JJZolx;611961 Wrote:
I think it's fair to say that the consensus in this community is Flac.
If I interpret the intended meaning of that correctly - one could
perhaps add a footnote saying that, if you are otherwise Apple based
(Mac/iTunes/iPod/iPhone/etc), ALAC is a good choice.
--
m1abrams;611968 Wrote:
If you transcode flac on the server to PCM you lose the ability to scan.
This is true for any transcoding.
Is gapless playback impacted by transcoding on the server? I seem to
recall that it is, but it's been a long time since I've done it.
As far as what format it
maggior;612063 Wrote:
Aside from wav, FLAC has more hardware support than any other lossless
format.
I don't have the numbers to support or dispute that claim, but I
suspect it matters a LOT if you are counting (a) number of different
hardware devices (ie, models), and (b) number of units in
aubuti;612074 Wrote:
I don't have the numbers to support or dispute that claim, but I suspect
it matters a LOT if you are counting (a) number of different hardware
devices (ie, models), and (b) number of units in use. I think all those
ALAC-supporting iPods would count for a lot in (b).
Cut-Throat;611954 Wrote:
He had spent a lot of time testing various formats and did not like
compressing formats as it gave the computer another task to do.
Doing tasks are what computers are made for. If a computer can't handle
that, it's either broken, or the wrong computer for its intended
FLAC and just let the file types settings be and the squeezebox
experience would just work as expected, enjoy :)
--
Mnyb
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200
aubuti;612074 Wrote:
I don't have the numbers to support or dispute that claim, but I suspect
it matters a LOT if you are counting (a) number of different hardware
devices (ie, models), and (b) number of units in use. I think all those
ALAC-supporting iPods would count for a lot in (b).
m1abrams;612086 Wrote:
ALAC as far as I know is only supported by apple. It is a properitory
format owned by apple. This makes it less attractive to people who may
not want to have their music tied to a single company. FLAC is an open
source format that is free for all to use and implement.
aubuti;612131 Wrote:
NSS. You're preaching to the choir here. I have no iThings and no use
for ALAC. FLAC is perfect for me. I was merely taking issue with the
bald claim that -Aside from wav, FLAC has more hardware support than
any other lossless format.- It's not as simple as that.
And I
There was a Seminar at the RMAF where an Audiophile was recommending
AIFF as the Format to Rip CDs to. He had spent a lot of time testing
various formats and did not like compressing formats as it gave the
computer another task to do. Simpler is better. Also AIFF was good at
tagging while WAV is
The consensus is use your ears.
--
JJZolx
JJZolx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=85738
JJZolx;611955 Wrote:
The consensus is use your ears.
The ears cannot detect correct tagging, so your suggestion won't work!
--
Cut-Throat
Cut-Throat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=43167
You can correctly tag a 64 kbps Mp3 file just as well as you can a
lossless Flac file.
--
JJZolx
JJZolx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10
View this thread:
JJZolx;611958 Wrote:
You can correctly tag a 64 kbps Mp3 file just as well as you can a
lossless Flac file.
But my ears tell me that MP3 is inferior, so that won't work either.
Are you interested in answering my question or do you just want to win
an argument?
--
Cut-Throat
JJZolx;611961 Wrote:
I think it's fair to say that the consensus in this community is Flac.
But you'll also find that very few people around here will claim they
hear any difference between uncompressed file formats and lossless
ones. And I'm certain that what you don't want to hear will
Cut-Throat;611962 Wrote:
Thank you! - Is it fair to say that the only advantage that FLAC has
over AIFF is it uses less disk space?
No you also have software compatibly concerns, this one I think favors
FLAC but it really comes down to what software you use.
If streaming flac you use about
m1abrams;611964 Wrote:
No you also have software compatibly concerns, this one I think favors
FLAC but it really comes down to what software you use.
If streaming flac you use about 1/2 the bandwidth which can help a good
bit with wireless connections
This would assume that the conversion
Cut-Throat;611965 Wrote:
This would assume that the conversion is done on the Touch rather than
on the PC. Correct?
Also, I have heard that doing the conversion on the PC rather than the
Touch is the preferred method.
Yes, however if you do the conversion on the PC you will lose the
Cut-Throat;611967 Wrote:
This is confusing to me. Why would that matter. It would seem that the
touch would not care whether the format was FLAC or AIFF and would have
the same features regardless.
If you transcode flac on the server to PCM you lose the ability to
scan. This is true for any
19 matches
Mail list logo
