|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
81.19.57.162
In Reply to: So you're saying nobody ever has had to? Are you just stupid.. posted by Michi on September 27, 2005 at 09:48:52:
"In our MLP training information, we point out as a matter of information that the size of a compressed file can be adjusted by using (gentle) low-pass filtering or selection of a word size to suit the project. This is useful background information to a certain type of producer, who may want to free up space on a disc for other assets or simply understand how the process works."
Follow Ups:
"Gentle" prefiltering? So what? ReBit *IS* LOSSY. Prove otherwise, you big-headed twerp.I guess "Gentle" is now also "Lossless". Oh, no no I know, the MLP process (when not using ReBit) is still lossless - but we'll just *ignore* the fact that a LPF had to happen in order to make MLP more efficient.
Agree to disagree, bury the hachets, whatever, but we're degenerating into name calling and I don't want to close this thread like the one above.
.
This is what: ReBit affects "bit depth". And the article refers to "word size" -- i.e. "bit depth" -- as a factor affecting compressability. Now you can do that within MLP, or you can do it elswhere in the production chain. Adding an optional function to MLP doesn't make it bad. It merely makes it more 'flexible'.> > Gentle" prefiltering? So what? ReBit *IS* LOSSY. Prove otherwise < <
You are saying rebit is lossy. But I am saying MLP -- sans ReBit -- is lossless. I think we agree on both scores.
And you do puzzle me with this loaded statement:-> > LPF had to happen in order to make MLP more efficient. < <
But who in the industry, with practical knowledge of DVDA, has ever proclaimed that MLP is "inefficient"?
Anyway, we now know that these sorts of tricks do apply to SACD, i.e. in order to extend a full six-channel program to more than 65 mins, reducing the dynamics allows the DST compressed file to still fit into the available disc space of a hybrid SACD. That's not rocket science.
Martin said: "Anyway, we now know that these sorts of tricks do apply to SACD, i.e. in order to extend a full six-channel program to more than 65 mins, reducing the dynamics allows the DST compressed file to still fit into the available disc space of a hybrid SACD. That's not rocket science.This is totally WRONG and in a previous deleted post he even said Audiophile companies do it. NO SACD I know of has been released that does not have the full dynamic range of the DSD master tape. Please Martin give as the titles so they can be check out!
Here are the choices taken so far to increase playing time for Multi-Channel programs over 74 minutes. 1) Use 4.0 or 5.0 channels instead of 6.0 to gain extra playing time or 2) release the longer program on 2 SACDs instead of 1 SACD. The first option was used by Telarc for example and the second option is used by Universal and many others.
This quote was given to Martin by an unnamed SACD engineer for an audiophile company and just like his quote that SACD is a virus, I believe this came purely from Martin own head.
Martin says "it's not rocket science" that is true because it is NOT done.
.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: