[Flac] playback problems with oppo BDP-95

[Brian Willoughby]

What is a "local implementation?"  Do you mean the hardware version  
number?

I think Pierre-Yves may be correct.  There certainly were some  
changes to 24-bit support, and many of these problematic FLAC files  
are HD audio.  In other words, they're not simply 16-bit 44.1 kHz CD  
audio converted to FLAC, but they are 24/96 or 24/192 audio in FLAC  
format.

The only curious thing is that using flac 1.2.1 with --fast or  
compression level 0 is enough to make the hardware happy.  In that  
case, are only the old Rice codings used for lower compression levels  
with 24-bit audio?

You raise a good point, Nicholas.  I would like to see manufacturers  
give specific information about what level of the FLAC format they  
support.  The BDP-95 does not mention FLAC in the manual at all, and  
the web page only mentions FLAC twice - once in a bold heading, and  
again in the body of text.  Neither mention of FLAC gives any details  
at all - they just put it in the list of formats.  I suppose, in  
comparison, that MP3 players usually don't give any details about  
whether the hardware supports 320 Kb or multichannel or anything  
else.  Perhaps we're reaching an age where nobody cares about the  
details.

Brian Willoughby
Sound Consulting


On Feb 6, 2011, at 15:24, Nicholas Bower wrote:
> Version 1.2.1 of the standard/spec or the local implementation?
>
> I've not seen "FLAC 1.0/1.1 Compliant" or "FLAC 1.2 Compliant" on  
> the specs of hardware gear for example when FLAC is stated supported.
>
> Just a curious on-looker.
>
>
> On 7 February 2011 02:34, Pierre-Yves Thoulon  
> <py.thoulon at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Version 1.2.1 introduced new rice coding techniques that are used by
>> the reference encoder for 24 bit files. An older version of the
>> decoder will have trouble with frames that use this encoding... Maybe
>> that's where the strange noises come from...