the changelog and that I might as well share here. The things between brackets are just to refresh memories, I?d leave them out of the actual changelog. * Improved efficiency of 24 bit decoding. (https://git.xiph.org/?p=flac.git;a=commit;h=ea0d5ddadc6902e873983c89f473130b3bb6625f) *

Martijn van Beurden wrote: Hi Marijn, Sorry for the lack of response on this. I didn't understand it when it came in and I needed time to properly review it. Sunday morning after a really good night's sleep seems like a good time for that :-). I've currently got this patch in an un-published branch. > This patch adds two new apodization functions that I developed. > From my

On 24 Nov 2014, at 10:13, Erik de Castro Lopo <mle+la at mega-nerd.com> wrote: > MauritsVB wrote: > >> As we?re talking 1.3.1 release, I?ve been keeping track of a couple of >> changes that I feel should be included in the changelog and that I might >> as well share here. The things between brackets are just to refresh >> memories, I?d leave them out of the

Martijn van Beurden wrote: > Hi, > > > If I understand this correctly, these new apodization functions only > > affect compression and that files compressed with these new functions > > will still decode correctly with older versions of the FLAC decoder. > > > > Is that right? > > Yes, that is correct. These functions are used to window the >

Martijn van Beurden wrote: > This patch changes the settings associated with compression > levels 6, 7 and 8. With this patch, -e is no longer used, but > instead apodization functions are added. This should improve > compression with at least 95% of all material. Independent tests > show that this is probably the case. But your patch changes only two last presets (-7 and -8) so

Op 20-10-14 om 16:36 schreef Martijn van Beurden: > Op 20-10-14 om 16:31 schreef lvqcl: >> But your patch changes only two last presets (-7 and -8) so >> -6 stays unchanged. ( IIRC it should have >> "tukey(5e-1);partial_tukey(2)" as its apodization string >> instead of current "tukey(5e-1)" ). > > .... okay, I really don't know how it is

The following series adds initial vector support for PowerPC64. On POWER9, flac --best is about 3.3x faster. Amitay Isaacs (2): Add m4 macro to check for C __attribute__ features Check if compiler supports target attribute on ppc64 Anton Blanchard (5): configure.ac: Remove SPE detection code configure.ac: Add VSX enable/disable configure.ac: Fix FLAC__CPU_PPC on little endian, and add

Op 22-09-14 om 21:56 schreef Erik de Castro Lopo: > Wouldn't "tukey(1/2)" be better? > > Erik 5e-1 is directly parsed by strtod, while 1/2 isn't AFAIK.

On 22.9.2014 23:22, lvqcl wrote: > Martijn van Beurden wrote: > >>> Wouldn't "tukey(1/2)" be better? >>> >>> Erik >> 5e-1 is directly parsed by strtod, while 1/2 isn't AFAIK. > Another idea is to write flac_strtod() (and probably local_strtod() too) > function that is able to parse both "0.5" and "0,5" strings

Martijn van Beurden wrote: >> And I also suggested to consider a different setting for -7 preset: >> -7 == -l 12 -b 4096 -m -r 6 -A tukey(0.5);partial_tukey(2) >> see <http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=106545&view=findpost&p=871797> >> >> But it will decrease decoding speed for this preset. > > Yes, that is another thing

Flake is a completely independent codebase. When I used it years ago, I remember it being not only better compression but significantly faster as well. I believe some of the techniques used in libflake were added to libFLAC in 1.1.4. However, some of the improved compression in flake was due to options that are outside the FLAC 'subset', such as larger blocksize, greater number of

Op 03-12-14 om 16:48 schreef Olivier Tristan: > Looks like I've missed the talk about this regression introduced in 1.3.1.

Hi, I experience surprisingly large timing differences for the multiplication of matrices of the same dimension. An example is given below. How can this be explained? I posted the question on Stackoverflow: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/58886111/r-why-is-matrix-product-slower-when-matrix-has-very-small-values Somebody could reproduce the behavior but I did not get any useful explanations

Hello All, I have a problem with my roaming profiles where they are becoming too large due to the Thunderbird mail accounts (stored by default) in Application Data. What I would like to do is exclude this directory from being part of the roaming profile. How can I do this? Also, how hard is it to have some users not use a roaming profile but others continuing to use a roaming profile? We

--- doc/html/documentation_tools_flac.html | 6 ++--- include/FLAC/stream_encoder.h | 42 +++++++++++++++++----------------- src/flac/main.c | 20 ++++++++-------- 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/html/documentation_tools_flac.html b/doc/html/documentation_tools_flac.html index 9f85a25..0964cd2 100644 ---