 |
 |
iTunes: Best lossless encoder
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Hi,
Over the Christmas holidays, I plan to rip approx 1,000 CD's to a lossless format, to be played back via iTunes.
I know that iTunes has Apple's Lossless codec built-in, but are there any better lossless codec around that will "plug-in" to iTunes. Or does it not really matter which one I use, because lossless is lossless after all.
My main concern is that I don't want to "discover" some super-whizzy lossless codec exists, that would have given me better results (better quality, lower filesize, etc, etc), after spending a whole lot of time ripping them via Apple's codec.
If you have any advice, I would really appreciate it.
Many thanks in advance for both your time and answers.
Matthew
|
|
Early 2008 Mac Pro (8 x 2.8), original Core Duo 2.0GHz MacBook Pro
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status:
Offline
|
|
You won't find any difference in quality with lossless codecs obviously.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Hi,
Thanks for your reply.
Quality-wise, I'd hoped not. But I also wondered if some were more effecient than others, and that perhaps one would be faster or one would result in smaller file sizes?
Again, many thanks,
Matthew
|
|
Early 2008 Mac Pro (8 x 2.8), original Core Duo 2.0GHz MacBook Pro
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
If you have an iPod and want to be able to potentially share these songs with others, I would use Apple's lossless format. The ONLY downside is... it's not Open Source.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Quality is going to be identical... because the WAV format can and will be 100% reconstructed from the compressed stuff in either case. That's what "lossless" really means.
Size-wise, you're going to be within 5% from best to worst... they all compress based on the same parameters. Without throwing away data (which lossless codecs can't do), there won't be one that has a big advantage.
ALE will be the easiest to use, by far. FLAC will be as good, but a lot harder to use within iTunes, and IMO the real value of iTunes is its management and how good it is with tagging. Back a few years ago when I was ripping on Windows, the rippers and encoders were all really awful with tagging.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Admin Emeritus  Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status:
Offline
|
|
Correction: because the PCM format can be reconstructed bit-for-bit.
WAV is a container format that can contain compressed (lossy or lossless) or uncompressed PCM audio.
PCM (pulse code modulation) is the raw format of almost all digital audio (the exception being direct stream digital, used in SACD). This PCM audio can be stored in a variety of file containers, such as WAV, AIFF, SoundEdit16, .au, etc. Red Book audio CDs store raw PCM data with a few flags here and there. (There are no files on an audio CD! OSes just make it appear that way for convenience's sake.)
tooki
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
