Which lossless codec uses least resources on iPod?

[peter312]

Does anyone have any idea whether an iPod (mines a Classic) uses a different amount of processing/resources when playing the different lossless codecs (ie ALAC, AIFF and WAV).

As far as I understand it, a PC plays WAV files natively and other lossless codecs have to be converted into WAV first, hence using more system resouces. I wondered therefore if the same was true for a particular codec for the iPod.

Cheers

 

[zip22]

My guess would be the hard drive access would be a bigger drain. ALAC files are significantly smaller so the hard drive wouldn't have to spin up as much.

 

[Halftrack]

Yes. All codecs actually have to be converted from digital to an analog signal, otherwise you wouldn't be able to hear anything. I don't know much else about the process, though.

In terms of processing, the more compression a file has (e.g. uncompressed versus compressed FLAC), the more resources it takes to play it.
As for which uses the least, I would assume that it's AIFF since Apple likes to do subtle jerkish things like that.

 

[krmathis]

They use different resources, but which one use the less may be hard to say.
ALAC -> Less hdd resource, but more cpu resources.
WAV and AIFF -> More hdd resource, but less cpu resources.

I would pick ALAC since I suspect the hdd draw more power than the cpu for the said used resources. But certainly not sure...

 

[Podtweaker]

I would think that the processing resources of Ipods are fairly basic as compared to a PC due to the limited amount of RAM that can be dedicated to any particular function on these portable devices(I could be completely wrong about this, but it seems logical to me). I think that each codec must have a digital "flag" imprinted on the file so that the Ipod(or whatever device) looks at & says that it's something it can decode or it can't & then turns the bits to analog regardless of what codec it happens to be. Now the short answer is the Ipod does'nt have to work as hard playing ALAC compared to WAV or AIFF because there is less HDD spin up due to the smaller file size. I hate to use the term but once things are on the player, the player is just saying"bits are bits" & is pretty indifferent as to what codec it's playing

 

[darkswordsman17]

I'd recommend ALAC as it offers the best tagging capabilities, file size, and performance wise, I would guess there's not a huge difference. Sonically there shouldn't be any difference, although that's a completely different can of worms.