23 Jun
2010
23 Jun
'10
2:10 a.m.
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 5:48 PM, A. C. Censi <accensi(a)gmail.com> wrote:
There is no decompress code in the article ...
Someone has to wright one to check.
The author and his company claim that it can operate in lossless mode
and it is already in use in some medical systems, so probably yes. But
the improvement, if any, when compared with established algorithms
used for sound, seems not sensible. I would not bet time in writing
the decompression code.
ACC
PS - Matlab compression code is attached. So anyone can try to decompress!
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:32 PM, <fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
Alright, I've done some proper testing.
I encoded 105 seconds of 8 bit PCM audio.
Flac got a ratio of .240 on -0 (least compression) and a ratio of .230 on -8
(most compression)
The algorithm got a ratio of "2.7446", which is 0.36 if you convert it to
the way flac measures. (take the inverse).
So flac does better in terms of absolute compression, ignoring any
performance measures.
Jeremy
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 06:18:17PM -0300, A. C.
Censi wrote:
--
A. C. Censi
accensi [em] gmail [ponto] com
accensi [em] montreal [ponto] com [ponto] br
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 5:31 PM,
<fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
So I'll repeat the question: Does it decompress to the original ?
( _it_ meaning the file that was reported to be compressed better
than 7:1)
Ciao,
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
Does it decompress to the original ?
... lots of text but no answer ...