Hello all,
Question: If you rip a ALAC file and decide to convert to an AIFF file, will there be any loss in fidelity? Will it sound as good a an AIFF straight from the CD?
Thanks.
Oh and what would be the best Windows program to do this with? I know Mac user have Max. Is there any windows programs that would be comparable?
Thanks again.
Hello all,
Question: If you rip a ALAC file and decide to convert to an AIFF file, will there be any loss in fidelity? Will it sound as good a an AIFF straight from the CD?
ALAC and AIFF are both lossless formats. So conversion from one to the other (and even back again) will yield the same audio data. So they should sound identical.
CDs don't store AIFFs, but I sort of understand what you mean. When you rip a CD losslessly, you pull all of the PCM data from the CD. So yes, lossless files, ripped from CDs, should sound identical to the CD because the audio data is the same.
If you have a player that plays ALAC where you want it to (portable, at home, etc) then there's no reason to convert from ALAC to another lossless format. They will be the same.
Hello,
Sorry to disagree with you you but AIFF files are NOT compressed at all. They are windows version of WAV files. The controversy is do ALAC sound as good as AIFF or FLAC as good as WAVs. Being that disc space is so cheap (A 1TB hard drive can hold 2000 CD's) should any compression be used at all. Some people believe they are giving your CPU more work unzipping compressed files. However the amount of "work" a CPU has to do to uncompress a ALAC or FLAC is almost negligible. The question do they sound as good.
I owned an iMac years ago and wisely backed up my music files. This was 2005 and I always used ALAC as I only had a 300GB hard drive. When my Mac died on me 5 years later Apple wouldn't touch anything without an Intel chip. Unfortunately I didn't have $1500 for a new Mac and had to jump to Windows, much to my chagrin. So I just kept on using ALAC as my CODEC. But I've heard ALAC files can be converted to AIFF's and the sound would be as good as if ripped straight off the CD. I'm going to buy an at least a 1TB external hard drive and want to convert all my ALAC,s to AIFF's to stored on this external HD.(BTW those of you who value your music collection had better back it up. Hard drives are mechanical devices and sooner or later, they will fail. Bye, Bye music collection!) So does anyone have knowledge or an opinion of this issue?
Thanks
Any codec can be converted to any codec, and lossless to lossless will always sound the same as the original files. If you are looking at lossless the smartest option is flac as it is playable on just about everything and isn't tied to any platform.
If you want to convert files on windows most music players can do it, foobar for example will convert between any format it can read (all of them) with simple plugins.
Why would conversion to AIFF be useful? It's probably not today; but, there may be a reason to rip or download to AIFF and retain the file in that format, at least in one of your library's. For example, let's say you have a Network Media Player, like a Marantz NA8005, this player will player AIFF up to 24/192 and it will also play ALAC up to 24/96. That would be a reason to download AIFF at 24/192. Now, if you have devices which have limited storage you might want to send them smaller files and thus convert AIFF to ALAC for that application.
You guys are missing the point. I have over 5000 files 90% which are ALAC because I owned a G5 iMac when I first got started. All my files are CD Red book meaning 16/44.1. Good old CD quality. My HD was 300GB. Didn't have the room for AIFF. Well that was 6 years ago. TB HD's were expensive. Now they're not. If I convert my ALAC's to AIFF's will I get the same quality as if I ripped AIFF's straight from the CD in the first place? Foobar plays ALAC just as well as FLAC in fact there's no difference in sound quality. Both CODEC's do the same thing. Same with J River for all you guys who got $50 burning a hole in your pocket. My DAC doesn't do hi-def. My entire headphone based system is about $2000 not including the laptop.
HeadRoom Micro Amp with power supply upgrade
HeadRoom Micro DAC
HiFiMAN HE-400's with CablePro custom cables
PS Audio Duet AC filter and surge protector
2 PS Audio Noise Harvesters
All of these products have been discontinued which is too bad because the crossfeed circuit in the amp smokes any DSP I've ever heard.
I'm not converting over 5000 songs to FLAC. Converting 5000 songs from ALAC to AIFF, if it's worth the trouble, meaning there would be a noticeable improvement in fidelity, is what I'm asking.
Thanks
If you read my earlier post, I identified why you might want to convert ALAC to AIFF; but, there would be no audible improvement. However, today you might want to download, as well as rip new material in AIFF as it permits 24/192 while ALAC just accommodates up to 24/96.This is if your perceive 24/192 to be better than 24/96.
To be honest I've never heard Hi-Def as, like I said, my 7 year old DAC won't process. When I've put together 5 large and can afford a Hi-Def DAC, I'll get back to you. Meanwhile I enjoy and am satisfied with the sound I have and isn't that what this hobby/passion is all about? Too many "audiophiles"get caught up who has the best, meaning the most expensive gear and forget it's all about the music. Would I rather have a $20,000 headphone rig? Sure. Would I rather have a $1,500,000 rig with a room to go with it? Sure. But what is hi-end audio? It's all about enjoying the music, not who has the biggest pecker.
You seem to want conversation, not an answer. The answers, in order of the questions, are no and yes. Usually, with presentation of such questions there's a motive for having the questions; that's to say, in this instance, a reason for wanting to convert from ALAC to AIFF. The reason for AIFF today is playback of Hi-Res files, which are beyond ALAC capacity. The answer to your final question is iTunes for Windows. Using it you could convert thousands of tunes from ALAC to AIFF in less than an hour.
Your ALACs are "the same quality as the CDs". The ALACs contain 100% of the digital audio data that was on the CD. If you convert to AIFF you will have *exactly* the same digital audio data.
I'm not converting over 5000 songs to FLAC. Converting 5000 songs from ALAC to AIFF, if it's worth the trouble, meaning there would be a noticeable improvement in fidelity, is what I'm asking.
Some people believe that all kinds of things improve sound quality. Some believe that pebbles placed on top of components, or stands placed under cables improve sound quality. Others think that green pens drawing circles on CDs make them sound better. In the digital arena some people think that reducing the CPU load and "cleaning" your operating system makes digital files sound better. Others say that WAV sounds better than FLAC or ALAC. Or that AIFF sounds just as good or not quite as good was WAV. Or any other manner of comparison.
I personally believe that none of the things I just outlined impact sound quality in any way at all. For AIFF versus ALAC there's just no reason that it should make any difference: The digital data is the SAME in both file types.
To be honest I've never heard Hi-Def as, like I said, my 7 year old DAC won't process. When I've put together 5 large and can afford a Hi-Def DAC, I'll get back to you.
DACs that can process 24/192 start at very low prices these days. My Schiit Modi 2 does 24 bit 192kHz and it cost something like $115 (if you factor in shipping). It's certainly not the last word in DACs, but it's no slouch. It's kind of amazing at it's price point actually.
For me the jury is still out on whether or not higher bit depths and sampling rates sound better than "just 16 bit 44.1kHz". Some of the high def recordings I've heard are pretty darned impressive. It's hard to be sure. I just know what I like in music and I know when I hear a good recording. I'm sure The Grateful Dead's American Beauty sounded great on systems in the 1970s. It sounds pretty freaking amazing at 24/96 on my headphone rig.
You guys are missing the point. I have over 5000 files 90% which are ALAC because I owned a G5 iMac when I first got started. All my files are CD Red book meaning 16/44.1. Good old CD quality. My HD was 300GB. Didn't have the room for AIFF. Well that was 6 years ago. TB HD's were expensive. Now they're not. If I convert my ALAC's to AIFF's will I get the same quality as if I ripped AIFF's straight from the CD in the first place?
These days when I rip I generally choose ALAC as it is more easily compatible with both my Windows and Mac setups.
I used to rip to WAV which is the CD format but there is no sound benefit and it is difficult to tag. Most playback software these days will decode a compressed song in memory before playback so it is going to come out the same as uncompressed.
Also from the research I've done, the "work" a CPU has to do to "unzip" an ALAC or FLAC to the original files data is less than minimal. CPU's aren't the issue. It's whether or not lossless files have the same fidelity as an uncompressed file would have. My guess is that if you did a double blind, no none would notice. Well I guess if you had a $50,000 dCS DAC you might. Of course in that level of hi-end audio I wouldn't have that kind of money invested in digital audio. When I owned my $38,500 system,$15,000 went towards my analog front end and $6,000 went to digital. $30,000 in a vinyl record collection. Pass Amps, B&W Nautilus loudspeakers. VPI, Graham, Benz Micro Ruby, Transparent Audio Labs cables, PS Audio P300. Installed 2 dedicated 20 amp circuits.
And I've learned to enjoy my $2000 headphone system just as much.
Yes is my best answer. I think that DBPoweramp is one of the best converters. I have a decent Dell laptop and I/we have converted half of our 40,000 songs from FLAC to AIFF. The other half were ripped directly from the CDs to AIFF. Similarly, you will not lose any quality/data by converting from ALAC to AIFF.
I think that you are very wise to convert to AIFF, if for no other reason, then to have an uncompressed archival file(s).
There is controversy as to whether ALAC, FLAC, AIFF actually SOUNDS DIFFERENT during playback. In my system it does. It is not a dramatic difference, but is noticeable on SOME WELL RECORDED MATERIAL. It is not due, (in my opinion), to data integrity, but due to TIMING.
The player must "unpack" the file AND play it, instead of just playing it: the process of unpacking and playing uses up more system resources than just playing.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
