Converting from Apple Lossless to AIFF. Did I do the wrong thing?

[mwheelerk]

About a month ago I converted my entire library from Apple Lossless to AIFF. Since that time I have been importing new CDs using iTunes using AIFF. I have had a lot, a lot of issues specifically with embedding album artwork that I never had with Apple Lossless. I originally did this in consideration of a digital player that would replace use of my Mac Mini which I thought specified use of AIFF but now find out does support Apple Lossless also. Additionally with Apple Lossless becoming open source/code (not sure of the proper term) maybe that is the best bet for the future. I have been looking at MAX and XLD as software ripping alternatives to iTunes but it seems with regards to tagging in general and embedding album art in particular the problem remains. It is about 50/50 that I will have a problem now where it was 0% problems with Apple Lossless. Should I convert my library back to Apple Lossless?

 

[scobek]

Haven't had any problems myself, although I only really bother with artwork for my Blue Notes, and then do these manually. Not sure if ALAC actually embeds artwork in the file, which AIFF may not do, although I was under the impression both did (as opposed to .wav).

 

I just think, with hard drives so cheap, it's better keeping "master" files natively unshrunk. You can then easily make MP3 or ALAC versions from these for your portables. Programs like Pure Music need to unravel them anyway to play, so best save a step in the process.

 

Also, I think programs like XLD cope better with AIFF files when converting to FLAC and back. Maybe this will change with the new open source status of ALAC. I don't hear a difference between the two, as some poor super-sensitive souls do, apparently.

 

I'd simply cross off my list any Digital Player that doesn't read AIFFs. There's absolutely no excuse for them not to recognise them.

 

[mwheelerk]

A couple of your points are part of the reason I converted to AIFF. The Bryston BDP-1 is what I am considering and it does support AIFF. I thought it didn't support ALAC. I also do not hear the difference as some do between AIFF and ALAC but I do accept the concept of the additional processing of compressed files.

 

ALAC does support embedded artwork and with AIFF it seems 'iffy'. I was frustrated as I imported three CDs last night and could not get the artwork embedded with the AIFF files, hence my post. I tried one with iTunes this morning and two with XLD and all accepted the embedded artwork. Go figure.

 

I like having artwork for all of my albums. I do have my HDTV connected to the Mac Mini which I occassionally display the artwork while listening. Mostly that is off but I like the artwork on my iPad using the Apple Remote app or the Screens VNC app. I find the visual reference for me easier to make selections and to refer to when I don't immediately recognize what is playing.

 

[bikemig]

@mwheelerk: I'm curious, since you can't hear the difference between AIFF and ALAC and neither format loses any digital information, why not go with the format, in this case ALAC, that seems to do what you want it to do (I like having artwork with my music as well). Since it is easy enough to convert files, I'm not sure why it makes a big difference which format one picks as long as it does what one wants.

 

[mwheelerk]

Originally bikemig the conversion was done in consideration of a potential purchase only later realizing it wasn't necessary. Though I have not heard a difference I kind of bought in to the idea it was better not to have to convert/'unzip' a file prior to playback.

 

I am having second thoughts on that decision.

 

[realhifi]

I can't blame you for having second thoughts on that.

 

http://www.macrumors.com/2011/10/27/apples-lossless-audio-codec-alac-now-open-source/

 

The writing is on the wall many folks believe.

 

http://blogs.linn.co.uk/giladt/2011/11/apple-opens-the-way-to-24-bit-itunes.php