highdudgeon;162445 Wrote: > Got it. > > Back to FLAC: I have 2 external drives, one 320gb and one 500gb. > Needless to say, I can fit a lot of music on there (and home huge > photoshop files). > > Still, I've tried and tried, but I can't hear any difference between > FLAC and Apple Lossless. So, why not save the space? That's my view of > things, anyway.
But Apple Lossless is not AAC. AAC is a lossy codec. Apple Lossless is ALAC, which takes up the same space (roughly) as FLAC, (as Snarlydwarf says, I've just noticed) but, like AAC, needs to be transcoded to play on a Squeezebox - and that's the main reason I don't use it much myself. But never AAC. Once the bits are gone, they're gone. FLAC would be the obvious answer (lossless, doesn't need transcoding, plays nicely with Slimserver) - but not with iTunes and a Mac, (or an iPod, for that matter) which, of the lossless, compressed formats, play only with ALAC. Having ripped 600 plus CDs so far (and still counting), with at least as many LPs to digitise yet, I take your point about space, of course, but you could get 1100 or so of your 1500 CDs on your existing HDs (although that's leaving aside your non-Music files) even in Aiff. Another 500Gb (even another Tb, these days) is a lot, lot less than a Transporter, for instance, and you'd live in lossless, full CD quality, untranscoding, drop-out-free heaven, while still being able to use iTunes on your Mac. Well, you would if you manage to sort out those neighbours of yours! Don't you have an axe? -- geraint smith ------------------------------------------------------------------------ geraint smith's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=625 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30594 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
