[redavaya-fi]

I thought all encoders/decoders are the same

, have been using Xilixsoft 3gp video converter and windows media player to rip/convert my files. Is there a difference in sound quality or just convenience?

@Berlioz: Maybe you could PM me the sites

Thanks Head-Fiers, you've all been a great help!

 

[WesMiaw]

During the encoding process, there is some wiggle room for error detection/correction and, depending on the format, the choices you make of what to throw away.

Decoding should be identical with all software. But post-decode software things like how you handle volume can affect the sound differently.

 

[Berlioz]

WesMiaw is correct. For encoding, I prefer EAC. It's very slow, but it compares the copy you make with other pressings stored in various databases. It has multiple levels of error detection, and when the copying is finished it will tell you how accurate your copy is.

I'm not sure how it fares against other dedicated ripping programs, but I found EAC's pressings better than what iTunes produced. You can download it here:
Introduction » Exact Audio Copy

At the very least, knowing the amount of errors (or lack thereof) is a satisfying thing.

 

[ph0rk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by WesMiaw /img/forum/go_quote.gif AAC is higher quality than MP3 though.

This varies from revision to revision, and once into the 256 kbps territory (which all itunes plus songs are) it doesn't really matter.


sadly there isn't a good OSX native ABX tool, but one can run one in parallels, vmware, crossover, or bootcamp. When the mind's feelings about how lossless should sound are removed from the equation, without training it becomes very difficult to differentiate 192 kbps tracks (with modern encoders) from lossless. Even with training, even 256-320 kbps vbr is hard if not impossible for many people.

Don't read about whether or not lossless "should be" better. Try it and find out under test conditions.

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ph0rk /img/forum/go_quote.gif sadly there isn't a good OSX native ABX tool, but one can run one in parallels, vmware, crossover, or bootcamp.

So true!
The only somewhat decent one I have found is Java ABC/HR, but it is a long way from perfect.

Meaning that some of us are not able to performed ABX tests...

 

[charliex]

Apple tunes are NOT lossless - but 256 AAC.
Flac (WAV) files are the only true lossless uncompressed files and with 1.5 TB hard drives now selling for under $100, no longer a storage issue.

 

[ph0rk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by charliex /img/forum/go_quote.gif Apple tunes are NOT lossless - but 256 AAC. Flac (WAV) files are the only true lossless uncompressed files and with 1.5 TB hard drives now selling for under $100, no longer a storage issue.

FLAC != WAV
FLAC ~= ALAC

ALAC are lossless files, and you can make them in iTunes (or max(, you just can't buy them from the iTunes store.

You can't buy them (or FLAC) from amazon, either - it is likely a bandwidth cost issues.

 

[Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ph0rk /img/forum/go_quote.gif You can't buy them (or FLAC) from amazon, either - it is likely a bandwidth cost issues.

In the case of Amazon I suspect that a big factor against selling lossless files has more to do with the customer support issues than bandwidth issues. MP3 files work on everything (even an iPod). Noobs can download an MP3 and be able to play it on anything. Not so with FLAC or WMA Lossless, or any other lossless format. Can you imagine how many people would be calling and contacting Amazon support to figure out how to play lossless files if they were offered for sale?

 

[mellows]

Quick question: I've been ripping my CD collection into ALAC with dbpoweramp. Would I be better off continuing with EAC?

 

[ph0rk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ham Sandwich /img/forum/go_quote.gif In the case of Amazon I suspect that a big factor against selling lossless files has more to do with the customer support issues than bandwidth issues. MP3 files work on everything (even an iPod). Noobs can download an MP3 and be able to play it on anything. Not so with FLAC or WMA Lossless, or any other lossless format. Can you imagine how many people would be calling and contacting Amazon support to figure out how to play lossless files if they were offered for sale?

Perhaps, but NIN did it okay. It would be pretty trivial to package mp3s (or AAC's) with lossless files - but you've quadrupled the bandwidth over plain lossy encoded files at that point - never mind the fact the recording companies would probably not allow it.


Quote:

Originally Posted by mellows /img/forum/go_quote.gif Quick question: I've been ripping my CD collection into ALAC with dbpoweramp. Would I be better off continuing with EAC?

I don't think EAC will encode to ALAC.

 

[mellows]

Thanks, so I'll stick with what I'm using then.

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ph0rk /img/forum/go_quote.gif FLAC != WAV FLAC ~= ALAC ALAC are lossless files, and you can make them in iTunes (or max(, you just can't buy them from the iTunes store. You can't buy them (or FLAC) from amazon, either - it is likely a bandwidth cost issues.

Technically FLAC = the audio section of a WAV file.

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by charliex /img/forum/go_quote.gif Flac (WAV) files are the only true lossless uncompressed files and with 1.5 TB hard drives now selling for under $100, no longer a storage issue.

Huh?

All lossless audio codecs are true lossless, and certainly not limited to FLAC. Apple Lossless, WavPack, LA, Shorten, ... are all true lossless.

...and the "uncompressed files" part I do not understand. FLAC are indeed compressed.

 

[Bilavideo]

iTunes doesn't sell you Apple Lossless. AL is a setting you can choose when importing CDs into your iTunes library. iTunes' traditional offering was 128k, with DRM strings attached. The standard now is "iTunes Plus," which is 256k without the strings attached. I've imported lots of songs into my iTunes library as Apple Lossless. I've also downloaded iTunes tracks as iTunes Plus. I'd be lying if I said I could hear any difference, but I'm not sure I can. On some of the detail-rich tracks, 128k sounds like the sonic equivalent of watching TV in standard digital but 256k has just enough information to leave me scratching my head.

 

[redavaya-fi]

Right now, with my current Zune 30/IE8, I honestly can't hear a difference between losless and 320kbps files. I have plans in upgrading my rig in the near future then maybe I'll be able to distinguish any difference.