Jon L
For him, f/1.2 is a prime number
- Joined
- May 20, 2003
- Posts
- 4,489
- Likes
- 733
Quote:
Thanks for the info. I would really love to stick with iTunes since I have a lot of CD's already in Apple Lossless, but not at the expensive of sound quality.
It seems like many people are championing Foobar/EAC as the best thing out there, yet one can find very few who have done serious A-B comparisons bet. iTunes and Foobar.
iTunes also seems to tag tracks well. Does Flac tag the title/artist/album info well?
| Originally Posted by donovansmith If you are getting your FLAC files from CD they will be 16b/44KHz anyway and you'd have to upsample them to get to 96KHz, which to me sounds a bit worse than straight 44KHz. I can tell no difference between EAC/FLAC/foobar2000 compared to iTunes/ALAC for my CD rips. foobar2000 does sound a tiny bit better for lossy files since it can put out 24bits, but it's not huge by any means. I started using iTunes again (used it a year ago but stopped) since it is easier to manage my collection with it. It also rips quite fast, I got nearly my whole CD collection ripped to ALAC in 2 days. |
Thanks for the info. I would really love to stick with iTunes since I have a lot of CD's already in Apple Lossless, but not at the expensive of sound quality.
It seems like many people are championing Foobar/EAC as the best thing out there, yet one can find very few who have done serious A-B comparisons bet. iTunes and Foobar.
iTunes also seems to tag tracks well. Does Flac tag the title/artist/album info well?
