hifisteve Wrote: > Other than the obvious compatability issues, any views on whether > there's any other advantages/disadvantages of using Apple lossless > rather than FLAC?
Not really from an audio standpoint, they're about the same size and are both lossless. One of them is open source and the other requires quicktime to play it back. For me it was a convenience thing, Apple Lossless is easier for me because I can use iTunes to rip and manage my library. EAC may perhaps give a more accurate rip, but it's a pain to set up and manage the files and I couldn't hear a difference in the end. I think the only argument you could put for an audible difference between lossless and uncompressed, assuming accuracy of the codecs which actually is pretty easy to verify, is that they place different electrical loads on the SB power supply due to the additional decoding or alternate circuitry being exercised. However, the SB isn't a asynchronously clocked processing device, so the processor is always crunching code, and the same circuits are used irrespective of source data, so I can't see how there would be any elctrical differences. In the case of Apple Lossless, it's done on the server anyway, so absolutely no diference as far as the SB is concerned. Paul -- CardinalFang You're only young once, but you can be immature forever... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CardinalFang's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=962 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=21700 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
