Wave compression, let's see what we can do...

PetMetroid · 10-13-2004, 04:08 AM

Ok let's start a thread full of wave and other audio file compression. Enyone is free to put down and discuss basically anything about freeing up space for large audio files. <img src=smilies/thumb.gif>I'll start...

Ok, PSF sound is just as good as wave files (so I think) but are much smaller. Is it possible to convert waves and/or other audio files to PSF format files?

Lenophis · 10-13-2004, 04:23 AM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr>

Ok, PSF sound is just as good as wave files (so I think) but are much smaller. Is it possible to convert waves and/or other audio files to PSF format files?

<hr></blockquote>

Consider this, it's possible, but inprobable. A wave is streamed audio I believe, while a PSF is sequenced. "What's the difference?"

Streamed, the data is played as it goes along (which is also how audio CD's, MP3's etc play music.)

Sequenced, the data is stored into RAM and then played. This is how SPC's, PSF's, etc play music. Take the SPC for example, the music is all over the rom, and it's sound chip just calls up the chunks required into ram, and then played. (Or something like that.) The PSF's are more or less the same way, which is why when you open the disc cover, music still plays. The data has already been loaded, and will play indefinately, unless it is streamed. (Like how Megaman X4-X6 are)

Personally, I'd love to see x -> PSF or another sequenced format to cut down on the space. <img src=smilies/magbiggrin.gif>

I hope that answered the question.

<img src=http://www.cpinternet.com/~norwin/lenophis/sig.png>
"For lovers of irony; I'll just say one thing...wishes do come true." - Lobster Cowboy. Jade

PetMetroid · 10-13-2004, 04:30 AM

> Personally, I'd love to see x -> PSF or another sequenced
> format to cut down on the space.

Well, people have already taken steps for reducing game files (SPCs, GYMs, etc) by playing them in their zipped folders. Why isn't this possible for the waves and other audio files, and why haven't more programs/plugins taken more consideration for the zipped folder play technique?

Sucking energy from various life forms
...such as delicious corn, slightly-salted mashed potatoes, and a large juicy steak with a side of A-1 sauce.

Wren · 10-13-2004, 07:08 AM

Sort of. A wav file is a pure recording of a length of audio. The number of bits and sampling rate used to store this data directly corresponds with how much disk space will be consumed. For example, if you record 1 minute of audio with 16 bits of data per sample at a rate of 44,100 samples per second, you'll end up with a file that is approximately 10MB. Because if its size, it's usually not possible/feasible to store that much information into system memory.

A midi or mod (or variants) works differently in that you have two sets of data. The first set are the samples. These are short recordings, usually of a single note of a single instrument but can actually be of anything. A midi uses a shared bank of these samples, so all midi use the same samples whereas a mod stores these samples internally so that each mod has its own instrument set. The second set of data that these formats use is pattern data. This is merely note, effect and sample referencing information. I'm not a midi sequencer, but I have written a number of mod/s3m/xm files so this is my example....

Sample data:
01 bassdrum.wav
02 snaredrum.wav
03 hihat.wav

Pattern data:
A-4 01 3a0
--
G-5 02 fb0
--
B-5 03 e50
A-4 01 3a0

As you can see, the pattern data would contain only music data. The first column is the note (relative to the sample's base) pitch, the second column is the sample number to use (bass, pause, snare, pause, hihat, bass) and the third column is the effect to apply (which can range from note portamentos, arpeggio, volume slides, note cuts, etc...).

Sorry if this was confusing, I'm tired and probably not making much sense. Hope it clarifies in any event.

-Wren

Disch · 10-13-2004, 03:43 PM

> Why isn't this possible for the waves and other
> audio files,

It is. There are several different compression schemes for wave files. Just the vast majority of wav files are uncompressed (since the whole point of having a wav file is to have a fully uncompressed copy).

There are many programs out which can compress a wav file. Some players may not be able to play them though... as compressed wavs aren't as widely supported.

> and why haven't more programs/plugins taken
> more consideration for the zipped folder play technique?

Because it doesn't make sense. Compressed wavs are smaller than uncompressed ones... but Oggs and even MP3s are usually much smaller than compressed wavs. Sure they're lossy formats so you lose a little quality... but (if done with quality settings that don't suck) you can't really notice any loss.

icenine0 · 10-13-2004, 04:04 PM

Additionally, there are widely supported lossless codecs like SHN and FLAC that do a much better job at compressing WAV files than a vanilla zip.

The more often you fail, the sweeter the taste of success!

PetMetroid · 10-14-2004, 01:52 AM

> Sure they're lossy formats so you lose a little quality... but (if >done withquality settings that don't suck) you can't really notice
> any loss.

Uh, I hate MP3's! The only reason I appreciate them is because their small. I know right away when I hear an MP3: it sounds a little bad, the stereo seperation usually sucks, and the treble lets off a rolling sound. Now when you say "quality settings that don't suck" that means editing DSP and sound to make it sound better, right? Ok, I just hate MP3's. <img src=smilies/moon.gif>

 Sucking energy from various life forms
...Such as delicious corn, slightly-salted mashed potatoes, and a large juicy steak with a side of A-1 sauce.

PetMetroid · 10-14-2004, 02:10 AM

Hey, hey, hat FLAC thing works well. Imagine this... You have a bounch of CDs and a large sized HD. You want to retire your CDs to your computer. This is what you'd use stuff like this for. But are zipped waves smaller than the FLAC thing or not?

 Sucking energy from various life forms
...Such as delicious corn, slightly-salted mashed potatoes, and a large juicy steak with a side of A-1 sauce.

PetMetroid · 10-14-2004, 02:11 AM

Oh, and just wondering... does this work with most portable devices such as the I-Pod?

 Sucking energy from various life forms
...Such as delicious corn, slightly-salted mashed potatoes, and a large juicy steak with a side of A-1 sauce.

Disch · 10-14-2004, 02:51 AM

> Uh, I hate MP3's!

You must use bad quality settings.

> The only reason I appreciate them is
> because their small. I know right away when I hear an MP3:
> it sounds a little bad, the stereo seperation usually sucks,
> and the treble lets off a rolling sound.

Give <a href=http://www.xiph.org/ogg/vorbis/listen.html>Oggs</a> a try sometime. They compress much better than MP3s and retain sound quality better. I swore I would never make an MP3 again.

Anyway... if you can really notice the difference between an original wav and an MP3... you must be just using low quality settings.

I could give you the 'Pepsi Challenge' with original wavs and a decent quality Ogg if you really want... and I'm pretty certain you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

> Now when you say "quality settings that don't suck" that means editing DSP
> and sound to make it sound better, right?

No, I mean using bad settings when converting wav->MP3 (like compressing too much and removing too much sound quality).

> Ok, I just hate MP3's.

Well like I said... I really don't think you could pass the pepsi challenge... so any better quality you think you're getting with wavs is either because your MP3 is shitty quality... or it's psychological.

Lemme know if you're interested in taking the challenge... I'll throw something together if you are.