EAC/FLAC or Apple lossless AIFF

mr_bill · « **on:** 3 Dec 2005, 04:58 am »

Hi,
I just got a SB3 and really like it. I don't have my CD collection on computer yet, but am thinking about it. I run the SB3 into my Benchmark Dac1. I also use Itunes on my computer and really like the interface.
I keep seeing EAC and FLAC used for ripping a collection. What's wrong with just using the Apple lossless AIFF which I believe is the highest quality transfer and also using the error correction.
Won't this give my the same result as the EAC/FLAC procedure?
If I use EAC/FLAC will the Itunes read the files?
Thanks,
Bill

ted_b · « **Reply #1 on:** 3 Dec 2005, 05:39 am »

First off, Apple lossless is not AAC 128! Hardly. AAC 128 is quite lossy; I use AAC 224 for my iPod/iTunes (224 is a nice compromise between not-quite cd quality and great compression), and use FLAC (lossless, like Apple lossless) for storage and cd-quality playback on foobar.

Do a search on "foobar" or "eac". I've listed the steps a number of times.

Net/net, use EAC (not itunes....it's ripper is not great) for ripping to perfect album-sized wav files (called "create image and cue sheet" in EAC), then using a virtual cd drive like virtual daemon manager, I load the wav file and have iTunes import it (it imports quickly since it's a virtual drive....like 17x speed or so) at 224 AAC or so. THEN, I unmount the wav file with a right-click of a mouse button. After I have done this for quite a few albums, like at the end of the day, I take all of the wav files and load them into the FLAC front end and encode them all (kinda like a batch process). Takes about 2-3 min per album. I then delete the wav file and store the flac files and their cue sheets for later use (the cue sheets are files that EAC creates that are simply tables of contents).

The earlier threads about this stuff have links to EAC tutorials, etc. here's one link:

http://users.pandora.be/satcp/eachelp01.htm

Enjoy,
Ted

suits_me · « **Reply #2 on:** 3 Dec 2005, 08:35 am »

Excuse my naivete, but I though eac was wintel only. If that's true, isn't the first poster a Mac user?

philipp · « **Reply #3 on:** 3 Dec 2005, 04:30 pm »

If you are a Mac user, iTunes doesn't read FLAC files. You'll need to get http://cogosx.sourceforge.net/ for that (note: download the binary, not source). But you can just as easily rip your music to Apple Lossless. It's equivalent to FLAC or SHN or any of the other lossless codecs you see around the web. The file extensions will be .M4A and iTunes will have no problem playing them. I've read that Squeezebox has no problem with them either.

Ted B -- that's a lot of steps you take!

Cheers,
Phil

mr_bill · « **Reply #4 on:** 3 Dec 2005, 07:04 pm »

I'm a windows XP user, not mac.
Will Itunes on my Dell read FLAC files?

I still don't understand why or if EAC/FLAC is better than Itunes AIFF if they are both lossless conversions?

I like the Itunes for managing by songs and creating playlists to use with my SB3.

Any help is appreciated!
Bill

philipp · « **Reply #5 on:** 3 Dec 2005, 10:17 pm »

You're mixing up file formats. There's three types:

1) lossless and uncompressed -- AIFF and WAV
2) lossless and compressed -- FLAC and Apple Lossless (M4A)
3) lossy and compressed -- MP3, WMA, Real audio, AAC

So to answer your question, FLAC is effectively the same as Apple Lossless. FLAC files are more often found around the web but that doesn't make it a better format nor does it mean you need to compress your own music that way.

iTunes will create (and play) Apple Lossless files for you if you select it in your preferences. Unless someone else on this board knows of a plugin, you'll need to use another music manager to create and listen to FLAC files.

mr_bill · « **Reply #6 on:** 3 Dec 2005, 10:38 pm »

Thanks Phillip,
That was a good explanation of how the different file formats compare in an easy to understand way.
Bill

studley · « **Reply #7 on:** 3 Dec 2005, 10:53 pm »

I currently store my music files as WAV files as I'm foremost interested in sound quality. However it would be great to take up less disk space and so I'm wondering whether there is any received wisdom on the question of whether there is any discernable difference in sound quality between WAV and Apple Lossless?

If so, is there a general consensus or is opinion divided?

( I'd do some A/B tests myself but my computer audio system is not yet set up - I'm currently considering what method/type of kit I'm going to use to link my ibook to my DAC.)

philipp · « **Reply #8 on:** 3 Dec 2005, 11:19 pm »

Well, I just did a Google search and found out what the hardcore techies had to say: http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/06/2034226&tid=141&tid=198&tid=4.

Essentially, the lossless encoding doesn't lose a single bit of the original file (WAV or whatever). They're kind of like ZIP files except the audio players can decode and play them in real time. If you want to look at it in terms of bitrate -- you know, like how an MP3 can be 192kbps -- an uncompressed CD-quality sound file is 1411kbps. FLAC or Apple or Windows Media lossless files will compress the original down to anywhere from 350 to 950kbps in my experience. The amount of compress all depends on the complexity of the original. The extremes I list above are 350kbps for an old Stones tune (Jumping Jack Flash I think) to 950ish for a Metallica song with lots of activity (as if they have any other kind).

DS-21 · « **Reply #9 on:** 5 Dec 2005, 06:32 am »

It is interesting to see the bitrate variability in Apple Lossless files. In my music collection, the extremes are over 1100kpbs (a lot of the latest U2 album) to 429kpbs for the 2nd mvt of The Rite of Spring. 153kbps if you cound test tones, with the 40Hz 1/3 octave tone on Sound Check with Alan Parsons and Stephen Court - Mobile Fidelity SPCD-15 - being encoded at that rate.

However, I wonder if the high-bitrate ones aren't simply much more dynamically limited. As I mentioned, Stravinsky gets low bitrates. So do good recordings of Holst, Shostakovich, Mahler, Sibelius, Beethoven, and other composers, while modern rock stuff (U2, DMB, and so on) gets higher bitrates.

philipp · « **Reply #10 on:** 5 Dec 2005, 03:16 pm »

Actually, my numbers were estimates from memory. After your post, I decided to look up the facts. My lowest bitrate M4A is Mary Lou Williams playing Yankee Doodle Blues at 285kbps. Old mono recording sure come in low! All of the tracks from Billie Holiday's Columbia recordings are in the 300-400 range. My highest bitrate jazz is Miles Davis playing Dr. Jackle from Milestones(Columbia) at 1036. The champion is Clinic's W.D.Y.Y.B. from Winchester Cathedral at 1179. I realized I didn't have any classical ripped (doesn't fit in with my jukebox approach to itunes) but I just converted the first movement of Tchaikovsky's 6th (Gergiev/Kirov Orchestra on Philips) and it came in at 621.

I think your opinion about dynamics limiting is accurate. It's probably that, along with the "horror vacui" of pop music, that keeps the bitrate high.

ted_b · « **Reply #11 on:** 5 Dec 2005, 04:05 pm »

Quote from: studley

I currently store my music files as WAV files as I'm foremost interested in sound quality. However it would be great to take up less disk space and so I'm wondering whether there is any received wisdom on the question of whether there is any discernable difference in sound quality between WAV and Apple Lossless?

If so, is there a general consensus or is opinion divided?

( I'd do some A/B tests myself but my computer audio system is not yet set up - I'm currently considering what method/type of kit I'm going to use to link my ibook to my DAC.)

FLAC (or Ape or Apple lossless, or any of the other lossless compression formats) is identical, bit by bit, to Wav (hence the term lossless), yet stores in approximately 55-60% of the space. That's why it exists. Many players can play FLAC without having to "unzip" it (FLAC calls it decoding). My foobar player does exactly that. I only decode if I need to burn a cd or whatever. I list the steps and pieces I used to build my fobbar gui in this forum somewhere (search on my username and "foobar"). My gui is in my gallery, if you care.

Philipp,
I know it seems like a lot of steps, and I could remove several if I didn't want to also import to iTunes AAC during the process (EAC, with a plugin, can rip directly to FLAC and convert the cue sheet automagically). The steps are quite mundane, though, some of them a simple right-click. I listed them all for completeness. Kinda like the old game of listing every step to light a cigarette,; there are like 45 of them (raise your index finger to hold the match against your forefinger).