Jump to content
IGNORED

Apple new format? CD and FLAC to AIFF ? help


Recommended Posts

hi, I have a huge collection of cds and complete albums on flac

 

1. Im a mac user and I really like itunes for play and organice my music...

2. I want rip all my cds

3. I want play my flacs on itunes, but itunes dont play flac

 

so...

 

I thinking convert all to AIFF, I mean rip all my cds on AIFF and convert all the FLACs on AIFF

 

why AIFF? well I think is the whole full thing... uncompress and maybe more standard format than ALAC, and AIFF keep tags.

 

but so...

 

my questions:

 

1. is a really good idea convert all to AIFF? I read around that apple plan a new format or something like that... maybe Im confused with the news... I need wait for apple new format for convert all? Apple developing new audio file format to offer 'adaptive streaming' | Technology | guardian.co.uk

 

2. is a waste of space convert all my flacs to aiff? hd's every day are more bigger for the same price... $150 por 3TB so maybe who cares about the space...

 

3. XLD app for me is the best for rip cds but is good for covert my flac to aiff??

 

4. some people hear differences between alac and aiff (that maybe depends of every equipment) but so... aiff is better? I mean when people hear difrecenes always hear aiff better?

 

PLEASE! any help! I want rip my cds and converts all my flacs, one time!!! I dont want in 5 years or something do again the same process.

 

also by the way, I plan play all my files with a DAC and the BW 685 speakers!!! thats my goal

 

thank you!

Link to comment

@ shekoluw:

 

Either AIFF or Apple Lossless (ALAC) will be a good format choice for the long term.

 

Some people think that AIFF sounds better than ALAC; others don't hear a difference. (I suspect that to a certain extent, this depends on the playback software and/or hardware in use.) The good news is that you can convert from one format to the other without losing either sound data or metadata. In my experience, ALAC handles metadata (tags) as well as AIFF does. To make the decision between AIFF and ALAC, I think you should convert some of your favorite tracks to both formats and listen to them.

 

As a rough estimate, and for planning purposes, your files will take up about 40% more space as AIFF vs. FLAC or ALAC.

 

XLD is a good app for doing the conversions. That's what I use.

 

--David

Listening Room: Mac mini (Roon Core) > iMac (HQP) > exaSound PlayPoint (as NAA) > exaSound e32 > W4S STP-SE > Benchmark AHB2 > Wilson Sophia Series 2 (Details)

Office: Mac Pro >  AudioQuest DragonFly Red > JBL LSR305

Mobile: iPhone 6S > AudioQuest DragonFly Black > JH Audio JH5

Link to comment

@ Julf:

 

I don't really disagree, but just a couple of points:

 

-- ALAC is also now an open format.

 

-- FLAC is a PITA when you're Mac based.

 

--David

Listening Room: Mac mini (Roon Core) > iMac (HQP) > exaSound PlayPoint (as NAA) > exaSound e32 > W4S STP-SE > Benchmark AHB2 > Wilson Sophia Series 2 (Details)

Office: Mac Pro >  AudioQuest DragonFly Red > JBL LSR305

Mobile: iPhone 6S > AudioQuest DragonFly Black > JH Audio JH5

Link to comment

If you plan to stay in the Apple universe, convert your FLACs to ALACs. You're just going to burn up space using AIFF files, and why would you do that when both are lossless formats? You'll probably want to buy more music over time, so the space savings will be apparent now, and save you the trouble of converting to save space later.

Snap, crackle, and pop is for breakfast cereal, not for music. Go digital!

 

The thrifty audio critter who does not buy into audiophile nonsense.

Link to comment
If you plan to stay in the Apple universe, convert your FLACs to ALACs. You're just going to burn up space using AIFF files, and why would you do that when both are lossless formats? You'll probably want to buy more music over time, so the space savings will be apparent now, and save you the trouble of converting to save space later.

 

I disagree. Convert them all to AIFF as there is a difference here, and HD space is cheap. I would not have thought there were differences with ALAC until I experimented. You should try it on some various types of music as some is more readily noticeable.

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment
It's only a PITA if you want to use iTunes .. flac plays nice with both Fidelia and Audirvana Plus sans iTunes.

 

Yes, but it sure is nice having iTunes as a cataloging program.

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment
flac plays nice with both Fidelia and Audirvana Plus sans iTunes.

 

Yeah, it's great if you never switch playback software, or if you like to re-import the FLACs for each player. You can include Pure Music in that group, as well. Audirvana is pretty good at reading PM's FLAC proxies (much to Rob's chagrin), but other than that, I haven't had much luck in getting the various players to read each other's proxies. Also, PM has some problems with the embedded metadata in some FLAC files. This isn't terribly serious, but it's not so much fun when you need to re-tag stuff.

 

Further, Rob's concerns (pretty legitimate, IMO, even though I currently use A+ more than PM) about Audirvana's proxies raise some questions about what will happen in the future. So on balance, I'm happy to continue to convert my FLAC downloads to ALAC. Everything's then interchangeable, free from metadata issues, and free from patent/licensing disputes. (AIFF would work equally well if you're so inclined.)

 

I'd agree that FLAC is do-able on the Mac, but over time, using FLAC files creates a rougher user experience overall. I started out trying to make FLAC my default format, but now, all new stuff gets ripped/transcoded to ALAC and existing stuff gets converted (by album) as soon as I encounter a FLAC-related issue.

 

--David

Listening Room: Mac mini (Roon Core) > iMac (HQP) > exaSound PlayPoint (as NAA) > exaSound e32 > W4S STP-SE > Benchmark AHB2 > Wilson Sophia Series 2 (Details)

Office: Mac Pro >  AudioQuest DragonFly Red > JBL LSR305

Mobile: iPhone 6S > AudioQuest DragonFly Black > JH Audio JH5

Link to comment
Yes, but it sure is nice having iTunes as a cataloging program.

 

That, too.

 

--David

Listening Room: Mac mini (Roon Core) > iMac (HQP) > exaSound PlayPoint (as NAA) > exaSound e32 > W4S STP-SE > Benchmark AHB2 > Wilson Sophia Series 2 (Details)

Office: Mac Pro >  AudioQuest DragonFly Red > JBL LSR305

Mobile: iPhone 6S > AudioQuest DragonFly Black > JH Audio JH5

Link to comment
Yes, but it sure is nice having iTunes as a cataloging program.

 

I couldn't agree more. The library function of both Audirvana Plus and Fidelia isn't pretty but very effective none-the-less. When JRiver Media Center is ported it should prove to be a most interesting addition to the MAC environ .. great library, great sound, great codec support, etc.

Link to comment
I couldn't agree more. The library function of both Audirvana Plus and Fidelia isn't pretty but very effective none-the-less. When JRiver Media Center is ported it should prove to be a most interesting addition to the MAC environ .. great library, great sound, great codec support, etc.

 

Is there news that JRiver is being ported?

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment

Interesting... Thanks Melvin!

 

I am not a fan of how they have conducted business on this site, but I am not a Mac fan boy either. Most likely I would only use it if it coupled with the existing Mac add on players.

 

Is there a reason why you are turned "off" instead of "on"? ;)

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment

Stick with iTunes, get BitPerfect, convert to ALAC, and when ripping in iTunes use error correction.

13.3" MacBook Air, 4GB RAM, 256GB SSD; iTunes/Bit Perfect; MacBook Air SuperDrive; Western Digital My Book Essential 2TB USB HD; Schiit Bifrost USB DAC; Emotiva USP-1, ERC-1 and two UPA-1s; Pro-Ject Xpression III and AT440MLa; AKAI AT-2600 and Harman Kardon TD4400; Grado SR80i; Magnepan MMG Magnestands; and, Rythmik Audio F12

Link to comment

Yes, so many different opinions, the OP has a headache, me too from reading this thread.

 

Stick with AIFF as it is the only lossless format with proper metadata support (that is with imbedded cover art) that can be played by DLNA devices and the support from Windows Media player (File Formats Supported by Windows Media Player Versions 6.0 and Later) . You may not need it now, but perhaps a new machine in the future can play BD via DLNA and/or Airplay as well as properley stream lossless files from network drives.

I keep two libraries in parallel one in FLAC the other in AIFF, and used DbPowerAmp to convert one to the other. Why in parallel? FLAC has better metadata editors, and AIFF has inherent support for OSX devices. And I don't see a middle ground coming up any time soon.

AS Profile Equipment List        Say NO to MQA

Link to comment

first thanks to all for the responses!!

 

some things:

 

1. well first now I dont have an "audiophile" system for detect differences between aiff and alac, for me sounds the same... but soon I buy a DAC (maybe a cambridge) and the BW 685 speakers... so maybe hear differences, maybe not.

 

2. by the way Im on a macpro, exist difference in sound on a macbook pro vs a macpro or imac? I hope no!

 

3. space well yes hds are relative cheap $150 per 3tb on this days, the problem is you need a NAS (a drobo $700) etc.. so space is space but well the true if I get the best sound I dont care consume all the space on a AIFF.

 

4. nobody respond me one part of the question, apple goes to release a new format? that beat aiff or alac? stupid question maybe... but...

5. play flacs with others like Audirvana Plus and Fidelia, well yes... I know but I hate it the true, I like the organization of itunes... other problem is that I have albums in a single file with .cue for that reason I want extract to files...

 

in conclusion my goal is make GLOBAL my files... one format and play easy on itunes...

 

I still dont understand how alac keep the same quality if size is less... is like a .zip that a programan like itunes can read inside and play???

 

and yes XLD is much better than iTunes for rip definitely

 

thanks

Link to comment
in conclusion my goal is make GLOBAL my files... one format and play easy on itunes...

 

I still dont understand how alac keep the same quality if size is less... is like a .zip that a programan like itunes can read inside and play???

 

If you goal is one format to play on itunes, then go with ALAC as I said before. It works perfectly fine in itunes and allows for easy management on mac systems.

 

Some reading on lossless audio and why ALAC is the same as AIFF - Lossless - Hydrogenaudio Knowledgebase

Snap, crackle, and pop is for breakfast cereal, not for music. Go digital!

 

The thrifty audio critter who does not buy into audiophile nonsense.

Link to comment
I still dont understand how alac keep the same quality if size is less... is like a .zip that a programan like itunes can read inside and play???

 

Yes, just like zip (and FLAC) ALAC (Apple Lossless Audio Codec) compresses the file without discarding any information, allowing for bit-perfect reconstruction of the original wave.

And just like the other lossless codecs, it does it by taking advantage of redundancy and "empty space" in the original sound file - pure white noise doesn't compress very well.

Link to comment
If you goal is one format to play on itunes, then go with ALAC as I said before. It works perfectly fine in itunes and allows for easy management on mac systems.

 

Some reading on lossless audio and why ALAC is the same as AIFF - Lossless - Hydrogenaudio Knowledgebase

 

Read all you want, but if you hear the difference, then well...

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment
4. nobody respond me one part of the question, apple goes to release a new format? that beat aiff or alac? stupid question maybe... but...

 

Probably just another silly Apple rumor. I think both ALAC and AIFF are adequate for most music you might encounter. :)

 

--David

Listening Room: Mac mini (Roon Core) > iMac (HQP) > exaSound PlayPoint (as NAA) > exaSound e32 > W4S STP-SE > Benchmark AHB2 > Wilson Sophia Series 2 (Details)

Office: Mac Pro >  AudioQuest DragonFly Red > JBL LSR305

Mobile: iPhone 6S > AudioQuest DragonFly Black > JH Audio JH5

Link to comment
David,

 

 

 

I am aware that Apple open source licensed ALAC, but there still aren't that many independent implementations.

 

Actually, off the top of my head, I cannot think of anything on a Mac that does not support ALAC, and on Windows iTunes and JRMC support ALAC. I don't use anything else on Windows... :)

 

Logitech Touch and Vortexbox all support ALAC, as does anything with Airplay in it. The only things that don't support ALAC appear, to me, to be products trying to be supercheap or - trying to create some impression that ALAC is difficult to support (untrue) or too expensive to support (also untrue) or simply want to rail against Apple.

 

The latter reason also gives them an excuse not to do the simple work needed to support airplay or the ALAC format.

 

I would express it as "Apple is a PITA if you are FLAC based" :)

 

Nothing against Flac really, but it does present a barrier to running iTunes based systems, and arguably, iTunes is a very very good system indeed. Or can be in a well setup system, including bit perfect playback, streaming, A/V integration, and quite a bit more. Paul

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
Probably just another silly Apple rumor. I think both ALAC and AIFF are adequate for most music you might encounter. :)

 

--David

 

There are Rumors about Apple increasing (or adding?) direct support for DSD, but even if true, that wiLl most likely be an addition, not a replacement. Way too much existing stuff out there in PCM format, and really AIFF or WAV formats are about as close to pure PCM as it makes sense to be. ALAC and FLAC are both lossless containers for PCM data, meaning that just like a zip fie, they are expanded before the are used.

 

Converting a FLAC or ALAC file to AIFF is pretty much like unzipping a zip file. Not exactly, but close enough you can use it tohave a really good understanding of the differences,

 

 

Paul

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...