AudioCircle
Industry Circles => Salk Signature Sound => Topic started by: cacophony777 on 1 Sep 2010, 07:40 pm
-
A bit off topic, but I found this interesting:
Apple just announced a new AppleTV product. It's only $99, it has an optical out, and you can stream content directly from your ipod touch, iphone, or ipad (what they call AirPlay). This sounds much more appealing to me than the Squeezebox, with its dated interface and dependency on a computer running a media server.
http://www.apple.com/appletv/
A good solution to those audiophiles that already have a touch, iphone, or ipad?
-
That feature is a possible game changer. Even though I have got a Sonos, it seems as if this will do things cheaper, quicker and more polished, as Apple is known to be the bringer of.
I will wait and see how that AirPlay works before even considering, also an audio quality review would be interesting.
-
Apple has been know to do things cheaper?
Their business model says otherwise.
With that said, Squeezebox and Android phone all the way. The squeezebox app for android allows you to just copy any song from your squeezebox server onto your android phone with one click. Yes, it's nice to have the pretty GUI up on your TV while listening to music. i used to do it with my Mac Mini, which I bought just to do that. That was cool and nifty, and as the above say, looks polished. The squeezebox, in the end, is the far better product for music lovers.
-
In an earlier part of the talk, Steve Jobs said that the existing "AirTunes" was being renamed to "AirPlay". So it sounds like anyone with a regular Airport Express will be able to do this kind of streaming too. (i.e. Audiophiles won't have to pick up an Apple TV.) Should be nice. There are plenty of Airport Express devices floating around cheaply on the used market, and it is known to be a bit-perfect transport for Redbook audio, albeit with moderate jitter levels.
I like this solution a little more than Squeezebox, etc. because it eliminates some storage hassles.
-
Apple has been know to do things cheaper?
Their business model says otherwise.
With that said, Squeezebox and Android phone all the way. The squeezebox app for android allows you to just copy any song from your squeezebox server onto your android phone with one click. Yes, it's nice to have the pretty GUI up on your TV while listening to music. i used to do it with my Mac Mini, which I bought just to do that. That was cool and nifty, and as the above say, looks polished. The squeezebox, in the end, is the far better product for music lovers.
Word!
-
FYI, as for storage hassles/server needed for a squeezebox, with the touch all you need is an external hard drive that can plug directly into the back of the unit.
-
FYI, as for storage hassles/server needed for a squeezebox, with the touch all you need is an external hard drive that can plug directly into the back of the unit.
Yes, but then I need to store my music files in a *third* location (laptop, SB Touch, and portable music player). Streaming directly from a portable media player eliminates one of those....
-
no, you only need it on the external storage drive. you can move it to and from the computer and squeezebox when adding music.
-
no, you only need it on the external storage drive. you can move it to and from the computer and squeezebox when adding music.
If I have to carry around an external storage drive and move it between my laptop and music player, it's not (IMHO) really a convenient solution.
-
I like the idea of avoiding hard drives because of the higher power consumption, noise, and heat. Also, spinning drives can be fragile and failure prone.
-
IMO Sonos still trumps all the other solutions out there. SB is good and cheap(er) if it works well, but there are a lot of users that have frequent dropouts. Plus SB works best when its server is running on a computer. Sonos can run off a plain NAS drive.
Yes, Sonos is expensive, but in the last month or so I have had it, it has been an absolute pleasure to use without a single dropout. Also has a free iPhone app that has 100% functionality of its controller. It imports iTunes (and other) playlists as well quite seamlessly. I moved my iTunes library to a NAS drive, and Sonos plays songs and iTunes playlists off of that extremely reliably.
Sonos gets even stronger if implementing multi-zone or whole-house audio. Synching is perfect - more than can be said about SB.
The ONLY thing the SB has on Sonos is that Sonos can't do hig-rez music as of now. I used Airport Express for a year before, but that too suffered several dropouts and needs iTunes to run. And you can't do different songs on more than 1 unit if you wanted to (unless you had them linked to different libraries running on different computers). Also love the access Sonos gives to Rhapsody, Napster and other thousands of internet radio stations out there, including all my local ones too).
-
A bit off topic, but I found this interesting:
Apple just announced a new AppleTV product. It's only $99, it has an optical out, and you can stream content directly from your ipod touch, iphone, or ipad (what they call AirPlay). This sounds much more appealing to me than the Squeezebox, with its dated interface and dependency on a computer running a media server.
http://www.apple.com/appletv/
A good solution to those audiophiles that already have a touch, iphone, or ipad?
I am not too excited about this new appletv.
I own the previous version of AppleTV (160GB), run by Remote from iphone 4 since I got it, and I love it (all my files are in the cd format). I am not sure if the compressed files from an ipod or iphone, etc, should be considered audiophile. I guess I will stick to my setup until it lasts.
-
I am not sure if the compressed files from an ipod or iphone, etc, should be considered audiophile. I guess I will stick to my setup until it lasts.
Various formats are supported, including lossless:
HE-AAC (V1), AAC (16 to 320 Kbps), protected AAC (from iTunes Store), MP3 (16 to 320 Kbps), MP3 VBR, Audible (formats 2, 3, and 4), Apple Lossless, AIFF, and WAV;
-
I have a 160g ATV collecting dust in my closet. At the time I liked it because I could store my music collection local on the HDD without using computer access. It worked decent as a media server until I got my SB Touch. Biggest hang up I had with the ATV was lack of file support for hi rez and flac. The Touch has been perfect for my needs as it supports basically everything and when hooked up to a quality DAC it sounds great. I've taken it a step further and have Bolder mods and power supply that took it even further in SQ.
Seems the new ATV should work just fine as a cheap media server solution as long as you don't care about hi rez or non-supported files. As someone mentioned, the jury is out on how it will sound. Maybe we will see some nifty mods for it. I hear the Bolder Mac Mini power supply makes a pretty substantial improvement.
-
If I have to carry around an external storage drive and move it between my laptop and music player, it's not (IMHO) really a convenient solution.
I know your preference is different(you like Apple), and that is fine. But moving a 1 pound hard drive once a week or so to add a CD is hardly making anyone go out of their way.
Its nice being able to read it off your ipod, ipad or whatever you have. Whats it really matter considering you already have that same music right there on your computer?
I had completely forgotten about the lack of FLAC support. Not thanks Apple, you are still making yourself fail with having to control every little thing.
-
IMO Sonos still trumps all the other solutions out there. SB is good and cheap(er) if it works well, but there are a lot of users that have frequent dropouts. Plus SB works best when its server is running on a computer. Sonos can run off a plain NAS drive.
Yes, Sonos is expensive, but in the last month or so I have had it, it has been an absolute pleasure to use without a single dropout. Also has a free iPhone app that has 100% functionality of its controller. It imports iTunes (and other) playlists as well quite seamlessly. I moved my iTunes library to a NAS drive, and Sonos plays songs and iTunes playlists off of that extremely reliably.
Sonos gets even stronger if implementing multi-zone or whole-house audio. Synching is perfect - more than can be said about SB.
The ONLY thing the SB has on Sonos is that Sonos can't do hig-rez music as of now. I used Airport Express for a year before, but that too suffered several dropouts and needs iTunes to run. And you can't do different songs on more than 1 unit if you wanted to (unless you had them linked to different libraries running on different computers). Also love the access Sonos gives to Rhapsody, Napster and other thousands of internet radio stations out there, including all my local ones too).
Whoever told you the SB drops out is incorrect. One model had that issue(Duet). Also, there are apps for both the ipod/ipad/iphone and android that control any SB in the house same as a Sonos. The only difference I found with Sonos and SB is price and hi-rez music.
-
In an earlier part of the talk, Steve Jobs said that the existing "AirTunes" was being renamed to "AirPlay". So it sounds like anyone with a regular Airport Express will be able to do this kind of streaming too. (i.e. Audiophiles won't have to pick up an Apple TV.) Should be nice. There are plenty of Airport Express devices floating around cheaply on the used market, and it is known to be a bit-perfect transport for Redbook audio, albeit with moderate jitter levels.
As a patent attorney, one of my areas of expertise is wireless communications. I guarantee that Airport Express is not "bit perfect". No wireless system is, and many wired systems are not. They may have low rates of bit errors, but they're not "bit perfect".
-
Various formats are supported, including lossless:
HE-AAC (V1), AAC (16 to 320 Kbps), protected AAC (from iTunes Store), MP3 (16 to 320 Kbps), MP3 VBR, Audible (formats 2, 3, and 4), Apple Lossless, AIFF, and WAV;
The problem is that if you have a reasonably large music collection and lossless, you won't be able to get all your music on your iPod/touch. To me, that's a significant detriment. I have all my music ripped to one large drive in my "server" computer, and I can access all of it at any time. I also have an iPod, but use highly compressed music on it, so that I have my entire collection on there. I listen to it in the car and for non-critical listening.
-
The problem is that if you have a reasonably large music collection and lossless, you won't be able to get all your music on your iPod/touch. To me, that's a significant detriment. I have all my music ripped to one large drive in my "server" computer, and I can access all of it at any time.
Um... you don't have to use an iPod/etc, the ability to do is just an extra feature.
-
I've been using SB's for quite a few years now. I just got an SB Touch so I could play hi-rez music. I do not use the analog outs and run the digital outs to an outboard AVA DAC.
One comment I would have is that in order to put music in an iPod (I use a iPod Touch to listen to podcasts while on the go), I sync to iTunes on my computer. I just picked up a small 2.5" USB hard drive (less than a pound) that is only slightly larger than my iPod Touch. I rip music and and transfer it to the hard drive as well. Not much different in terms of effort. I can then plug the hard drive into the touch and don't need a dedicated music server (although I still use one).
I don't normally have any problem with drop-outs. But with the hard drive, there are no drop-outs. If I didn't already have a dedicated music server, I think I would probably just use a USB hard drive and be done with it. It doesn't get much more simple.
I can also use iPeng on my iPad Touch to control all the SB's in the house remotely. And I just installed a similar app on my new Android phone to do the same (although I have not tested that app yet).
The whole system works pretty good for me.
Just one person's approach...
- Jim
-
Question...
Could you use an iPod with the USB port on an SB Touch? I've never tried this but it might work for those who have an extensive music collection on an iPod. Just curious.
- Jim
-
The problem is that if you have a reasonably large music collection and lossless, you won't be able to get all your music on your iPod/touch. To me, that's a significant detriment. I have all my music ripped to one large drive in my "server" computer, and I can access all of it at any time. I also have an iPod, but use highly compressed music on it, so that I have my entire collection on there. I listen to it in the car and for non-critical listening.
Exactly. I love my iPod but it isn't big enough for me to use a true music server. My solution has been to keep 2 iTunes libraries. One that is compressed and one that is uncompressed. Compressed feeds my iPod/iPhone. The uncompressed feeds my SB Touch. If I get unsupported files that I cannot put into iTunes, I simply drop it in my iTunes folder manually. iTunes doesn't see it, but my SB still does.
-
The problem is that if you have a reasonably large music collection and lossless, you won't be able to get all your music on your iPod/touch. To me, that's a significant detriment. I have all my music ripped to one large drive in my "server" computer, and I can access all of it at any time. I also have an iPod, but use highly compressed music on it, so that I have my entire collection on there. I listen to it in the car and for non-critical listening.
totally agree; as I understand --to run uncompressed files thru new ATV, you need a computer or a storage, as there is not enough memory on an Ipad/pod/phone.
As for differences between AIFF and Hi-Rez files, so far I could not hear it( digital out to AVA Insight+ DAC from either Macbookpro (WAV) or appletv (AIFF)). I do not see any reason to switch to WAF or FLAC from AIFF. there were a number of discussions at AC including blind tests hi-rez vs redbook, and as i remember the results are random.
-
My solution has been to keep 2 iTunes libraries. One that is compressed and one that is uncompressed.
iTunes now has a checkbox option to "Convert higher bit rate songs to 128kbps AAC" for synchronization to an iPod. It is located on the Summary tab when the iPod is connected. This would avoid having to maintain two separate libraries.
As for differences between AIFF and Hi-Rez files, so far I could not hear it (digital out to AVA Insight+ DAC from either Macbookpro (WAF) or appletv (AIFF)).
When you say WAF, are you referring to WAV files? I use WAV files, but I can't say I hear a difference between WAV, AIFF and Apple Lossless. But I would think you might be able to hear an improvement with a high-resolution file (24-bit / 96KHz or higher) over a 16-bit / 44.1KHz Redbook file, if the high-res file is truly high-res and not simply an upsampled Redbook file.
As far as the new Apple TV, I can't find any specs one way or the other, but I assumed it downsampled everything to a maximum of 16-bit / 48KHz, just like the existing Apple TV and Airport Express, so listening to the output of the ATV may not be a valid comparison test.
Steve
-
I do not see any reason to switch to WAV or FLAC from AIFF.
WAV & AIFF are, as i understand, essentially the same format.
dave
-
WAV & AIFF are, as i understand, essentially the same format.
dave
you are right, I meant to say I run hi-rez FLAC using a plugin or a converter as mac does not support flac. I downloaded the hi-rez flac from hdtracks and then converted the file using a plugin ( do not remeber which one). I will double check tonight how it is done as it was about year ago since I did it.
-
I just picked up a small 2.5" USB hard drive (less than a pound) that is only slightly larger than my iPod Touch. I rip music and and transfer it to the hard drive as well. Not much different in terms of effort. I can then plug the hard drive into the touch and don't need a dedicated music server (although I still use one).
- Jim
Cool! What about playlists from songs on the hard drive? How easy is it to create those? Also, can you create automated playlists from the USB hard drive songs using tags (artist, genre, year etc), and more important to me, ratings? Most of my listening is through automated playlists via iTunes, so integration with iTunes playlists - while not having to run a SB server - is important to me.
-
While this is completely off-topic, using the small server onboard the Touch provides the worst usage and quality of playback from the device. The amount of resources available using the Touch in this fashion may take quite some time to acquire the music files and to set up playlists.
Using the Touch wired and running SBS on a remote PC provides the best listening and usage scenario.
Each device being discussed in this thread has different strengths. IMO, the Touch provides the best cost to sound quality tradeoff when done properly.
-
I had completely forgotten about the lack of FLAC support. Not thanks Apple, you are still making yourself fail with having to control every little thing.
Agreed. They try to control everything, charge way too much and cannot even put out a fully functional product; iPhone 4 is a good example. They also don't admit when they make mistakes. No Apple for me; not yet anyway.
Jim, which Android phone did you get? I use Squeeze Commander with my Droid to control my Sqeezebox and it works flawlessly, for what its worth.
-
Agreed. They try to control everything, charge way too much and cannot even put out a fully functional product; iPhone 4 is a good example. They also don't admit when they make mistakes. No Apple for me; not yet anyway.
Jim, which Android phone did you get? I use Squeeze Commander with my Droid to control my Sqeezebox and it works flawlessly, for what its worth.
Yep Apple has some controlling tactics in their business plan. Won't argue that. But for me I like stuff that just WORKS. I've dealt with way too much crap in PC land for many years. I've gone mac and will never own another PC again. Drives me crazy that I have use a PC at work and deal with the constant updates, crashes, and general slowness. To each their own. But this is off topic.
-
Cool! What about playlists from songs on the hard drive? How easy is it to create those? Also, can you create automated playlists from the USB hard drive songs using tags (artist, genre, year etc), and more important to me, ratings? Most of my listening is through automated playlists via iTunes, so integration with iTunes playlists - while not having to run a SB server - is important to me.
If you are referring to the SB Touch, it will bring in your Playlists from iTunes. I know there is a way to make your own playlists on the Touch itself but I have not done it.
If you are referring to the ATV, it simply brings in everything you have in iTunes that you opt to sync.
-
iTunes now has a checkbox option to "Convert higher bit rate songs to 128kbps AAC" for synchronization to an iPod. It is located on the Summary tab when the iPod is connected. This would avoid having to maintain two separate libraries.
I've heard this is VERY slow for it to do these conversions. Plus it only does that at 128 AAC I believe. I find it easier just to rip twice. Once in AppleLossless for my music server and the other in 256 AAC for my iPod.
-
Yep Apple has some controlling tactics in their business plan. Won't argue that. But for me I like stuff that just WORKS. I've dealt with way too much crap in PC land for many years. I've gone mac and will never own another PC again. Drives me crazy that I have use a PC at work and deal with the constant updates, crashes, and general slowness. To each their own. But this is off topic.
+1
I have to use a PC at work, but prefer my mac on my free time.
Nuance, please enlighten me regarding a non-functional Iphone4? Unles you are referring to the the drop of the signal if the antena elements are conected with left hand, I am suprised. That problem, btw, is common for most of the smartphones (according to apple :))
-
If you are referring to the SB Touch, it will bring in your Playlists from iTunes. I know there is a way to make your own playlists on the Touch itself but I have not done it.
If you are referring to the ATV, it simply brings in everything you have in iTunes that you opt to sync.
I am referring to SB using songs stored on a USB hard drive (not on the computer running SB server). Can it make auto playlists from that using tags?
-
sarge:
I just posted that it could make playlists but it will take some time for this and also acquiring the music files. There are only limited resources available on the small local server as I stated above.
-
+1
I have to use a PC at work, but prefer my mac on my free time.
Nuance, please enlighten me regarding a non-functional Iphone4? Unles you are referring to the the drop of the signal if the antena elements are conected with left hand, I am suprised. That problem, btw, is common for most of the smartphones (according to apple :))
While I have not yet made the leap to Mac (just wary of s/w that may not be usable on Mac, actually not sure how many of that I use are there), Apple sure makes usability a key aspect of their products and few products come close to replicating its ease and usability. iPod / iPhone 3GS are products that once I used them I pretty much shut my eyes to anything not from Apple subsystem. Yes they are not perfect, but they are the closest of all there is out there (at least by the criteria important to me). Usability across products is EXTREMELY helpful, so I don't have to manage different things in different ways. Same itunes playlists are available on all products seamlessly, so I dont have to create different versions for computer / ipod / iphone / ipod for car. As people have noted, it just works.
Sonos is the only other product I have encountered so far that seems to get it. It just works. While I was setting it up, my wife was quite wary of everything wireless. In 2 days of usage, she was a convert. Small attention to details set it apart from SB from what I have read. E.g. if I have 3 zones in the house, it is very easy to link them to play same song across all zones. SB is not difficult - maybe just 2-3 clicks more, but Sonos is just easier. SB is known not to have completely synced music across zones, Sonos is perfect. If you want to change volume of all three zones, in SB you have to go to each zone separately and change it; in Sonos it is available in one screen. How much of a premium one is willing to pay for such things is of course a personal preference, but over the years I have gone from tinkering with everything to using products that just let me enjoy what I want when I want.
Now back to waiting for the SongTowers :)
-
sarge:
I just posted that it could make playlists but it will take some time for this and also acquiring the music files. There are only limited resources available on the small local server as I stated above.
Ah ok - thanks lcrim! And it can pick tags from the songs to make automated playlists too? What about ratings, can I rate songs and create playlists based off of that? How do I do that?
-
sarge:
Here's a resource for you. http://forums.slimdevices.com/forumdisplay.php?f=34
You'll have to join the forum to directly ask your questions. Some USB HD's are not even recognized by the TinyServer onboard the Touch. This functionality is not the strongest part of the Touch. I use my 2 Touches wired w/ an older laptop located elsewhere for noise isolation w/ several USB HD connected to that laptop for music storage.
Lots of information on that forum.
-
Jim, which Android phone did you get? I use Squeeze Commander with my Droid to control my Sqeezebox and it works flawlessly, for what its worth.
I got the HTC Evo 4G. I wanted something I could use to tether a notebook to while on the road. I got that working with 3G and did a net speed test. It was actually faster than the DSL line in our shop! Too bad we don't have 4G service here yet. When we do, I may just get rid of my home cable modem and shop DSL line. With the Evo, you can use it as a hotspot and connect up to eight devices.
I'll check out Squeeze Commander soon.
- Jim
-
No data caps with that sharing plan?!
-
+1
I have to use a PC at work, but prefer my mac on my free time.
Nuance, please enlighten me regarding a non-functional Iphone4? Unles you are referring to the the drop of the signal if the antena elements are conected with left hand, I am suprised. That problem, btw, is common for most of the smartphones (according to apple :))
I am referring to the signal issue, yes. And I assure you, the death grip signal dropouts aren't frequent of all smartphones. Apple can't even admit they screwed up and instead of fixing the issue claim its a common problem among smartphones (a lie) and give out free bumpers rather than fix the issues. Not cool. I wont even get into the overheating issues they have with the imacs and mac minis (I work in IT and deal with Mac and PC failures frequently). This is totally off topic, but they have had and still do have quality control and customer service issues. PM me if you want to continue the convo, as I don't want to derail the thread any more than I already have. To each their own I say. As long as you're happy. :-)
Jim, you have great taste in phones. The EVO 4G is awesome, especially now that its running Froyo (Android 2.2).
-
I am referring to the signal issue, yes. And I assure you, the death grip signal dropouts aren't frequent of all smartphones. Apple can't even admit they screwed up and instead of fixing the issue claim its a common problem among smartphones (a lie) and give out free bumpers rather than fix the issues. Not cool. I wont even get into the overheating issues they have with the imacs and mac minis (I work in IT and deal with Mac and PC failures frequently). This is totally off topic, but they have had and still do have quality control and customer service issues. PM me if you want to continue the convo, as I don't want to derail the thread any more than I already have. To each their own I say. As long as you're happy. :-)
Jim, you have great taste in phones. The EVO 4G is awesome, especially now that its running Froyo (Android 2.2).
well the thread is about new appletv, so i think it is ok to discuss pros and cons of apple products. I personally have not faced yet the reliability issue of macs yet nor iphone or ipod. My choice is based on my experience with PC vs. Mac or iphone vs another smartphone (not android, though). There is no overheating issue with a macbook. AppleTV gets warm, but if the user follows the instructions, there is no issue either. As for the signal loss, you have not seen the Apple's presentation on it. They do not claim anything, they tested certain smartphones of the leading companies and taped the results. check it out. If they lied in the presentations, then they should expect paying giants fines to those producers.
To each their own, but I have chosen my own from my experience and yes I am happy with my choice. Thanks.
-
Edited because this is getting goofy.
You like what you like based on your experiences, and I like what I like based one mine. Go with what you like, and enjoy.
For what its worth, I like Apple's stuff when its working correctly (same goes for PC). I just don't care for Apple's attitude and customer service woes (we've had a lot). In the end, chose which better fits your needs. If you want that new, sexy look, Apple is the kind. If you want to be able to customize, go PC. Both are good at what they do when they're working properly. :thumb:
-
ok, if you saw their smarthone presentation, then as I understand you said in the previous message that they "lied" meaning they made up all the results for the signal loss in the smartphones by Samsung, Nokia, blackburry and others??? I think that is silly alright. who do you think they are? Can you imagine all the accused producers decide to take it to the court and win the case? That "fake" would be a bit risky from apple's point of view.
As for overheating, again I have not faced it, but I admit I did not care enough and I have not studied the statistics. However, I cannot see if the problems were so significant, how apple would sell so many iphones, ipods, or ipads. BTW, I "hated' macs just about 18 months ago until I bought one!
Later then, and hopefully this thread is still good tomorrow.
-
Didn't mean to start an Apple vs Windows/Linux/etc thread :D
I just saw the new AppleTV as an interesting substitute for something like the Wadia dock for getting digital out from ipod/iphone.
Currently I just use a CD player, but I have an ipod touch, so perhaps:
ipod touch -> [wireless] appletv -> dacmagic -> integrated amp -> songtowers
-
Didn't mean to start an Apple vs Windows/Linux/etc thread :D
I just saw the new AppleTV as an interesting substitute for something like the Wadia dock for getting digital out from ipod/iphone.
Currently I just use a CD player, but I have an ipod touch, so perhaps:
ipod touch -> [wireless] appletv -> dacmagic -> integrated amp -> songtowers
yeah, but how about using a SB touch instead :D
sorry for stealing the thread, it is just so much fun...
-
ok, if you saw their smarthone presentation, then as I understand you said in the previous message that they "lied" meaning they made up all the results for the signal loss in the smartphones by Samsung, Nokia, blackburry and others??? I think that is silly alright. who do you think they are? Can you imagine all the accused producers decide to take it to the court and win the case? That "fake" would be a bit risky from apple's point of view.
As for overheating, again I have not faced it, but I admit I did not care enough and I have not studied the statistics. However, I cannot see if the problems were so significant, how apple would sell so many iphones, ipods, or ipads. BTW, I "hated' macs just about 18 months ago until I bought one!
Later then, and hopefully this thread is still good tomorrow.
Other websites have created counter videos to prove Apple's "death grip" video was ridiculous. These other sites hold the phones in a realistic manner, just like someone would out in the real world and show that Apple's new phone has a serious flaw, while other smartphones might only lose a bar on rare occasions. We can talk more about this over PM's if you'd like, but let's stop over-running the thread with this stuff. This is suppose to be about the AppleTV. ;) I also edited my previous post because I don't want to argue like this. We're grown men and debating nothing more than our opinions. That is what is silly, don't you think? :oops: :duh: :)
-
No data caps with that sharing plan?!
No, it is unlimited (at least for now). They charge $30 per month extra to enable this service. However, I have found a nice little app that will allow you to hook up a notebook via USB without paying anything extra. You can obviously only run one device at a time, but you don't have to pay extra since Sprint thinks it is the phone making the requests.
Tethering is why I went with this phone. The iPhone has this feature as well, but ATT will not support it. That, coupled with the future promise of 4G speeds made the Evo on Sprint a very attractive alternative for me. It is probably not for everyone, but I am extremely pleased with my choice. I have an iPod Touch so I am fairly familiar with the iPhone user interface and I have to say I prefer Android 2.2 - not by a lot, mind you, but I do prefer it.
- Jim
-
I am not a regular on the Salk circle but this thread intrigued me. Apple TV is very attractive at $99. I wonder what Google TV's settop box will do audio-wise as well. Anyhow do you guys think it makes any sense to use the HDMI for video and use the optical out to an external dac?
Paul
-
Tethering is why I went with this phone. The iPhone has this feature as well, but ATT will not support it. That, coupled with the future promise of 4G speeds made the Evo on Sprint a very attractive alternative for me. It is probably not for everyone, but I am extremely pleased with my choice. I have an iPod Touch so I am fairly familiar with the iPhone user interface and I have to say I prefer Android 2.2 - not by a lot, mind you, but I do prefer it.
- Jim
Jim, regading the tethering, I think ATT supports it now, 'cause
I have picked 2 Gb data plan for iphone 4 with tethering for extra 20 bucks/month (good thing my company pays for that!). Now I have not used my cell phone for tethering (as an access point to i-net from another devices) yet, so I cannot verify.
Art
P.S. I just checked the att webpage, att seems to support tethering. It does require iOS4, which can be installed on iphone 3G as well.
-
Jim, regading the tethering, I think ATT supports it now, 'cause
I have picked 2 Gb data plan for iphone 4 with tethering for extra 20 bucks/month (good thing my company pays for that!). Now I have not used my cell phone for tethering (as an access point to i-net from another devices) yet, so I cannot verify.
Art
Thanks for that. For a long time, ATT fought Apple over this issue. They wanted Apple to disable this feature because they worried about not having enough bandwidth to support the added traffic, especially in NYC, LA and other larger metro areas. Apple refused. Apparently they worked things out.
- Jim
-
i don't think this has been brought up yet, but can apple/itunes handle hi-rez files or not? google seems to fail here. it seems most people confuse hi-rez with lossless. is there a way to convert 96/24 to a format apple can handle or to flac and then use one of the flac decoders? sorry if this has been covered, i just browsed over the last few pages..
-
I do not think ATV can, but the hi-rez FLAC files can be played from itunes installed on a pc or mac using a plugin, that can be found here on AC' apple core circle. you would need to connect your DAC or HT reciever directly to the computer using digital out bypassing ATV. so squezbox is a better choice if hi-rez files to be used.
-
yeah thats what i thought. my touch is working fine now for 96/24 but for $99 if i could get appleTV to do it, and get 5.1 playback and movies too, that would be a good thing. someday, someone will get smart enough to put this all together into an easy to use and inexpensive box and everyone will start to use them. until then, you will never get the average joe (or my mom and dad) to switch to this.
-
sarge:
Here's a resource for you. http://forums.slimdevices.com/forumdisplay.php?f=34
You'll have to join the forum to directly ask your questions. Some USB HD's are not even recognized by the TinyServer onboard the Touch. This functionality is not the strongest part of the Touch. I use my 2 Touches wired w/ an older laptop located elsewhere for noise isolation w/ several USB HD connected to that laptop for music storage.
Lots of information on that forum.
Thanks for the link. It had a good amount of info there. As you mentioned, connecting SB directly to USB is not optimal - apart from long scan times, people have also reported reduced audio quality. Of course, if a separate DAC is used that may not be the case. Seems there is also the functionality to build complex playlists using SQL queries if desired. For me, I am happy to not spend the time and effort for that and also because it works better for whole-house audio. If it were just for one location, I may look more closely at this.
-
I am not a regular on the Salk circle but this thread intrigued me. Apple TV is very attractive at $99. I wonder what Google TV's settop box will do audio-wise as well. Anyhow do you guys think it makes any sense to use the HDMI for video and use the optical out to an external dac?
Paul
Google is making something along these lines? Wow...they just don't quit. :) I've heard rumors they are creating an OS for laptops and PC's too. If it's anything like Apple's OS it will be worth looking in to IMO.
-
Logitech is supposed to be on board for the Google set top box http://www.pcworld.com/article/199218/logitechs_google_tv_box_named_will_control_your_life_this_fall.html
It sure would be nice if they pay attention to audio on this one. I've used Boxee with my laptop and although buggy I love the TV over IP concept done with a smooth interface for the entertainment center 8)
-
Apple consciously, intentionally took flac support out of iTunes circa version 3.something or 4.something. Unforgivable. Switch to their playing devices at your peril.
Flac is wonderful because it is open source and free, as well as lossless and more or less perfect compression (you might squeeze another 2% with some other algorithm if you really really try, but why bother). That genie cannot be put back in the bottle. With flac, you own your music, permanently.
Apple's ploy was quite cynical and Microsoftish (or old-school Applish, in fact).
btw the iTunes interface is horrible wrt long-term management of your music collection if it's reasonably large (say, more than 1000 albums). One little screw up and iTunes can lose whatever info you entered, and you have to work really, really hard to bring it back to how it was. Happened to me more than once via inadvertent transfer of music files from one external drive to another--much foul language was shouted at the time.
Slimserver is not perfect, but ugly duckling issues notwithstanding, it is far more efficient. Learn it once, use it until someone inherits your stereo.
-
If you want to stay with the Mac platform and store files in iTunes, consider layering in Pure Music. He allows for hi rez music and also supports FLAC.
Steve
-
You can also always convert FLAC to Apple Lossless...easy, fast, no change in sound.
-
You can also always convert FLAC to Apple Lossless...easy, fast, no change in sound.
Easy? It takes quite a while and duplicates files. I wrote a unix script to automate the process and erase the files immediately after conversion, which helps to avoid the duplicate files but that was a bit of work, not the least bit accessible to your typical Apple customer, and why the hell should Apple users pay Apple above-average money for a product that does that to its users?
Anyway, you miss the point of flac. It's open source. It's free. No corporation can tell you what to do with your music when it is in that format. Thirty years from now, when your DAC is still going strong (get one from Frank :wink:), your flac will be just as playable. Apple file format? Who knows...
I don't understand why people cut a corporation such as Apple any slack when it screws us over like this. People had a flac collection and Apple intentionally makes it unavailable for playback? Unacceptable...
-
If you want to stay with the Mac platform and store files in iTunes, consider layering in Pure Music. He allows for hi rez music and also supports FLAC.
Steve
Thanks, I'll pass that on. Of course we should mention that it costs $99, whereas the slimserver is open source and free.
-
Actually, I think that was an intro offer. It's now $129. :roll:
-
Easy? It takes quite a while and duplicates files. I wrote a unix script to automate the process and erase the files immediately after conversion, which helps to avoid the duplicate files but that was a bit of work, not the least bit accessible to your typical Apple customer, and why the hell should Apple users pay Apple above-average money for a product that does that to its users?
Anyway, you miss the point of flac. It's open source. It's free. No corporation can tell you what to do with your music when it is in that format. Thirty years from now, when your DAC is still going strong (get one from Frank :wink:), your flac will be just as playable. Apple file format? Who knows...
Sure, if you have a huge FLAC library, the batch process will take some time. But you just let it run while you do something else...its not like you have to babysit it or constantly fiddle with it. I never had so many to convert that duplicate files was an issue, and if I did I would just run an Automator script to do the housecleaning for me.
I don't get all this rhetoric about "being told what do with my music"...how are you restricted by using ALAC in any way? Non-Apple products support it (Squeezebox), and it will play on any computer on the planet. FLAC doesn't work on Zune either (which supports WMA Lossless...conspiracy!! :lol:). And if ALAC support will vanish in some post-apocalyptic version of the future, I will just convert it to whatever is around at the time.
Its really a non-issue, unless you want it to be.
Good call on Frank's DAC, though! 8)
-
I don't get all this rhetoric about "being told what do with my music"...
Yes, there clearly is plenty that you don't get on the topic. What I don't get is why you persist on lecturing others about things that you obviously do not get.
Apple definitely gets it. That is why they make it so difficult for you to use flac in iTunes. Why don't you get that it was very, very wrong to intentionally obstruct flac files in iTunes?
Really, why don't you get that? It is very obvious. Do tell. Why do you use that disrespectful tone towards someone that is giving you a heads-up about how you are getting screwed?
The advice that you gave, to supposedly easily convert files to the apple file format, was clearly bad advice. Why don't you just admit that you made a mistake?
Please, stop giving people bad advice and doing the legwork for a corporation that tries to treat your music files as though it is theirs.
-
The irony of your post is hilarious. I am being disrespectful? :duh:
Ok, we get it, you don't like Apple. Thats fine. But the notion that people are "getting screwed" because Apple doesn't support one of the many equally suitable lossless formats out there is a bit of a stretch, I have to say. As I said Microsoft won't let you use FLAC on their Zune players either. Big deal. Yes, it would be nice if everything out there supported every format under the sun, but nothing does. And there isn't anything out there (lossless or lossy) that doesn't have at least one equivalent, either. Its a file format, not a religion.
I will admit to making a mistake, and that was attempting to engage in a rational discussion with someone clearly not capable of such.
-
I'm trying to think of a thread that has less relevance to Salk Speakers than this one, but the only one that comes to mind is thread about my new puppy. No. Off. Settle. Maybe some reports will come in from RMAF and get us back on track.
-
The irony of your post is hilarious. I am being disrespectful? :duh:
Ok, we get it, you don't like Apple. Thats fine. But the notion that people are "getting screwed" because Apple doesn't support one of the many equally suitable lossless formats out there is a bit of a stretch, I have to say. As I said Microsoft won't let you use FLAC on their Zune players either. Big deal. Yes, it would be nice if everything out there supported every format under the sun, but nothing does. And there isn't anything out there (lossless or lossy) that doesn't have at least one equivalent, either. Its a file format, not a religion.
I will admit to making a mistake, and that was attempting to engage in a rational discussion with someone clearly not capable of such.
The problem here is that I was just trying to correct some pretty mistaken lousy advice from you. Instead of just admitting that you had no clue, you proceeded to be disrespectful while, apparently, insisting on sucking up to all things "Apple" regardless of what they may actually be doing.
Now you bring Microsoft into it? Dude, it's the squeezebox that you need to be talking about. Who wanted a Zune player here??
The squeezebox is a better choice for music playback, and support for flac is the most obvious reason why. Just because you refuse to understand it, that doesn't mean that you get a pass on misinforming people. Just man up on having been clueless and move on.
-
I'm trying to think of a thread that has less relevance to Salk Speakers than this one, but the only one that comes to mind is thread about my new puppy. No. Off. Settle. Maybe some reports will come in from RMAF and get us back on track.
Look, if it's that bad, so be it. I see the subject title is "New AppleTV as transport", so as far as I can tell, within the thread, the content is accurate.
Maybe the whole thread should be elsewhere, that certainly is not for me to decide... but Salk speaker purchasers deserve accurate information as much as anyone.
-
The problem here is that I was just trying to correct some pretty mistaken lousy advice from you. Instead of just admitting that you had no clue, you proceeded to be disrespectful while, apparently, insisting on sucking up to all things "Apple" regardless of what they may actually be doing.
Now you bring Microsoft into it? Dude, it's the squeezebox that you need to be talking about. Who wanted a Zune player here??
The squeezebox is a better choice for music playback, and support for flac is the most obvious reason why. Just because you refuse to understand it, that doesn't mean that you get a pass on misinforming people. Just man up on having been clueless and move on.
All I said was that you can convert from one lossless format to another. That isn't "pretty mistaken lousy advice", its the truth. If that rates as "sucking up to Apple" in your book I don't know what to tell you. And what was that about being disrespectful, again?
I never said a Squeezebox was a bad choice for a transport...in fact, its excellent (and supports ALAC as well as FLAC, oddly enough). If someone has a wealth of different formats and doesn't want to convert it makes an even better choice. I never said anything to the contrary. There is nothing I am "refusing to understand". I understand this sort of thing quite well, thank you.
I mentioned the Zune to show that its not merely an Apple decision to not support FLAC. That part, at the very least, I figured would be obvious.
I don't know why you are taking something as trivial as a file format or music server so personally...its just music, and it will play no matter what you use.
-
All I said was that you can convert from one lossless format to another. That isn't "pretty mistaken lousy advice", its the truth. If that rates as "sucking up to Apple" in your book I don't know what to tell you. And what was that about being disrespectful, again?
I guess I need to remind you of what you wrote? "You can also always convert FLAC to Apple Lossless...easy, fast, no change in sound."
Clearly mistaken and lousy advice. There is nothing "easy" or "fast" about it. I stand by my remark. You are disrespectful, among other things, because you distort the record instead of simply admitting that you do not know what you are talking about.
-
I guess I need to remind you of what you wrote? "You can also always convert FLAC to Apple Lossless...easy, fast, no change in sound."
Clearly mistaken and lousy advice. There is nothing "easy" or "fast" about it. I stand by my remark. You are disrespectful, among other things, because you distort the record instead of simply admitting that you do not know what you are talking about.
This has gone from silly to sad, and I won't comment any further as this has gone too far afield from the purpose of the the thread.
But for those still curious, last night I transferred a live album I purchased in FLAC to ALAC using Max. It took:
1. Maybe 3, 4 clicks to get it going (a 5-year old could do it)
2. Took about 12 seconds per track to convert (faster than re-ripping a disc)
3. Sounded exactly the same.
So, again, very easy, fast, and no loss in sound quality. :duh: Really not that hard to comprehend.
Anyone wanting more info without "input" from trolls can feel free to PM me and I would be happy to oblige. 8)
-
I guess I need to remind you of what you wrote? "You can also always convert FLAC to Apple Lossless...easy, fast, no change in sound."
Clearly mistaken and lousy advice. There is nothing "easy" or "fast" about it. I stand by my remark. You are disrespectful, among other things, because you distort the record instead of simply admitting that you do not know what you are talking about.
Actually I find it quite simple and fast to convert between WAV, AIFF, FLAC and Apple Lossless. It's just a matter of the correct conversion application, disk space, basic knowledge of folders(directories, filesystem) and compute cycles. Perhaps if one is challenged by any of those aspects then, sure, call it difficult.
-
This has gone from silly to sad, and I won't comment any further as this has gone too far afield from the purpose of the the thread.
But for those still curious, last night I transferred a live album I purchased in FLAC to ALAC using Max. It took:
1. Maybe 3, 4 clicks to get it going (a 5-year old could do it)
2. Took about 12 seconds per track to convert (faster than re-ripping a disc)
3. Sounded exactly the same.
So, again, very easy, fast, and no loss in sound quality. :duh: Really not that hard to comprehend.
Anyone wanting more info without "input" from trolls can feel free to PM me and I would be happy to oblige. 8)
Max is a great app for that. It even allows you to do multiple conversions at once even making the process faster with larger libraries.
-
I'm trying to think of a thread that has less relevance to Salk Speakers than this one, but the only one that comes to mind is thread about my new puppy. No. Off. Settle. Maybe some reports will come in from RMAF and get us back on track.
I never understood why this thread is here. Can a moderator move it?
At least the puppy thread involves a key member of the Salk team, and I don't see any needless bickering going on there either.
-
This has gone from silly to sad, and I won't comment any further as this has gone too far afield from the purpose of the the thread.
But for those still curious, last night I transferred a live album I purchased in FLAC to ALAC using Max. It took:
1. Maybe 3, 4 clicks to get it going (a 5-year old could do it)
2. Took about 12 seconds per track to convert (faster than re-ripping a disc)
3. Sounded exactly the same.
So, again, very easy, fast, and no loss in sound quality. :duh: Really not that hard to comprehend.
Anyone wanting more info without "input" from trolls can feel free to PM me and I would be happy to oblige. 8)
All of that work comes to you courtesy of Apple. All that hassle, for no good reason.
You want to give them a pass for that? That's your affair. But calling all that hassle "fast and easy" is dishonest.
You have not outlined all the additional work you had to do: the additional software that you had to install, plus the fact that there is double the storage required (one for the original flac, one for the new apple format that you put there).
All that work, just because Apple tells you you have to do it? It is unjustifiable. They should not try to herd users into their own propietary format when there was already something available that was free and open source.
If you want Apple to succeed in herding all users into their own little format, that's your affair. But the description of "fast and easy" is dishonest.
Salk users deserve to know these things as they evaluate which digital transport to use. Use one that supports flac and you will not have any of these propietary-format headaches.
-
All that hassle, for no good reason.
I haven't found file conversion to be much of a hassle.
But calling all that hassle "fast and easy" is dishonest.
I did find it fast and easy, too. Dishonest?
But the description of "fast and easy" is dishonest.
You already said that.
Use one that supports flac and you will not have any of these propietary-format headaches.
I also have no headaches.
It would have been nice if Apple had included FLAC capability with iTunes. I suppose if one would prefer to use FLAC and iTunes, you could use Fluke with it. The fact is, I use iTunes because I like the intuitive interface and the easy creation of playlists and smart playlists. I have seen the Squeezeserver operation and interface, and I don't like it as much. But oddly enough, because of the tone of your posts, I am (albeit wrongly) taking perverse delight in knowing that this bothers you so much.
Steve
-
Max is a great app for that. It even allows you to do multiple conversions at once even making the process faster with larger libraries.
Max is a nice app, the most flexible that I know of without using the Terminal. Free, open, etc. It even helps when you rip your files from CD.
Now the multiple conversion, is that drag and drop for each individual album (usually contained in its own directory)? That was so the last time I tried it. If you have, say, 200 albums, that's a lot of dragging and dropping.
XLD is another nice app, I think it's a bit more robust for ripping files, checking for a good rip, etc. That's the one I'm using nowadays.
-
It would have been nice if Apple had included FLAC capability with iTunes. I suppose if one would prefer to use FLAC and iTunes, you could use Fluke with it. The fact is, I use iTunes because I like the intuitive interface and the easy creation of playlists and smart playlists. I have seen the Squeezeserver operation and interface, and I don't like it as much. But oddly enough, because of the tone of your posts, I am (albeit wrongly) taking perverse delight in knowing that this bothers you so much.
Steve
Well, that's great for you. You could take some straightforward delight in knowing that Apple is not trying to herd its users into a propietary format that basically makes things into an unnecessary hassle.
You prefer to take delight at other people's annoyance. Good luck with that.
-
Max is a nice app, the most flexible that I know of without using the Terminal. Free, open, etc. It even helps when you rip your files from CD.
Now the multiple conversion, is that drag and drop for each individual album (usually contained in its own directory)? That was so the last time I tried it. If you have, say, 200 albums, that's a lot of dragging and dropping.
XLD is another nice app, I think it's a bit more robust for ripping files, checking for a good rip, etc. That's the one I'm using nowadays.
Just pick a directory and it will read all the files in a sub-directory. If you computer has multiple cores, say 4, you can ask it to do 4 at a time. Great open source product to help folks get around the betamax vs vhs digital file format war. IMO very painless process, it's great.
XLD doesn't seem to be an open source or at least there's no mention of open source or GPL on the website. But like all of those apps they all end up using the same open source libraries and the core audio libraries.
-
Well, that's great for you. You could take some straightforward delight in knowing that Apple is not trying to herd its users into a propietary format that basically makes things into an unnecessary hassle.
You prefer to take delight at other people's annoyance. Good luck with that.
Granted that the FLAC file format is open source, which I'm a card carrying member, there's not a free player (device). Everything has a cost. There's not one single device I own that supports flac unless I hack it, nor is there an online site that will allow me to download any significant music that I actually like in flac or any lossless format. I don't know of any major studio or mainstream manufacturer that his adopted either ALAC or FLAC as a way to deliver media. We have a long wait before this format war is over. There's not a large selection of devices that make FLAC standout either. (http://flac.sourceforge.net/links.html)
And you don't have to like Apple and you can even call them a Monster, that aside let the guy enjoy his $99 Apple TV. It's very inexpensive player for netflix, vod and to stream audio and to top it off it is truly convenient for both the little ones and the technically challenged. That's a big win for me.... less tv tech support.... more time for other activities.
Perhaps a better way for the resistance to fight back is to just describe your set up and what you like about. The debate between which format a consumer will use is a far second after convenience. Maybe in the end it will be no different than whole milk or organic whole milk as they both can come from the same holstein just $1 more a gallon at the store.
-
Just pick a directory and it will read all the files in a sub-directory. If you computer has multiple cores, say 4, you can ask it to do 4 at a time. Great open source product to help folks get around the betamax vs vhs digital file format war. IMO very painless process, it's great.
XLD doesn't seem to be an open source or at least there's no mention of open source or GPL on the website. But like all of those apps they all end up using the same open source libraries and the core audio libraries.
Ok, yes, the Max workflow is the one I was familiar with from before. The basic problem there occurs if you have each album in its own directory (a common arrangement). *If* you put all your tracks in a single directory, then it's drag-n-drop and let it go. I would not recommend that arrangement, myself, since tracks will often have the same name (e.g. "01 - I. Allegro.flac" is going to be an awfully popular name in classical music).
Now it's hard to fault Max for this, since drag-n-drop interfaces tend to require this. If you allow such an interface to recurse down a directory tree, the results can be unexpected (and massive).
XLD documentation is sparse at best, that's for sure.
btw a tool that has not been mentioned here is Media Rage, that one does recurse down directory trees, renames files on the fly, etc. It goes for a little bit ($29) but it makes tagging remarkably effective. It helps to do a little bit of regexp work (a la Perl). One of its nicest features is its ability to create a tag straight from the filename, which saves you a fair number of keystrokes and mouse drags.
-
Ok, yes, the Max workflow is the one I was familiar with from before. The basic problem there occurs if you have each album in its own directory (a common arrangement). *If* you put all your tracks in a single directory, then it's drag-n-drop and let it go. I would not recommend that arrangement, myself, since tracks will often have the same name (e.g. "01 - I. Allegro.flac" is going to be an awfully popular name in classical music).
Now it's hard to fault Max for this, since drag-n-drop interfaces tend to require this. If you allow such an interface to recurse down a directory tree, the results can be unexpected (and massive).
XLD documentation is sparse at best, that's for sure.
btw a tool that has not been mentioned here is Media Rage, that one does recurse down directory trees, renames files on the fly, etc. It goes for a little bit ($29) but it makes tagging remarkably effective. It helps to do a little bit of regexp work (a la Perl). One of its nicest features is its ability to create a tag straight from the filename, which saves you a fair number of keystrokes and mouse drags.
What I meant by sub-directories is that it will recursively get everything. No dragging and dropping required. I can easily convert a very large library from one format to another with just a few clicks and compute cycles.
-
What I meant by sub-directories is that it will recursively get everything. No dragging and dropping required. I can easily convert a very large library from one format to another with just a few clicks and compute cycles.
Thanks, that is a good workflow for converting things. We should warn newbies though, be careful, please, anything that recurses through subdirectories is veddy veddy powerful!
Now, easily... I still have issues with using that particular word because of how much it needs to be qualified. Easily, for guys like you or me or some of the other folks contributing here. Easily, if you are lucky enough to find Max and use it instead of iTunes exclusively (which is the direction in which Apple herds its users). Easily, if you have enough hard drive space for the potential multiple copies of the same song. Easily, if you have a multi-core computer (which is standard among new machines nowadays but was certainly not the case back when Apple shafted flac support). But for the newbies... yes, flac also presents challenges... but it's more of a "teach a man to fish" type of challenge.
There is an observation embedded there: what may have become easier over time was far more difficult back when Apple pulled this stunt; it took the work of people outside of Apple to make it easier, and that also took time. In the end, all this extra work was totally wasteful and unnecessary. Apple works against its users on this occasion.
Your other message, seeking positive rather than negative contributions, is very good! I'll take up your offer. This may have to wait a bit because I need to look at what I'm doing with my home machine and that's not a two-minute job, unfortunately.
Hopefully, we can tie this tempest in a teapot with a nice ribbon so that the prospective Salk speaker listener and digital music collection newbie can have some idea of what he's in for if he buys a squeezebox or an apple box or a Sonos (or, why not, a Zune).
-
I've archived my music in both ALAC and FLAC, because the Squeezebox doesn't handle ALAC files in hardware, so I use FLAC for that, and ALAC for my AirTunes. I'd prefer that iTunes ran FLAC natively, but that won't happen, but if its really that much heartburn for a guy, just download Songbird. It plays virtually every file format and has the same interface as iTunes and is compiled for all three platfroms. It is also completely free.
The one advantage of having ALACs is that they will store album art in the file, whereas you have to take extra steps to add it into FLACs. Several programs which can read FLACs require special configuration to read that album art and display while playing.
Having both file formats, a bunch of different music players, and Squeezebox/AirTunes, I find the slickest solution to be AirTunes via the iTunes interface. The files are lossless, streamable to a $99 Airport express, and if you want to get really fancy, you can use an iPod touch or iPhone or an iPad as a remote...for the whole house. For the cost of a single Squeezebox, you can literally setup 3 Airport express stereo receiving stations and use your iTunes playlist. That iTunes playlist is handy because it is already rated and organized. I could recreate the same thign on my SB, but its just extra work. And dynamic updates from anything I change on my iPod after I mow the lawn.
Right now I have Squeezebox hooked up to HT2-TLs with an AVA front end and I also have my SongTowers in my office with AVA gear as well (on AirTunes). Eventually, I'm going to go all AirTunes, which would cost me $99 bucks, so I only have to manage one set of playlists, which are usable from my computer, any of those roaming iDevices with Remote, or my iPod. I will continue to archive in both formats for insurance, storage is cheap and XLD and 8 cores make short work of converting any files. In fact, when ripping off the CD, you can set it up to make 8 formats at one time if you like. The only extra "work" is checking the box for what formats you'd like. I've tried both Max and XLD and prefer XLD myself.
I consider myself a very informed user, having messed with streaming extensively, and virtually any and all possible solutions from Microsoft and Apple (I'm a computer geek). If anyone has any questions about it, feel free to PM me. I honestly think the "work" argument is bunk, its no more work to go from FLAC to ALAC and back (or simultaneously) than it is to re-rip all your CD's from mp3 to FLAC in the first place. And it don't cost hardly more than $65 dollars to store all of it, which is dirt cheap considering people on these boards are buying 5-10K speakers and associated electronics.
-
Since I'm bored and its late, I guess I'll write a short little primer for those considering the options.
Complete aversion to Apple:
SqueezeBox is the way to go. The server runs on all platforms and handles the Big 2 (FLAC and mp3) natively in hardware. If you're using something like Windows Media Player or Winamp, any m3u playlists can be imported.
Complete Mac dominated household:
Obviously, you'd want to stick to ALAC, iTunes and AirTunes via Airport Express. Your iTunes playlist that you are already using for your iPods and etc will be usable either from your computer desktop or via some mobile iDevice using the Remote app. Simply go into iTunes and instead of selecting your computer speakers as your output device (the dropdown in the bottom right corner of iTunes), select the appropriate Airport Express, say hooked up to your stereo in your Den.
Mixed environment:
This could be a completely Windows household where people are using some combination of foobar, iTunes, Winamp, MediaMonkey, etc, basically a hodge podge of players and/or mp3 players. iTunes remains quite popular (#1) on the Windows platform, so if you have to have lossless, ALAC is your only choice. Unless you want your wife to be pissed you have a bunch of music in format her iTunes won't read, or your daughter's iPod won't use. You could always just use 320kbps mp3, and format problems go away.
The easy solution for lossless in a mixed user environment is just to follow the "all Mac" solution above, use AirTunes via Airport Express and ALAC. If you personally can't bring yourself to do that, then maintain two separate file chains, one for you that is Mac free, and one for the rest of your mixed computing environment. I'm finding that the easiest thing to do is use the ALACs in the live realm and keep FLAC copies in case Apple decides to go all RIAA on its users and lock you out of your tunes. A $65 1TB hard drive will solve your problem, although I think some folks tremble with rage at the thought of decoding an ALAC file in their AVA DAC.
For any of the solutions, I'd recommend an external dac to hook up to your Airport Express or your Squeezebox. They sound ok without one, but they sound supreme with one.
-
^^
well said! :D
-
Good guide to options, floresjc!
As Max and XLD seem to be Mac-based, just wanted to add that dbpoweramp is a windows-based program that can handle most format conversion needs of Windows-based users. Quite painless and you can make it sort the songs into tag-based folders if required. Am sure there are several others out there too.
Also, Mp3Tag works great for bulk tagging.
Unless you actually use FLAC on devices that don't support ALAC, I don't see why I would need to keep copies in FLAC as well (for those in Mac/mixed environment). I can easily (relative, I guess) convert back and forth between FLAC and ALAC and I doubt Apple can lock me out of those that I already have with s/w that already supports it? More than space cost, it is the hassle of managing duplicate files I would rather avoid unless I just have to.
-
XLD and Max are Mac only. Windows does have a few good options for converters though.
Foobar handles just about any file format you'd want and has excellent "amateur" development support. Since it is plugin based, anything you'd want it to do out of the box can usually be found as a plugin.
dBPowerAmp is a good program, but I didn't think it was free. Thats not to say that its expensive, I thought a full up version was like $30. But people love it if you want to spend the money.
MediaMonkey also handles conversions of most any usable format as well.