[Ham Sandwich]

Many media players on Windows that can play ALAC files do so by playing the audio back using QuickTime. In those cases, QuickTime is in control of the audio processing and the quality of the audio. Anything using QuickTime for the audio rendering is going to have the same sound.

Some media players give you the option of using either QuickTime or a DirectShow filter using the reverse engineered ALAC playback routines, or directly using the reverse engineered ALAC playback routines. Using something other than QuickTime gives the media player application more control over the audio processing and prevents QuickTime from doing anything naughty to the audio. So in those cases where QuickTime is being used, I can see how it would be possible for FLAC or WAV to sound different and better than the ALAC files.

ALAC on Windows is evil. It is a closed format. If it was an open format where anyone could implement a conforming encoder and decoder we wouldn't have this problem.

 

[leftear]

I have done the same on my MBP couple of months back found the same... Maybe is the DAC inside?

 

[genpatton7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ham Sandwich /img/forum/go_quote.gif Many media players on Windows that can play ALAC files do so by playing the audio back using QuickTime. In those cases, QuickTime is in control of the audio processing and the quality of the audio. Anything using QuickTime for the audio rendering is going to have the same sound. Some media players give you the option of using either QuickTime or a DirectShow filter using the reverse engineered ALAC playback routines, or directly using the reverse engineered ALAC playback routines. Using something other than QuickTime gives the media player application more control over the audio processing and prevents QuickTime from doing anything naughty to the audio. So in those cases where QuickTime is being used, I can see how it would be possible for FLAC or WAV to sound different and better than the ALAC files. ALAC on Windows is evil. It is a closed format. If it was an open format where anyone could implement a conforming encoder and decoder we wouldn't have this problem.

Yep, just did some further audio testing tonight and found that the main culprit is the iTunes player, not the files themselves. All of my ALAC files sound just as they should through VLC.

 

[orby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Chaos /img/forum/go_quote.gif There's nothing wrong with Itunes. There is a lot wrong, however, with CD mastering. Some of the CDs I've ripped to Apple Lossless sound very good. Others sound pretty bad. They sound the same when played directly from the CD.

Quote:

Originally Posted by phototristan /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't understand how an Apple lossless file can sound any different than playing the CD directly. It's supposed to be identical to the CD isn't it?

That sounds a lot like you're trying to rip discs that have pre-emphasis.

Here's a thread you want to look through. Of course google will help you find out a lot more.

You, Lord Chaos and phototristan, can test the very recordings you were talking about by just inserting them in your computer drive, start EAC and the very right column of the main window will inform you, if there was pre-emphasis used for your cd or not.


Quote:

Some older CDs (and perhaps some newer, mainly classical, ones) come with pre-emphasis. Pre-emphasis is not a problem if you rip your CDs in order to be able to burn exact audio CD copies to CD-R and listen to those CD-Rs in stand-alone CD players, provided that you use EAC's cue sheet as you burn them (see EAC CD Burning Guide). It can be a problem, though, if you plan to listen to your ripped files on your computer: pre-emphasis makes the high frequency (treble) parts of the music sound louder than they should.