Home Digital Drive

Upsamplers, DACs, jitter, shakes and analogue withdrawals, this is it.

Re: Apple Lossless vs. AIFF

> After dozens of blind A/B tests, it is clear that AL and AIFFs
> differ slightly in playback. The AL file almost always sounds
> better. Is iTunes/QT decoding AL files and massaging gain and EQ?

Apparently it's doing something if you're certain about the conclusion of your blind tests. Though, if you think about it, it should have nothing to do with the encoding scheme. The decoder has just taken it upon itself to mess with the playback of that particular file format.

> I can deal with that and wait for better decoders/players as long
> as the quality of the audio data is identical to AIFF or WAV

Either a data encoding scheme is or is not lossless. From your conversion experiments apparently AL is lossless. Which really shouldn't be much of a surprise.

I dunno, I'd be disturbed if the only means of playback of a particular encoding scheme was messing with the output. Even if you think it sounds better to you. Next year's version 5.0 or whatever of the playback software may not sound so good to your ears. I'd much prefer that they sound identical when played back by the same means.

> I would love to save big $$$ on disk space, but I will NEVER rip
> from CD again

Yep, you should be future proof as long as you're satisfied with redbook. You could change from that lossless encoding to another one or to raw WAV or AIFF formats at will. Or create mp3 or mp4 or whatever new lossy codec comes along for portable players.

If you really want to think you'll never rip again, make sure you've got everything backed up to some very large-capacity media such as DVD-R.


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Sonic Craft  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups


You can not post to an archived thread.