I did some testing a while back. This was only with one album, but it
gives you an idea
Code:
--------------------
FLAC 1.1.1 -6
=============
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 01.flac 34,746,441
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 02.flac 39,847,635
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 03.flac 49,837,157
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 04.flac 14,940,639
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 05.flac 22,505,958
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 06.flac 56,664,984
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 07.flac 48,523,004
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 08.flac 63,504,254
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 09.flac 13,347,604
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 10.flac 54,341,202
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 11.flac 95,480,000
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 12.flac 42,697,384
-------------------------
12 File(s) 536,436,262 bytes
FLAC 1.1.1 -8
=============
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 01.flac 34,647,759
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 02.flac 39,615,286
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 03.flac 49,594,714
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 04.flac 14,823,598
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 05.flac 22,437,221
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 06.flac 56,257,984
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 07.flac 48,126,259
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 08.flac 62,910,992
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 09.flac 13,297,712
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 10.flac 53,916,172
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 11.flac 94,873,781
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 12.flac 42,509,883
-------------------------
12 File(s) 533,011,361 bytes
99.36 % of FLAC 1.1.1 -6
FLAC 1.1.3 -8
=============
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 01.flac 34,511,990
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 02.flac 39,427,088
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 03.flac 49,134,975
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 04.flac 14,658,683
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 05.flac 22,090,753
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 06.flac 56,072,758
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 07.flac 47,562,514
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 08.flac 62,710,992
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 09.flac 12,859,723
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 10.flac 53,651,617
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 11.flac 94,267,117
Goldfrapp - We Are Glitter - 12.flac 42,180,372
-------------------------
12 File(s) 529,128,582 bytes
98.64 % of FLAC 1.1.1 -6
99.27 % of FLAC 1.1.1 -8
--------------------
Funkstar on another forum Wrote:
> The reason for the -6 compression setting was that is what EAC was setup
> to encode to. For some reason i put that in instead of -8 a while ago,
> not sure why. I actually think a lot of the library is encoded at -5 as
> well.
>
> Anyway, the difference in compression ratio is tiny. barely 0.7%
> reduction in the versions. So probably not a lot of point in re-FLACing
> your collection really.
>
> But lets see what the maths are when you take a large library of 14,043
> flac tracks.
>
> Size on disk at the moment: 388,679,239,117 bytes (361.98 GB)
> Estimated size when using FLAC 1.1.1 -8: 386,230,559,911 bytes (359.70
> GB)
> Estimated size when using FLAC 1.1.3 -8: 383,393,201,465 bytes (357.06
> GB)
>
> So thats almost 5GB of data i could save over my whole library.
>
> Is it worth re-FLAC-ing my library? Perhaps. If i can get a script or
> utility that will just run in the background over the course of a few
> days and re-compress everything then, yeah, i might do that at some
> point. Would also be a good test for my X2 system. not done any kind of
> stress testing or benchmarks on it yet.
>
> Each album averages 384.12MB so an extra 5GB would let me store another
> 13 albums in the saved space
As you can see i don't get anywhere near the 3% or 5% you have. I might
need to try this out on a larger selection of music.
--
funkstar
------------------------------------------------------------------------
funkstar's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2335
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30698
_______________________________________________
ripping mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/ripping
