To Re-Rip or not to Re-Rip? That is the question - AIFF vs Apple Lossless

[Sakahara]

Should I re-rip my music collection, or at least my reference, better recordings, in AIFF, as opposed to how they've been ripped already - Apple Lossless? And should I use 44.1 or 48 kHz sample rate if I have a 24/192 DAC? I only have 500+ CD's so it's not a huge undertaking.

 

Will Menu>Advanced>Create AIFF version... result in same audio quality? I want a bit-pefect copy of the CD in it's whole form. I considered WAV but read many comments regarding issues with meta-tags, artwork,... not attaching/showing up when using OS X/iTunes.

 

The music files are being copied to an external USB drive attached to a Bryston BDP-1. Is there a way to import directly to the external drive via iTunes connected to my iMac w/o affecting the current Apple Lossless music library? The internal drive isn't big enough and this would be more convenient then importing each CD, then copying it over to the external drive.

 

My previous music sever was the Wadia iTransport w/ a Classic 160GB iPod using Apple Lossless music files. Using a Reimyo DAP-777, the sound was more then musically satisfying compared to a previous Accustic Arts CDP. Now I'm switching to a hi-rez tube based DAC (Lampizator v3 L3) and wanted to try another music server, one that had a larger GUI, using an iPad or iPhone 4.

 

[Paul R]

If you convert an ALAC file to AIFF, then back again, it will compare bit for bit with the original.

 

In other words, absolutely nothing is lost in the translation.

 

Just batch convert them (try XLD) and see how you like them.

 

Be sure to tell us if it makes a significant difference for you in terms of enjoying your music! It does for some folks and not for others.

 

-Paul

 

 

[Sakahara]

A bit-theory, that still leaves me skeptical when it comes to digital playback.

So as long as the music server handles either ALAC and AIFF it shouldn't matter?

 

Should I consider using another app for ripping CD's since this isn't for use on my iMac? I've read comments that iTunes isn't the best. My main concern is having the best digital copy of the CD and all the meta-tags, artwork intact when using iPad/iphone 4 MPoD app. I experienced issues with missing artwork using SBT.

 

[audiventory]

You can rip AIFF with original sample rate. If you want to avoid realtime convert, you can try convert file to 24/192 by special utility (slow with high quality).

 

But store (in archive drive) lossless compressed original rip. Tomorrow - 384 kHz DAC and more.

 

[Paul R]

First, one has to realize there is no "audio" involved either with ripping a CD or with converting an ALAC to AIFF file. (Or FLAC to AIFF, or indeed, any other lossless format.)

 

All lossless formats store exactly the same bits. No room for variation or error. And that isn't a theory - it is about as hard and cold a fact as one could ever ask for in this world. When you store an "a" on a computer, it doesn't matter if it is stored on 10 different disks, copied 10,000 times, transmitted over any ind of network. When you access the data, it will still be an "a". It cannot mysteriously become a "b" for example, unless of course, an error occurs. And the copy programs, network transmission programs, etc. are all coded to detect errors and at the very least, warn you about the error.

 

You can convert format to format, and as long as all the formats are lossless - when you decode the format you get the exact same bits. No timing issues, nor any processing issues. This is all done usually when the file is not being converted to audio.

 

 

This is one of the great advantages of the digital audio revolution.

 

 

[Sakahara]

Why use AIFF w/ Mac if Apple Lossless is identical yet takes up less space?

 

[Paul R]

An AIFF file and an ALAC file are anything but identical.

 

The content of each file however, is identical.

 

Indeed, the content of an ALAC file, when uncompressed will be identical with the content of an AIFF file. Bit for bit, absolutely perfectly.

 

Transcoding between the formats is a perfectly ordinary and bit perfect task.

 

Because of that, there is no real advantage to re-ripping a file from a CD just to change from one lossless format to another. None at all.

 

Now when you play the file, some folks can hear audible differences between the lossless formats. The reason why people can hear those differences is a subject of much debate and a significant amount of research.

 

But one thing is absolutely certain - the reason is not because the bits or the datums are being changed. The bits sent to the DAC are exactly the same from any lossless format - AIFF, WAV, FLAC, ALAC, PCM, or any other lossless format.

 

This is so not true with lossy formats, like AAC and MP3. Those formats you would be well advised to avoid, and if you do have sound in those formats, it is worth the effort to re-rip them from CD into a lossless format.

 

 

[kennyb123]

I have re-ripped about 2/3 of my CDs and will likely re-rip nearly all of them eventually. Apple Lossless files were replaced with AIFF files, but the format change had very little to do with why I elected to go through all the effort. I changed ripping programs as I found that dbPoweramp rips sounded more natural then my iTunes rips. The improvement was enough to justify the effort to re-rip my CDs.

 

It would be a waste of time to just convert your ALAC files to AIFF.

 

I found no difference between ALAC and AIFF rips from dbPoweramp. I went with AIFF primarily because I was concerned that maybe one day with better gear I might hear a difference between ALAC and AIFF. I didn't want to have to re-rip again.

 

I would encourage the original poster to download dbPoweramp and take advantage of the free trial. Rip a few CDs and compare these to your iTunes rips.

 

[Sakahara]

Why rip to AIFF with dBpoweramp if no audible difference to ALAC, but less storage requirement with the latter (convert ALAC>AIFF when/if needed)?

 

How are you using dBpoweramp on Mac (Fusion, Parallels)? Isn't there a better rip app for Mac?

 

[Sakahara]

Would an AIFF music file download be the same as me ripping a CD to AIFF (or Apple Lossless) in iTunes/Mac?

 

What about downloading a FLAC music file to OS X and then mov/copying that to the music server drive*, or using a file conversion app; FLAC>AIFF? Will I lose anything in terms of sound quality?

 

*The music server uses an external drive (formatted for FAT32) and can read most music file formats; FLAC, AIFF, ALAC,... etc, so there's no really need to convert but I thought for easier storage on Mac with tags/artwork.

 

As you can sense I'm a novice with this. I've only recently bought a 24/192 DAC so I could start trying/buying hi-rez music. My previous music server was a Wadia 170iTransport/iPod Classic combo so it was as simple as ripping to ALAC and copying my iTunes Music Library.

 

Btw, I would NEVER use or support [DGCC] MP3 - digital garbage compactor codec. Not even with my iPod, although I've only recently used the "Convert... to AAC" feature to fit more on my limited capacity 16GB iPhone 4.

 

 

 

[kennyb123]

I elected to have dBpoweramp rip to AIFF instead of ALAC for these reasons:

 

1) While I didn't hear a difference between the two formats at the time, I thought that maybe with a better DAC I would hear a difference. I knew I would be upgrading to a better DAC in the future, and didn't want to have to re-rip again.

2) With AIFF I would have greater flexibility to move to a different playback solution in the future, should I decide to use something other than Pure Music/iTunes.

3) AIFF's additional storage requirement wasn't really an issue, as I have plenty of HD space. Even though I can now get less music on my 16 GB iPhone, I have not regretted ripping to AIFF.

 

A little over a year ago a few friends and I tried really hard to find a Mac application that did as good of a job as dbPoweramp, but we came up empty. A friend who is a diehard Mac user has never ever owned a Windows PC and yet he even went out and purchased a used Dell just so he could have a ripping machine. That's how impressed he was with the improvement from using dbPoweramp.

 

I am now using an old Dell PC for ripping.

 

You probably could set up a VM in Parallels or Fusion for ripping. I VMs on both my Mac Pro and MacBook Pro that I could have used. I elected to go with a physical machine as I wanted dbPoweramp to have full control of the disc drive so I could get the best results. Re-ripping would take many, many hours and I wanted to make sure the job was done properly. This is a common theme in my decisions. I never, ever want to re-rip again. :-)

 

You might consider creating a boot camp partition for this. Another friend just did this, and he is very pleased with how this is working out. Or you could try a VM too and see how the results compare.

 

You have a great DAC. I'm sure you'd hear a difference from these rips. Two of my friends own this same DAC and they both rip using dbPoweramp too.

 

I hope this helps.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Good strategy and well reasoned approach Kenny. dBpoweramp is what I use for ripping. I haven't found anything better.

 

[SteveS1]

XLD for Mac seems to do the job fine, no measurable or sonic difference that I can tell. Have you found something?

 

Steve

 

[PeterSt]

And should I use 44.1 or 48 kHz sample rate if I have a 24/192 DAC?

 

NEVER change the format of the source "CD". So, rip it - "do nothing" - and it will be stored in its native format (which will be the "bit perfect" format if you like).

 

Notice that to this respect format is : bit depth / sample rate.

 

Later you can always change it to another format, but which I personally still would not do in "off line" fashion (which means permanently store the converted format).

 

Peter

 

[Sakahara]

NEVER change the format of the source "CD". So, rip it - "do nothing" - and it will be stored in its native format (which will be the "bit perfect" format if you like).

 

 

Curious then why iTunes allows the sample rate to be changed when importing to AIFF?

 

[Sakahara]

Music server novice needs some clarification;

 

Is a AIFF music file download the same as me ripping a CD to AIFF (or Apple Lossless) in iTunes/Mac? I sense not based on comments above with using dBpoweramp for ripping instead of iTunes for better playback quality. Strange that this makes a difference. HW as well (i.e, CD/DVD drive, old/new computer,..)? Does the RIP app version also make a difference (CD's ripped with earlier version of iTunes vs current version)?

 

Can I download FLAC music file to Mac/OS X and then move/copy to the music server drive*? What about file conversion; FLAC>AIFF? Will I lose anything in terms of sound quality?

 

*The music server uses an external drive (formatted for FAT32) and can read most music file formats; FLAC, AIFF, ALAC,... etc, so there's no real need to convert but I thought for easier storage on Mac with tags/artwork.

 

What defines a hi-rez music file; 24/96,..24/192? Is only FLAC capable of this?

 

With regards to ripping on WIN, I do have access to a Dell XP Laptop, also some old WIN (XP,..) towers, but the laptop hasn't proven to be reliable with some unknown issue where it overheats and goes blank (4 years old) and the towers are older (not current CD/DVD drives). using my year old iMac might result in better ripping. I planned to use an external DVD drive to save wear-n-tear on the internal one. I also have VMware Fusion/XP for dBpoweramp, although I also have XLD. I'll have to try ripping a few CD's both ways to know for sure, but I think I'd be happy either way as I've been very satisfied using iTunes/ALAC.

 

I'm still trying to decide on a external USB drive for use with Bryston BDP-1. I wanted something sleek, slim, and thpought of the G-Drive 500GB Mobile Slim. Then considered the Apple Time Capsule to have both storage and ethernet in one box (no need for Airport Express), plus ability to simply drag-n-drop music files over to it, but I'm told the USB port wouldn't allow the BDP-1 to see the TC's internal drive. Too bad. That would be a simple solution. Maybe NAS so I didn't have to unplug/plug drive between BDP-1 and iMac?

 

[PeterSt]

Ehhm, because it was made for MP3 stuff ?

A bit of a vague answer maybe, but that really *is* the answer.

 

Ok, mine.

 

Anyway, this is similar to copying an analogue medium too many times (father, child, grand child), and the more times you do it, the more noisy it will be, until nothing is left for real data. With digital conversions the same happens.

Not when those conversions are not there (like just copying a digital file). Even if you do that a million times, nothing will have changed.

 

Peter

 

[Paul R]

The music is (almost) always PCM data. The type of file it resides in is like a shell. An AIFF or WAV file is a very simple shell:

 

[----- AIFF Header-----]

[ --- ---]

[ --- PCM DATA ---] (This very oversimplified and only for illustation)

[ --- ---]

[ ---MetaData---------]

[----- AIFF TRAILER----]

 

The important bit in that is the PCM data- this is the digital representation of your music. Bit for bit, that PCM data is the exact same whether it resides on a CD, an AIFF File, or a WAV file.

 

FLAC and ALAC, and other "lossless" compression methods store a compressed version of the PCM Data in their files, but when you "process" a FLAC or ALAC file, the "process" uncomrpesses that data, and it is once again, bit for bit, exactly the same data as on a CD or in an AIFF or WAV file.

 

MP3, AAC, etc. Are lossy - the PCM data in the file, when reconstructed, is NOT a bit for bit image of what was on the CD file, or what would have been in an AIFF or WAV file.

 

This is, in part, why ripping a file from a CD to a AIFF, WAV, ALAC, FLAC or other *lossless* file is generally an improvement - the ripping program can try many times to reread a dodgy bit of data on the CD, and will almost always succeed in recovering the data. You cannot do that when you are *playing* a physical CD in a CD player, as there is just simply not enough time for the player to do all those error retries.

 

It is also why converting a file from AIFF to ALAC, or ALAC to WAV, or from any one lossless or uncompressed format to another is just as safe as re-ripping the CD. The computer is copy the PCM data with precision, much more reliably than a CD player can. Even the very high end and terrifically expensive CD players.

 

So basically, as long as you use a good application to rip your files, and you store them in a lossless format, you can reliably swap those formats around with no problem whatsoever.

 

Now, the question of what sounds better - a FLAC, an AIF, an ALAC file, etc. Well, that's pretty much a religious argument, with adherents on both sides having hard held opinions. But the actual digital representation of the music in them - that's exactly the same.

 

There is also one other consideration, and that is your metadata for each track. Things like album artwork and so forth. A good program like XLD or dbPowerAmp takes care of those issues for you, for the most part.

 

But you can loose metadata moving from format to format. WAV files, I think, have no capacity to hold metadata, like album covers or track names.

 

Mu recommendation is AIFF or ALAC, choosing one or the other based upon space considerations, and if one or the other sounds better to you. Both formats store a ton and a half of metadata.

 

-Paul

 

 

 

[Sakahara]

XLD for Mac seems to do the job fine, no measurable or sonic difference that I can tell. Have you found something?

 

 

Did you compare XLD to dBpoweramp and iTunes using AIFF, as well as AIFF to ALAC?

 

For now, I've decided to use XLD -> AIFF for all new CD's and then re-rip the rest as time permits, while listening to music, overwriting the ALAC files on the music server drive (using another drive for backup, finally freeing up my iMac drive since I don't need the music there). I've been more then satisfied with the sound from my system using iTunes->ALAC to import CD's, so whether or not using XLD->AIFF yields improved sonic results (which I feel it will based on feedback), my music library will at least be an exact copy of the CD and I won't have to be concerned with re-ripping anytime soon.

 

Wow, XLD->AIFF seems sloooooow, or am I imagining this?

 

 

 

 

 

[kennyb123]

I never tried XLD as I thought it was just for converting music files. I use Max for converting - it works well.

 

I would encourage you to read about AccurateRip here: www.accuraterip.com

 

This will explain why dbPoweramp does a superior job of ripping CDs.

 

XLD is listed as AccurateRip compatible program, so maybe it is a good candidate for ripping. I will have to try it! I'll let you know what I hear.

 

 

 

[Sakahara]

I'm satisfied with XLD as far as accurately ripping redbook CD's. Without having experience with anything other then iTunes>ALAC for 4 years on Mac it looks to have more then enough built-in redundant error correction safeguards and leaves me feeling secure about the integrity of the rips. I only wish the GUI was more intuitive (Save to Folder Structure,..), with more feedback about the process, ripping status results, in real-time, and Help was included. There's plenty of window space above the track listing window. It's too generic and designed towards more computer savvy individuals with hands-on ripping. Wouldn't mind if it managed the music as well. And I'd like to see exactly what the differences are when the Metadata comes back with multipole results (show comparison).

 

[ManWithAPlan]

Guys, Rip is the tool from Stephen who makes Decibel and Max and Tag. It is indeed a secure ripper equivalent to dbpoweramp. It does indeed use AccurateRip, as does XLD. Just for the record. XLD is excellent choice as is Rip...Max should only be used for conversions at this point, not virgin rips, because it lacks AccurateRip. Hence why Stephen developed Rip.

 

Make sense?

 

[kennyb123]

I tried Rip last summer. It was the worst sound I heard from any ripper. The channel levels were off, which was odd. It was a beta at the time, so I figured I had just encountered a bug. Hopefully the current version does a better job.

 

XLD has two ripper choices as I recall. I think only one choice uses secure ripping & AccurateRip. I am at work now and don't have a Mac handy so I can't confirm.

 

Lastly, dbPoweramp does a sensational job of tagging. It also does a fairly good job of retrieving cover art. I doubt XLD or Rip come close to this. So this is something else to consider.

 

I try to avoid using Windows as much as possible at home. But as far as ripping goes, dbPoweramp is really tough to beat.

 

[Johnny Moondog]

I'd like to see more people become aware of Rip and subsequently encourage Stephen to further develop it out of beta status.

 

Like other Mac owners I wish there was an OS X application that eliminated the need for running dBpoweramp within Boot Camp/Windows.

 

I've used XLD but prefer the design of Rip.

 

I recently exploring these online sources...

 

Exact Audio Copy website

dBpoweramp CD Ripper Setup Guide

Secure Ripping document at Hydrogen Audio wiki

Computer Audiophile CD Ripping Strategy and Methodology

 

...and attempted to confirm the secure ripping features that Rip has in common with dBpoweramp.

 

Accurate Stream: Yes

 

Caching: I don't see anything in Rip's Inspector or Preferences that mentions the drive's cache. Does Rip request additional data in order to flush the cache between read operations? Or invalidate the cache by reading an area larger than the drives cache?

 

C2 Error Points: Yes

 

Log File: Yes

 

AccurateRip: Yes

 

Drive Offset Detection: Yes

 

Set Drive's Read Offset: Yes

 

Secure Ripping Mode: the Advanced tab in Rip preferences appears to have user adjustable settings for configuring what's known as Secure Mode, although they are somewhat different than those in dBpoweramp.

 

Maximum track re-read attempts [5]

Required matches per sector [2]

Required matches per track [1]

 

Both EAC and dBpoweramp have preferences for slowing down the spin of the optical drive. Rip does not have such a preference. I've recently been informed there is another OS X application in development designed for 'High Quality Audio-CD ripping with a low read speed for so-called secure ripping'. However it is not scheduled for release until the third quarter of 2011.

 

I am planning to try dBpoweramp next. But I'd like to encourage people to try Rip and to send feedback to it's developer.

 

[Sakahara]

With the recent posturing over rip apps I decided to download and compare dBpoweramp to XLD. I ripped the same song (Touch of Trash from Modern Cool by Patricia Barber) as follows; XLD>AIFF and dBpoweramp>AIFF & FLAC. If there was an audible difference I could not detect it. I spent about 20 minutes going back and fourth, over and over, with different parts and I could not discern any difference between them.

 

Note; settings were at their highest possible for secure, accurate, rips. I even slowed down the drive speed for the dBpoweramp rips and also used the Best(8) setting with FLAC.