AIFF or Apple Lossless

[The Computer Audiophile]

Not totally sure I understand this one. Check out the CODEC page http://www.dbpoweramp.com/codec-central.htm

 

and download & install the AIFF CODEC

 

[starman]

thankyou Chris, didn't realise or I guess understand the nature of this converter and that a codec was all that was required to make this possible.

 

[AV-OCD]

I've had good success with this audio file format converter.

 

http://sbooth.org/Max/#max

 

And bonus, it's free.

 

[starman]

Hi Tim

 

thankyou so much , had a look and it looks great, glad you are having good success with this converter, after installing the right codec dbpoweramp does the business and I am very happy.

I have a Windows XP system so MAX does indeed look like a good recommendation for Mac OS X 10.4 or later

 

regards

 

*man

 

[AV-OCD]

*man -

 

Glad you found a solution. I was under the impression that you were a Mac user. Oops. :-)

 

[Tog]

Max is simply superb - when Snow Leopard (a real operating system) broke Max - the guys had it back in under two days

 

yours, respect tog

 

[1975DCS]

Even on a laptop with Sennheiser HD-595 you can hear a difference between ALAC in iTunes and FLAC in Foobar2000. I don't know if it is the player or the format, but the FLAC in Foobar2000 sounds more colorful and lively.

 

Everybody here is saying AIFF is easier to tag metadata than WAV. But how do you add metadata to the file (not just the playlist in iTunes)? I would like to use iTunes as it is most easy to rip and burn from and to redbook CD's.

 

I would also consider BWAV, if AIFF can't work...

 

So how to tag AIFF files in Windows? mp3tag doesn't work and I don't want to do manually in iTunes (which is a pain in the ass for automatic mass tagging).

 

[Renerator]

Hi Chris. I just tried to download my registered version of dbpoweramp onto my mac mini. When it finished downloading, I received a warning that the downloaded file was a Windows file. Can you tell me how to reactivate my dbpoweramp onto my mac mini?

 

 

 

[bottlerocket]

dbPoweramp is a Windows program. It won't run under OSX. You need to either use boot camp or something like VMware to run windows on you Macmini if you want to use dbPoweramp. You will need a licensed copy of Windows 7 or XP to do that. Since your mini is maybe a dedicated music server, loading windows at all is probably not what you had in mind. What are you trying to accomplish with dbPoweramp? Conversion from FLAC to ALAC or AIFF? Error reporting when ripping? If conversion, check out sbooth.org and download MAX. It will run under OSX and can convert to Itunes compatible formats like ALAC or AIFF or WAV. If you want to use dbPoweramp to rip, someone else can probably suggest an Osx compatible program to rip and create error reports as needed. (I use Itunes to rip and have no problem with it.) Let us know your objectives with dbPoweramp.

 

[Miska]

I have yet to see anyone claim that a computer can't uncompress a music file fast enough or anything that relates to speed of decompression. I believe the common theories are more related to the decompression of music in real time and decompression errors, not a lack of computing power.

 

Personally I would be much more worried about the extra data transfer from the storage needed to play uncompressed files. Harddisks and FLASH storage is immensely much slower than anything in the computing domain.

 

Decoders tell if there was a decoding error. OTOH, with an uncompressed file like WAV there are no checksums or similar to verify correctness of the data.

 

If there is a measurable difference in playback data output from the computer when playing uncompressed or losslessly compressed data, then there is a bug in the playback software or the hardware is faulty.

 

Regarding WAV and metadata, yes there is a sort of metadata support also in WAV, but it is really rarely used and it is rarely supported by software. Biggest problem I see is the size limitation, I'm not sure if AIFF has the same problem too (only 32-bit size field).

 

[Tog]

Max is imo a fantastic program-well supported by its developers and capable of conversion into most formats. It is also an excellent ripper.

 

yours, tog

 

[Renerator]

Thanks for the great response bottlerocket! Since I just got my Mac Mini, I'm trying to figure out the best way to make the FLAC to Aiff conversion. And yes, I plan on keeping the Mini as a dedicated music server. I may just go back into my old PC and do the converting there and load them into an external HD. Either way, it should be cool, right?

 

Thanks again.

 

Rene

 

[Audio_ELF]

Both Max and XLD do a good job of converting FLAC to AIFF on a Mac.

 

Eloise

 

[Renerator]

Hi Eloise. I used Max to convert certain files from FLAC to Aiff. The app seemed to successfully make the conversion. My question is, where did it put this converted file? Sorry for the rookie posts. I'm 3 days into the the Mac world.

 

[Audio_ELF]

Try looking in the Preferences settings for Max, it should have a location for saving files in there (under the Apple menu).

 

Eloise

 

[1975DCS]

I am not a Mac user at the moment, but a "maybe".

 

Does Max copy the ID-tags as well (for ALAC or AIFF)? If yes, does it add ID-tags by default (for example I don't have "album artist", only "artist" and want to keep that blanc). Does it leave the filename as it is (except the .m4a extension ofcourse).

 

It there an easy way on a Mac to (batch) convert to rename files by tag info, like mp3tag does in Windows?

 

Can you set iTunes to name files in the format you like (in my case: Madonna - What It Feels Like For A Girl (Above & Beyond 12'' Club Mix)), rather than the iTunes setting (like: 02. What It Feels Like For A Girl (Above & Beyond 12'' Club Mix))

 

Thanks in advance!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Audio_ELF]

As far as Ive experienced, Max (and XLD) create tags identical in the AIFF (or ALAC) file as they were in the FLAC original.

 

I've never looked at alternative tagging programmes so I don't know.

 

There is no control over how iTunes names the files.

 

[cbarber]

In iTunes I definitely notice a difference between ALAC and AIFF.

 

However, in Pure Music, I don't. Do others?

 

I attribute this to Pure Music decompressing the ALAC file before playing it (with hybrid mode turned off). Does that seem right?

 

[Audio_ELF]

I'm not sure what the flow of data in Pure Music is, but if Pure Music decoded the ALAC before it loaded it into memory then that could/should/would effectively eliminate the difference in processing ALAC and AIFF so sound should be identical.

 

Eloise

 

[Shibboleth]

What a delightful haven of rational discourse this forum is! And particularly this thread.

 

This issue crops up too often not to be important. The contention that compression of any sort impairs playback in most scenarios seems to be supported by some of the best informed and most open-minded 'experts' online. These tend to be distinguished by a reluctance to discount any possibility without investigation, and a humility before all that remains unknown.

 

This in sharp contrast to the delusional know-it-all: the guy who owned a home computer back in the 80s, with a low-grade IT job, who flames into rage because 'none of this stuff CAN make a difference'. The kind of moron who persecutes journalists who think they may have heard a SATA cable making a difference to their system.

 

As with cables, very few people really understand what's going on it, and at the end of, an interconnect. I think far fewer really understand, at the physics level, the world of interactions taking place in a computer. And of that small remainder, how many are interested in designing computers for audio? The rest of us should proceed carefully in making categoric statements.

 

If you half-understand 'clocking', you imagine that you'd only do it once in the signal path: why re-clock and re-clock and re-clock the same bitstream? And yet in practice multiple, additive clocking yields audible benefits. Why? Ah. Only the really clever people know. And in fact, several of them don't agree with each other. What does that tell you?

 

What is relatively easy to demonstrate in your home, with the help of a volunteer, is the difference between AIFF or WAV and FLAC or ALAC, assuming you have a revealing system and listening environment. If you're old, borrow a child's ears: I've found they're particularly sensitive to compression artefacts. Ironic, that: given who buys all the MP3s.

 

In theory, fully buffering the ALAC in Pure Music should level the differences: in practice, I think it probably does, but I'm not sure I could prove it in blind testing without a little attuning practice.

 

[Renerator]

Found them. Thanks Eloise.

 

[Renerator]

Found them. Thanks Eloise.

 

[usernaim250]

To me, the odds of internet groupthink making people hear differences where there are none or hearing superiority where there is none are rather high compared to the odds of their actually being an audible difference between lossless formats (or data cables). Many have claimed the Hiface the best thing since sliced bread--but Chris didn't hear it that way. The Playstation vogue, the long ago thing for the Optimus portable player (CD3400) etc. demonstrate that hot air circulates rather fast in audiophile circles.

 

Against these claims is the demonstrated inability of the audiophiles on Zerogain and Pink Fish to distinguish blind between 256 AAC and lossless just two weeks ago.

 

The majority of perception happens in the brain. The sighted listening practices on which most of the claims about AIFF vs. lossless are based affect the brain even if the actual sound waves are no different.

 

How many of you claiming differences have listened blind and done 15 to 20 trials?

 

I would do it, but personally, I don't hear a difference, so there is nothing to test. I also can't tell between itunes, foobar, and mediamonkey (even when Itunes is not bit-perfect). I also can't tell between ASIO, WASAPI, and Direct Sound output. Or, into my Benchmark, between HagUSB-->coax or optical out from my mobo or the mini-TOS from an Airport Express. [This is through a one-time top-of-the line active Linn-Naim system].

 

Personally, I await the results of a robust double blind test of the type Sean Olive runs for Harman before I believe in something that is a)highly implausible and b)contrary to my experience.

 

Or if anyone wants to do a hi-rez recording of the analog outs of their dac when fed by different data paths and show me some differences.

 

 

 

[Shibboleth]

Each to their own, of course: there are many levels of hearing acuity, and many compromises in our listening environments and systems.

 

Certainly, I've never been impressed by anything other than the price of the HiFace: in a recent audition, I thought the Halide Bridge was significantly better, and cheaper, compared to the HiFace with an expensive cable.

 

One interesting thing about Rob Holt's recent test that bears on this topic is that the AACs were re-encoded as WAVs which, to many contributors to this thread, represents an 'upgrade'.

 

The other interesting thing is that the better ears in that group were consistently able to tell the files apart. If even only a few people can do this, there's no argument.

 

Its main proof seems to be that some people have better (trained?) hearing than others: no surprise there.

 

[Codifus]

I think it has been well established on this forum that even devices or software that spit out bit perfect data, sound different.

 

The audio signal, until it hits the transducer, be it a speaker or headphone, is an electrical signal. Therefore it is subject to all the laws of electricity. If 2 speakers cables have different electrical properties, they must affect the audio signal travelling through them. The real question is: can you hear the difference?

 

All I'm trying to say through these examples is that sound is very, very complicated, and to conclude that something is perfect due to some double blind test or calculation is limiting ourselves.

 

It has been shown time and time again that humans are flawed. Remember the unsinkable ship? Perfect music forever? I'm sure there are more examples. It's all just part of the evolving human experience.

 

CD