1. 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.

    Dismiss Notice

ALAC vs. FLAC

Discussion in 'Sound Science' started by jonasras, Mar 5, 2013.
First
 
Back
1 2 3
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Next
 
Last
  1. Duartisimo
    *edit
     
  2. bigshot
    As I understand it, the only difference compression levels make in lossless is the speed at which the ripper rips, which affects file size. The end result sounds the same, but the file size might be a little different.
     
  3. Duartisimo
    *edit
     
  4. bigshot
    I've ripped thousands and thousands of CDs using iTunes with the safe rip box checked. No problems. I own the CDs anyway, so it really doesn't matter.
     
  5. Duartisimo
    *edit
     
  6. vermilions
    Yeah, come to think of it... that's a lot of money! My parents and a few relatives have passed on their CD collections to me and I guess it's my job to make sure I keep them in good condition! Yeah, I have them all backed up using Glacier. :) Thanks for your advice!
     
  7. Duartisimo
    *edit
     
  8. wnmnkh Contributor
     
    I really think it's better buy a used CD from Amazon or ebay. People are literally selling them like 25 cents.
     
  9. Duartisimo
    *edit
     
  10. bigshot
    Meguire's Plastic cleaner and polish work great on clearing up scratches on CDs.
     
  11. FiJAAS
    I was going to buy a Fiio X5 to play my ripped CD's converted to FLAC using XLD on a iMac....but now I'm tempted to buy a iPod Classic 7th Gen. I just learned two days ago that you can convert FLAC to ALAC. Guys could you help me make the right decision?

    Fiio X5
    Fiio E12
    Beyerdynamic DT-770 250 OHMs
    FLAC

    ...or

    iPod Classic 7th Generation
    Fiio E12
    Beyerdynamic DT-770 250 OHMs
    ALAC
     
  12. hogger129
     
    I really liked the X5 when I was in the test trial.  It drove my Audio Technica ATH-M50 headphones very well.  I own the X3 currently and like it a lot.  The X5 just felt like a better design to me ergonomically speaking.  It reminded me a lot of the iPod Classic's shape, but it has better sound, you're not tied into iTunes, it can play pretty much any format that I could throw at it.  I almost like the X5 more than my X3 just for the extra capacity it can carry and I liked the design more. 
     
    Now the iPod.  It has more capacity, 160gb compared to the X5 which can carry 2 microSD cards for a total of 128gb.  It will not play FLAC without installing Rockbox - which can be done on the 7th Gen.  Running out to that E12, I'm not sure how it would sound.  Without that, the X5 sounds better. 
     
    My choice would probably be the X5.  Mostly for the better sound quality and not being tied into iTunes.  Oh and the X5 can output resolutions past 16/48 if you have any of those 24-bit files you might want to play.
     
  13. FiJAAS

    Thanks for you're input!
    So it pretty much boils down to space.
     
  14. bigshot
    I love iTunes. I love my iPod, iPhone and iPad. Lossless to lossless is same same. The features are what count. If you are Mac based, you should stick with Apple, because all of Apples software and hardware is designed to work together seamlessly. The people who don't like iTunes or iPods don't own Mac computers.
     
  15. castleofargh Contributor

    +1 to that. and I'm an anti apple nazi by heart.
    everything on mac is done so that when you have one product, compatibility is reduced as much as they can from other plateforms to force you into getting the all package from them. it's taking people for sheeps IMO. but on the other hand, when you're all mac, it does perform very well. so as you're already "stuck" in it, why not go all the way and enjoy the benefits of mac.
     
First
 
Back
1 2 3
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Next
 
Last

Share This Page