Harry,
why doesn't a ffp file make a md5 of the *whole* flac file, so that
all non-audio data inside the file are verified too?
Because its purpose is to confirm the integrity of the audio in
situations where it's OK to change the metadata, as it usually is.
Changing the compression options
Harry,
so i was wondering what advantages it could give me to make a ffp
file, because there is already a internally stored md5 checksum on the
decoded audio data inside the flac file?
Testing the .flac file against its internally stored fingerprint lets
you know that you have a properly enc
i forgot to ask this important question :)
why doesn't a ffp file make a md5 of the *whole* flac file, so that
all non-audio data inside the file are verified too?
in my opinion, now it only does the same as the internally stored md5
on the decompressed audio data, but there is still no way to veri
hi,
i found this explanation of the flac fingerprint somewhere:
'A FLAC Fingerprint is generated only for the audio data portion of
the file. (Therefore, changing the filename or the tags or
FlacMetadata does not change the fingerprint calculation.) In
contrast, an .md5 is generated against the w
Hello!
I just noticed how the LPC prediction is quantized by browsing the
source code of the java port jFlac:
:
int sum = 0;
for (int j = 0; j < order; j++)
sum += qlpCoeff[j] * data[startAt+i-j-1];
data[startAt + i] = residual[i] + (sum >> lpQuanti
