[Budrew]

The new ACC, high-rez MP3, AIFF, WAV? WHat's the best option for optimum playback. I'm setting up an audio server for my home office. I really wish that Apple would include a line-out on the iPod so I can use an external DAC! Thanks.

 

[stan23]

ahh.. one other reason to get the new ipod. It has line-out on the dock. I'm gonna test this out on my Meta42 and report back the results.

 

[Budrew]

A line out on the dock? Ahhh...

 

[blessingx]

Quote:

Originally posted by Budrew The new ACC, high-rez MP3, AIFF, WAV? WHat's the best option for optimum playback. I'm setting up an audio server for my home office. I really wish that Apple would include a line-out on the iPod so I can use an external DAC! Thanks.

Is space no issue? Then don't compress at all and go AIFF (same as WAV, but on Mac). Other compressions of ACC or mp3 won't add anything (though there are some theories out there), but will take away. Question is if your ears or equipment can hear it. Check this thread for some opinions. If space is an issue consider lame preset insane/320 or lame preset extreme. You can download an Applescript plugin to use the LAME encoder directly from iTunes (instead of one built into it). As for AAC I think we're all testing that at the moment. Certainly at lower bitrates it blows away mp3, but looks like you're looking at the other end. You may want to do a few tests. Good luck.

 

[D-EJ915]

yeah, rip Wavs, or the mac version, but wavs are actually better (why?)...or 320 for MP3...get a .ogg ripper, and they are much better than mp3's

 

[phonatic]

Quote:

Originally posted by D-EJ915 yeah, rip Wavs, or the mac version, but wavs are actually better (why?)...or 320 for MP3...get a .ogg ripper, and they are much better than mp3's

I don't think there's a difference between WAV and AIFF on Mac versus other platforms...? Same file size, plays the same on all our machines regardless of who originated it. I haven't actually compared them using an editor but I expect WAV or AIFF of same original would look the same whether from Mac or Windows.

I think he wants to play the format directly from his iPod... does iPod handle Ogg?

A good compromise is still LAME-encoded MP3 using one of the alt-presets. Try some AAC at different bitrates and see what you think of it.

 

[grrr223]

From what I hear, AAC is better than MP3 at comparable bit rates, so if you've made the decision to "spend" such and such a bit rate for your music, I think using AAC would give better quality. For example, if you planning on trying 320 kbit LAME encoded MP3s, try 320 bit AACs, or you may even be happy with the AAC quality at a slightly lower bitrate, maybe 256 or something. I haven't done any A/B tests or anything yet, but I'm pretty damned happy even with the 128 bit AACs that I've bought from the Apple Store.

I know hard drive space usually isn't an issue (although I'm about to fill up my 120 gig hard drive

), but if you're using a portable MP3 player, I think you might want to give it at least some consideration. The increased quantity of songs that you get from using say 256 or even 192 kbit if it's acceptable to you, instead of 320 kbit could mean a lot.

I don't think there's any difference between aiff and wav files, they're both just the original digital information, I don't think there's any way for them to sound any different unless the software is doing something weird to one or the other when playing them back.

Since you're using iTunes, I'd not really worry about Ogg, whatever benefits it supposedly has over MP3, I think are minimal over AAC, and since Apple has committed ot fully supporting MP3 and AAC, and will probalby never support Org, why deal with the hassle.

On a somewhat unrelated note, has anyone tried Shorten or Flac or any of the handful of lossless compression formats? I'd like to try some of them, but I'd hate to give up the ease of iTunes, I really do love it.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by D-EJ915 yeah, rip Wavs, or the mac version, but wavs are actually better

Not true at all. WAV is the Windows format, AIFF the Mac format. Both are uncompressed, bit-for-bit audio files.

 

[blessingx]

Quote:

Originally posted by D-EJ915 ...or 320 for MP3...get a .ogg ripper, and they are much better than mp3's

Dude, I really don't see the point of this or your simple mp3's suck comments. Nor if you prefer ogg or wma. What are you saying? Ogg is always better than mp3? Most vorbis supporters don't see an ogg quality advantage over lame presets at the high end. At the other end ogg usually wins, but is beaten by aac, mp3pro, and wma. Repeat question- what tests, at what bitrates, with what encoder have you used? Or where have you even read ogg is "much better than mp3's"?

 

[Oliver :)]

Quote:

Originally posted by Budrew The new ACC, high-rez MP3, AIFF, WAV? WHat's the best option for optimum playback. I'm setting up an audio server for my home office.

As it was said before - if space & money do not qualify as "issues" go for AIFF. Full CD quality, fast ripping. If you want to save on HD-space, go for 320kbps AAC, it sounds just fantastic.

A word of caution though: Be *very* shure to either use a fast Mac or, at all cost, quit all other running applications if on a G3/slow G4. iTunes needs a ton of cycles for HQ AAC encoding, and in my case, produced dropouts if sharing the CPU wit other apps.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by Oliver [/A word of caution though: Be *very* shure to either use a fast Mac or, at all cost, quit all other running applications if on a G3/slow G4. iTunes needs a ton of cycles for HQ AAC encoding, and in my case, produced dropouts if sharing the CPU wit other apps.

Woah, how old is your Mac?

I have an older 733MHz and was ripping an entire CD with about 15-20 other applications open, working with some graphics and didn't get a single dropout. And it took LESS time than ripping the same CD to MP3 at a comparable-bitrate. (I was comparing the two.)

If I had to guess, I'd guess you don't have a lot of RAM?

 

[Oliver :)]

Quote:

Originally posted by MacDEF Woah, how old is your Mac? I have an older 733MHz and was ripping an entire CD with about 15-20 other applications open, working with some graphics and didn't get a single dropout. And it took LESS time than ripping the same CD to MP3 at a comparable-bitrate. (I was comparing the two.) If I had to guess, I'd guess you don't have a lot of RAM?

Ok, it's a 384MB iceBook600, and it rips AIFF at 10x, and less for AAC/MP3 *blush*

I would not go as far as calling a 733 G4 old or slow though...