19 May '13 - 10:27 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Reply  |  Print  
Author Topic: MO4, instead of MO3 (lossless) ?  (Read 8701 times)
Lau
Guest
« on: 14 Jan '06 - 17:48 »
Reply with quoteQuote


Hi there,

MPEG4 ALS looks promising :

http://www.nue.tu-berlin.de/forschung/projekte/lossless/mp4als.html

Lau
Logged
Zarggg
Posts: 1239


« Reply #1 on: 17 Jan '06 - 23:13 »
Reply with quoteQuote

MO3 already has a lossless option.
Logged
Lau
Guest
« Reply #2 on: 18 Jan '06 - 21:53 »
Reply with quoteQuote

Yes, but it is far better than delta compression. MPEG4 ALS is the result of years of effort by compression experts.
Logged
Dotpitch
Posts: 2472


« Reply #3 on: 18 Jan '06 - 22:28 »
Reply with quoteQuote

Would it make that big a difference when compressing short samples of a single instrument, and would the extra compression justify the integration of yet another decoder in the mo3-decoder?
http://www.un4seen.com/forum/?topic=4172.0
Logged
Lau
Guest
« Reply #4 on: 20 Jan '06 - 09:55 »
Reply with quoteQuote

Would it make that big a difference when compressing short samples of a single instrument,

or big sample of many instruments ?  Wink

and would the extra compression justify the integration of yet another decoder in the mo3-decoder?
http://www.un4seen.com/forum/?topic=4172.0
Logged
raina
Posts: 1086


« Reply #5 on: 20 Jan '06 - 10:14 »
Reply with quoteQuote

Would it make that big a difference when compressing short samples of a single instrument,

or big sample of many instruments ?  Wink

and would the extra compression justify the integration of yet another decoder in the mo3-decoder?
http://www.un4seen.com/forum/?topic=4172.0

That's some nice quoting right there. Make a comparison whydontcha, and we'll see if it would be worth it.
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Reply  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines