[Bredin]

Something somewhat relevant. Cant't you use the alac plugin for foobar and then converting the music using foobar?

 

[Kobra]

hmm, to bad you're on a PC

I recently converted my entire FLAC library (many high res 24/96 and some 24/192) to ALAC. But since I've ditched my PC and went for the new MacBook Pro (my reason for transcoding) I used MAX, it worked flawlessly and without any glitches - I loaded MAX with about 15 000 FLAC's and let it do it's thing as I went to bed

By morning it was done

 

[craiglester]

OK I just tried importing the same 24 bit 48Khz track into Itunes using 3 formats

1. Wav - No Metadata obviously.
2. WMA Lossless - Keeps Metadata, but downsamples to 16 bit
3. AIFF - Imports as AIFF, but you can Create Apple Lossless Version in Itunes once it's imported, and it keeps it 24 bit, and retains Metadata.

So converting the Flac files in dBPoweramp, importing them into Itunes, then creating Apple lossless from the files (you'll end up with AIFF AND ALAC Files) seems to work.

Seems Apple crippled the WMA Lossless convertor somehow.. (converting the FLAC and WMA Lossless files to Wav and bit comparing them in Foobar reveal no differences, so the WMA Lossless files is good, just Itunes by default downsamples it)

Have fun

 

[m1abrams]

And to add test results, I did the mac test and used Max to convert 24bit FLAC files to ALAC and it worked just fine and retained metadata and 24bit.

So if you have a mac that is a second option.

 

[craiglester]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kobra /img/forum/go_quote.gif hmm, to bad you're on a PC I recently converted my entire FLAC library (many high res 24/96 and some 24/192) to ALAC. But since I've ditched my PC and went for the new MacBook Pro (my reason for transcoding) I used MAX, it worked flawlessly and without any glitches - I loaded MAX with about 15 000 FLAC's and let it do it's thing as I went to bed By morning it was done

I'm sure if the OP actually had a Mac, he'd have tried this, right?

Can't you play FLAC's on a Mac? I don't get why you'd convert if you can? We're all PC in our household, so I've no experience of playing FLAC on a Mac.

 

[Bredin]

foobar2000 3rd party components

Macs can play flac, using programs like songbird or vlc. Just like OpenSolaris lol.

[OT]
I don´t get it why ppl wants macs for music playpack. A "PC" running windows or *nix won´t crash if it's only used for music. It´s cheaper and it will run itunes too if you want that......

 

[m1abrams]

Well many reasons why.
1 iTunes runs better on OSX however I personally do not know how true this is.
2 if you also have an iPhone sync with iTunes on a mac works better with non music items. Address book, iCal, etc.
3. Not everyone bought their MacBook pro

4. Some people may have a mac for other reasons and find also using it for music is handy.
5. OSX has no Kmixer! Course nor does Linux.

 

[Bredin]

1.Even if itunes runs better on mac OSX it's still apples fault that it runs worse on windows. And it is still an inferior musicplayer compared to foobar2000. It can barely play any formats at all! And I guess that there are no oversampling plugins for it either. And foobar can handle ipods.

And is a phone so important that you have to buy a apple computer just to sync some things between them?

Only good thing hardware wise with the macs are the design and the optical output. They are using old 65nm graphicscards and are having alot of hardware issues. ANd mac OSX is actully very unsecure, and there are trojas spreading like aids

.

The only valid reason I can see with a mac is if you are using programs that does not work on another operatingsystem.

Buy B&O then, it's the same idea. lol.

 

[m1abrams]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bredin /img/forum/go_quote.gif 1.Even if itunes runs better on mac OSX it's still apples fault that it runs worse on windows. And it is still an inferior musicplayer compared to foobar2000. It can barely play any formats at all! And I guess that there are no oversampling plugins for it either. And foobar can handle ipods. And is a phone so important that you have to buy a apple computer just to sync some things between them? Only good thing hardware wise with the macs are the design and the optical output. They are using old 65nm graphicscards and are having alot of hardware issues. ANd mac OSX is actully very unsecure, and there are trojas spreading like aids . The only valid reason I can see with a mac is if you are using programs that does not work on another operatingsystem. Buy B&O then, it's the same idea. lol.

I am going to stop here, because it is clear you are either not familiar with Apple hardware/software or very closed minded and think that anyone that uses it is a fanboy. Foobar is great, but has many issues. I keep wanting to use Foobar but everytime I try I run into an issue that I just can not make work for me (actually just gave it my 3rd go round, gave it 3 months of use and tweaking before I decided it would not work for me). I actually love the fact that foobar is so customizable and love spending the time to set it up just for me. BUT it does not do certain things that I need from a media player such as decent ability to create dynamic playlists, you can do simple ones but not complex ones, Podcast support (sure you can get them other ways or with a plugin that is so-so). Also foobar is closed source in the worse way, the sole developer will ban plugins when he feels they do not do things the way he wants, while this is really no different than Apple just need to remind people it is far from an open project. Since there is only a single developer doing it in his spare time if he decides to stop working on it or gets bought out Foobar is over because no one can step in to pick it up. Sure Apple could do the same however the risk is much greater with a single developer doing it for the fun of it.

Also keep in mind I am not a lover of iTunes in fact I have spent the better part avoiding iTunes. However I have come to the realization that no perfect media player exists they all have short comings that we must work around to fit our specific needs. Since I do happen to like iPods and the iPhone I am trying once again to use iTunes. I have in the past used Foobar, Winamp, Jriver MediaCenter, MediaMonkey, and very very long time ago MusicMatch. Of those Jriver and MediaMonkey have been my personal favorites, however I stopped using Jriver because of issues I have with the development team and the way they treat their forums. I still like MediaMonkey but I feel their approach to syncing to the iPhone is a bad one, Songbird is on the right track for that and will watch Songbird closely to see how they do. Until Songbird matures more I am going to give iTunes another go round.

It helps to not be so close minded regarding hardware and OSs. They all have their uses and every person has different requirements. I sit here at work with a windows machine to my right, linux center, and a mac to my left.

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bredin /img/forum/go_quote.gif 1.Even if itunes runs better on mac OSX it's still apples fault that it runs worse on windows. And it is still an inferior musicplayer compared to foobar2000. It can barely play any formats at all! And I guess that there are no oversampling plugins for it either. And foobar can handle ipods. And is a phone so important that you have to buy a apple computer just to sync some things between them? Only good thing hardware wise with the macs are the design and the optical output. They are using old 65nm graphicscards and are having alot of hardware issues. ANd mac OSX is actully very unsecure, and there are trojas spreading like aids . The only valid reason I can see with a mac is if you are using programs that does not work on another operatingsystem. Buy B&O then, it's the same idea. lol.

Does not sound like you have much experience with Apple computers and Mac OS X.
Anyway, please do not make this another one of those MS Windows (PC) vs. OS X (Mac) discussions. Which is totally off-topic in regard to the OP.

If you have nothing to contribute in regard to the OP just move on.

 

[Kobra]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bredin /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...They are using old 65nm graphicscards and are having alot of hardware issues. ANd mac OSX is actully very unsecure, and there are trojas spreading like aids . The only valid reason I can see with a mac is if you are using programs that does not work on another operatingsystem. Buy B&O then, it's the same idea. lol.

I sincerely hope that you're ironical, I will interpret it like if you are and see it as a funny comment

And incase you're not, I'll leave it to others to tear you apart...

(

preparing for the possibility of a great flame war

)

 

[Kobra]

Quote:

Originally Posted by craiglester /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm sure if the OP actually had a Mac, he'd have tried this, right?

You're absolutely right, my comment were a bit unnecessary as he's on PC and I was referring to MAC

Though as a former PC guy (been using them for well over the past 19 years) and a recent MAC switcher ( 5 weeks and counting) I sympathize with him and his problem, albeit I think he is out of luck (or at least he wont find a easy fix... like if he'd been on a MAC

)
Quote:

Originally Posted by craiglester /img/forum/go_quote.gif Can't you play FLAC's on a Mac? I don't get why you'd convert if you can? We're all PC in our household, so I've no experience of playing FLAC on a Mac.

FLAC's were my main reason for not switching earlier. I did some research before plunking out my hard earned cash for the MacBook Pro 13. You can play FLAC either using a plugg-in script for iTunes (tried it but have to say it didn't work that well, to much manual work is needed to get all the files in to iTunes) or by using some of the 3rd party players like SongBird, VLC or Play. But as my FLAC library is in the neighbourhood of 16 000 individual songs ( both 16/44 and 24/96) I wanted a player that was good at managing my library. SongBird has a lot of potential, but it's a bit slow at the moment (it runs on JAVA) and needs to be developed further. The interface of SongBird is a mix of iTunes and Foobar.

VLC is great at playing films, but not so great at managing music... Haven't tried Play that much so I can't really comment on it.

So in the end I made the decision to transcode everything to ALAC. The no loss in quality and the great iTunes interface helped in making the decision. MAX made it very simple as it's just a case of "drag 'n dropp". All metadata was retained and I didn't need to do anything special to transcode the high resolution 24/96 FLAC's. iTunes plays the high res music as good as Foobar. After getting all of my music in to the iTunes library I used CoverScout to automatically download jpg's for the albums that missed a cover art. Painless and beautifully!

So, what I mean by all of this is that if you're not a CAD user or a heavy gamer - make the switch to MAC as your life will be so much simpler and easier (at least in front of your computer that is

) The old argument that MAC's are so expensive holds little ground as the majority of all PC users upgrade their hardware many times a year and actually pays more for their PC's. There's no need to run like mad to keep up on a MAC, the life cycle of the MAC hardware platform is measured in three years lapses and not in months as is the case for the PC. After the three year lapse, the MAC wil still have a rather good and strong value on the second hand market, whereas the PC will be of little more use than as anchorage for your boat

( the market value is a fact, not a myth... as opposed to the anchorage thing

)

After all, computers are tools and appliances - not religion or a political movement...

 

[oinkbanana]

can the touch even play 24/96 files? i know ipods cant.
(or are you just going to use it as a remote?)

 

[nullstring]

Wow, Bredin is pretty closed minded and inexperienced.
People like you are very annoying. They talk like they know way more than they do, and it shows through in there writings.
Maybe you're just very young... I am pretty sure I used to do the same thing.

Yes, Macs are overpriced. Yes, itunes isn't perfect. Yes, foobar is awesome.
But, if you think thats the whole story then you're greatly mistaken.

FYI, this is coming from an avid windows/linux user. I've been using foobar for years, and can tell you for sure that it has it's problems. I've talked to the authors of the program, and they were not willing to fix some of them, and I was required to write plug-ins with horrible workarounds in order for it to be useable.

In any case, with my experience from OS's, I've concluded that every OS sucks.
1) Linux is amazing as a server from a functionality standpoint, but isn't incredibly secure; Furthermore, X sucks, but the GUI and back end are separate, so they can be maintained separately.
2) Windows is getting better with newer releases, but pre-vista it was horribly insecure. The strength of windows over linux is the windowing system, which is far better than X.
3) I have limited Mac experience, because I've just never seen a good enough reason to use it extensively. The GUI seems clunky and poorly organized, but again, I haven't used it extensively.
4) various distros of unix are just not used enough; They don't have the features I need. certain unices, such as netbsd are very secure, and would be a better choice as a server for those who are paranoid or really need security, but the ease of maintenance seems to be much lower. Too many amateurs write for linux, and security holes get written into distros.

In the end, I've settled for a Windows workstation that always has dozens of putty sessions open to my Linux server, and a linux laptop that has been optimized for battery life.

And, about the "insecure" comment. You realize that OSX uses a modified freebsd kernel, right? While I can't comment on the front end, the back end should be just as secure as any BSD.. that is to say, it's very secure.

FYI to the OP, couldn't you control foobar using your touch? I wrote a script to control foobar using irssi. It shouldn't be hard to use the touch to control foobar.
Worth a consideration.

 

[dunkadunka]

you could always try 'itunesencode' with foobar, can be found at rarewares.org. it is a way to use itunes to transcode to AAC or ALAC. perhaps it works with hi-rez.