[mink70]

Howdy--I know this has been discussed here before, but... About 18 months ago I purchased a 40gig 4gen iPod and filled it with MPEGs. Surprisingly, I found myself rarely listening to it--after a couple of minutes my mind would begin to drift. Then, yesterday, I ripped some files as AIFFs and found myself glued to the iPod. The music sounded better, but more importantly, it became involving for the first time. I now want to re-rip my whole collection. BUT... I noticed that ALAC will give me much more space over AIFF. Here's the question: Is there any sound difference between ALAC and AIFF----AT ALL? I'm a music perfectionist and listen mosty to vinyl on a Garrard 301/SME 3012/Denon 103D into tube electronics driving massive Tannoy Arden speakers. In other words, I want things to sound as good as possible over headphones, not just good enough. I'm a firm believer, BTW, that the sonic difference between two interconnects is not only real but easily demonstrable. So what do people think? Is ALAC identical or...?

 

[blessingx]

Apple Lossless Audio Codec.

Assuming a proper encoding and properly working decoder ALAC and AIFF/WAV should sound identical. If it doesn't there may be a few causes, but the first step is investigating the possibly of the test being flawed.

 

[Digitalbath3737]

ALAC is lossless AIFF is loseless.... and loseless is loseless. It all sounds the same. The only differeance between loseless is encoding/decoding speed, file size and compatibilty with players.

You're better off with ALAC because it's gives you smaller files and a tad bit battery life. With the same sound quality as the cd.

 

[krmathis]

AIFF and ALAC contains identical PCM streams, and should sound exactly the same. So sound quality wise there are no reason to use AIFF over ALAC!

 

[mink70]

Thanks, that's what I thought. But isn't there a number of people on Head-Fi who argue that ALAC actually sounds different, and worse?

 

[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mink70 Thanks, that's what I thought. But isn't there a number of people on Head-Fi who argue that ALAC actually sounds different, and worse?

There are some people on Head-Fi that would tell you sacrificing three chickens and doing a war dance will make things sound different. Trust your *own* ears -- ALAC and AIFF and WAV should sound the same under any normal circumstances, and if you can't tell the difference, pick the ALAC to save your battery life and disk space.

--Chris

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mink70 Thanks, that's what I thought. But isn't there a number of people on Head-Fi who argue that ALAC actually sounds different, and worse?

True! But there are two possible reasons behind this:
1. They use a faulty decoder (not iTunes of Apple's iPod firmware).
2. Their tests is not accurate.

 

[pds6]

mink70:
Would you mind doing a 320 bit MP3 cbr lame encoding and post your results.

It is what it is.

Thank You

 

[jdimitri]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mink70 Thanks, that's what I thought. But isn't there a number of people on Head-Fi who argue that ALAC actually sounds different, and worse?

Well, people believe a lot of things
I'm pretty sure i can't tell the difference from 224AAC up, did a couple of blind tests.. I'm happy with that too, less space consuming and more battery life

But hey, find out for yourself i guess

 

[milkpowder]

I definitely can't tell the difference between ALAC, AIFF and WAV. Your gear would have to be incredibly high-end (well a good dac to begin with like the DAC1 or the DA10) and transparent for any differences to be heard. OBVIOUSLY, YMMV!

 

[gsansite]

You could have the best system in the world, there is NO difference, no YMMV, fact! Lossless is lossless. If you can AB it you either have not performed the test correctly or the codec doesn't work, in which case I'd get in contact with the developer's as I'm sure they'd be VERY interested!!!

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gsansite You could have the best system in the world, there is NO difference, no YMMV, fact! Lossless is lossless. If you can AB it you either have not performed the test correctly or the codec doesn't work, in which case I'd get in contact with the developer's as I'm sure they'd be VERY interested!!!

Exactly!
ALAC, AIFF and WAV contains the exact same PCM data.

So if you hear a difference between them, you either use an faulty decoder or not performed the test correctly.

 

[mink70]

Sure, it's the same ones and zeros that are sent to the DAC. So the sound must be exactly the same, right? But why, then, do CDs played over different transports produce an audibly different sound from the same DAC. Some audiophile transports cost high-four and five figures (Theta, Oracle, Esoteric, Accuphase, etc.). If the "digital is digital" argument holds, then there should be no difference at all. All it is a laser reading numbers form a piece of plastic.

I don't mean to incite an argument, but after A/B-ing AIFF and ALAC files of the same songs on my iPod with a pair of Grado SR-60s I do hear a slight difference. The AIFF files sound more fleshed-out and substantial, in a much smaller but similar way that AIFFs sound more substantial than MP3s. Also, the AIFF files seem more involving. I know these are subjective terms, but for me, they have everything to do with what makes a piece of hi-fi equipment, or a pair of headphones, fun to listen to. Has anyone else heard this, or am I just smoking carpet?

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mink70 Sure, it's the same ones and zeros that are sent to the DAC. So the sound must be exactly the same, right? But why, then, do CDs played over different transports produce an audibly different sound from the same DAC.

Let me see...
* Quality of components in the signal path.
* Quality/accuracy of the laser pickup and its controller.

 

[mink70]

But why should the quality of the laser assembly, etc., matter? It's still the same data sent to the DAC, right? It doesn't become music until it reaches the analog realm. That seems to be the argument made by the posters here who argue that there CANNOT be any sonic difference between AIFF and lossless compressed files because the same PCM data is sent to the DAC. Is that right, or am I missing something?