PDA

View Full Version : Apple Lossless library on Mac, but I want Mp3 in my iPod




erh
Jun 21, 2009, 11:24 AM
My music library consist of files in the Apple's Lossless format and I would like to keep it this way, but I don't want large Apple Lossless files on my iPod.

- How can I easily keep my Apple Lossless library on my Mac and transfer the Mp3 to my iPod?

- and why haven't Apple made it possible to check a box 'convert all files to Mp3' when exporting to iPod?



speakerwizard
Jun 21, 2009, 11:41 AM
yourll have to convert them all or at least the ones you want on the ipod. and aac will be better than mp3. you can group select to do this.

erh
Jun 21, 2009, 12:02 PM
DoubleTwist for my BlackBerry will convert my files into Mp3 files when transferring (automatically). I hope Apple listening!

Moonjumper
Jun 21, 2009, 12:07 PM
You can convert a group of files to mp3. Highlight multiple files (hold down Command to add individual tracks at a time to your selection, or Shift to group select) and right click. You will get an option to convert to mp3. You will now have lossless and mp3 versions of each file.

Create a Mac playlist and add all your lossless files, and an iPod playlist with the mp3 files. You should now find it easy to select the right versions from those playlists.

Consultant
Jun 21, 2009, 12:08 PM
write to
www.apple.com/feedback

Would be useful for those with loseless library.

erh
Jun 21, 2009, 12:34 PM
write to
www.apple.com/feedback

Would be useful for those with loseless library.



Thanks for the link. I just made a feedback-case with a link to this thread.


It would be wonderful if an Apple-script or automator could handle what you would think would be the most normal request (iTunes has only been around for 5-7 years).

Foxer
Jun 21, 2009, 01:45 PM
This feature is available in iTunes for iPod Shuffle users. I have been regularly hitting Apple with requests to expand this to all iPods. I don't want to mess with converting tracks and maintaining playcounts and other metadata is very important to me. Since they already have this feature written into iTunes, I don't see any reason why they don't open it up to all iPods.

erh
Jun 21, 2009, 02:12 PM
This feature is available in iTunes for iPod Shuffle users. I have been regularly hitting Apple with requests to expand this to all iPods. I don't want to mess with converting tracks and maintaining playcounts and other metadata is very important to me. Since they already have this feature written into iTunes, I don't see any reason why they don't open it up to all iPods.


That is just plain bad design. Why is this function limited to the Shuffle? :eek: :apple: :cool:

erh
Jun 21, 2009, 02:14 PM
Does anyone know how to change this in Terminal?

erh
Jun 25, 2009, 10:39 AM
This feature is available in iTunes for iPod Shuffle users. I have been regularly hitting Apple with requests to expand this to all iPods. I don't want to mess with converting tracks and maintaining playcounts and other metadata is very important to me. Since they already have this feature written into iTunes, I don't see any reason why they don't open it up to all iPods.

Maybe a plug-in?

Nadinengland
Jun 26, 2009, 08:17 AM
write to
www.apple.com/feedback

I always feel that submitting feedback is like posting a letter through a paper shredder. Maybe it's just me.

sbking
Jun 26, 2009, 09:21 AM
God I hope they don't implement what you guys are suggesting, what if the files on your computer are already lossy? When you transfer that file to your iPod it will be transcoded =/

Seriously, how hard is to select everything you want on your iPod, convert them, transfer the files to your iPod, and then deleting the files on your computer (show duplicates, sort by bitrate, remove the lower bitrate files by selecting them all). Of course do check "manual management" on your iPod, so it won't automaticly sync (you shouldn't use this function anyway).

yg17
Jun 26, 2009, 09:24 AM
This feature is available in iTunes for iPod Shuffle users. I have been regularly hitting Apple with requests to expand this to all iPods. I don't want to mess with converting tracks and maintaining playcounts and other metadata is very important to me. Since they already have this feature written into iTunes, I don't see any reason why they don't open it up to all iPods.

Why the hell would they offer it for the Shuffle and not the rest of the iPods? The functionality is there, it would probably require them to change 5 lines of code to enable it for all iPods.

rhett7660
Jun 26, 2009, 09:30 AM
Why not have two library's?? One of the apple lossless and one of aac/mp3? It is not really that hard.......

erh
Jun 26, 2009, 10:34 AM
Why not have two library's?? One of the apple lossless and one of aac/mp3? It is not really that hard.......

That could be the solution, but I currently store around 90-100GB of music (Apple Lossless and mp3) on my laptop. To convert, and have duplicates would take up an extra 30-50GB.

erh
Jun 26, 2009, 10:49 AM
God I hope they don't implement what you guys are suggesting, what if the files on your computer are already lossy? When you transfer that file to your iPod it will be transcoded =/

Seriously, how hard is to select everything you want on your iPod, convert them, transfer the files to your iPod, and then deleting the files on your computer (show duplicates, sort by bitrate, remove the lower bitrate files by selecting them all). Of course do check "manual management" on your iPod, so it won't automaticly sync (you shouldn't use this function anyway).



If the file is already lossy, iTunes could bypass it.
I don't think the function would be to intrusive in iTunes preferences. You could specify which file format should be converted and which to bypass using check-boxes.



I often rotate my songs on my iPhone. It would be a constant hassle to convert files, transfer files to iPhone, then erase the lossy files in iTunes. Do this for each song I want to listen to.


Mac OS X is supposed to be user-friendly. Not extra work :rolleyes: iTunes has been out there for many years, and through many upgrades, and it is still missing basic functions.

rhett7660
Jun 26, 2009, 03:16 PM
That could be the solution, but I currently store around 90-100GB of music (Apple Lossless and mp3) on my laptop. To convert, and have duplicates would take up an extra 30-50GB.

Ok..... disc space is cheap.... 30-50gigs is nothing. Get yourself a pocket drive for 80 bucks. Keep two library's. Neat and clean.


Mac OS X is supposed to be user-friendly. Not extra work iTunes has been out there for many years, and through many upgrades, and it is still missing basic functions.

Is there any other music program out there that lets you do this???? If so, maybe you should be using that instead of iTunes.

Sorry I actually see it more of a bother to go through and pick out songs that I want to convert. Why not have everthing in lossless and in aac/mp3 format. Then if I want to load up my ipod I don't have to go through and do the converting of a few songs every time I want to do so. Do it from the beginning. Make it part of your work flow for ripping. Depending one what program you use, you can rip to lossless, then load those files into a que and have it rip your aac/mp3's at night or while you are away. When you come back you have two library's.

Sorry, but going through and picking one by one the songs I want to convert or even grabbing a few songs at a time, seems very time consuming. I would prefer the do them all approach then pick the songs I want to load up from the newly converted list.

sbking
Jun 26, 2009, 03:22 PM
After you converted your lossless files and transferred the lossy files, show duplicates, sort by bitrate and remove anything 320kbps and below. You can use your mouse + shift key to select everything you want to remove in 2 clicks. Not a hassle at all.

Tilpots
Jun 26, 2009, 03:27 PM
Ok..... disc space is cheap.... 30-50gigs is nothing. Get yourself a pocket drive for 80 bucks. Keep two library's. Neat and clean.

Do you realize how time consuming and painstaking maintaining up to date multiple iTunes libraries are?:eek: It sucks. Especially if you are constantly adding new music, changing Music Folder locations, and backing up to disc... I'm so over it, but it's what I gotta do to keep the collection the way I want. iTunes could seriously use some help in this department. Their way overdue for it to add real multiple library support. Doug's got some scripts that help a bit, but most of it just a big pain in the a$$.

Is there any other music program out there that lets you do this???? If so, maybe you should be using that instead of iTunes.

None I've found...

I would prefer the do them all approach then pick the songs I want to load up from the newly converted list.

I would prefer iTunes just wisen up and handle it. It's far from impossible...

Lunchbox16
Jun 26, 2009, 03:44 PM
Apple already has model for how to handle multiple libraries. Look at iPhoto. It's very easy to create multiple libraries in iPhoto and select which one you'd like to load at start up. I don't see how it would be too onerous to implement a similar function in iTunes. Of course the one problem I see in that set up would be that any converted files would have to be exported and then re-imported into a separate library, unless you opt not to have iTunes manage your music. But personally I don't use iTunes to convert files to mp3 (I use Max or xACT).

That said, on a personal note, as much as I'd like to have two separate libraries, I wouldn't do so until iTunes supports FLAC, which may never happen - shameful as that is.

TJRiver
Jun 26, 2009, 03:46 PM
If the file is already lossy, iTunes could bypass it.
I don't think the function would be to intrusive in iTunes preferences. You could specify which file format should be converted and which to bypass using check-boxes.



1.I often rotate my songs on my iPhone. It would be a constant hassle to convert files, transfer files to iPhone, then erase the lossy files in iTunes. Do this for each song I want to listen to.


2. Mac OS X is supposed to be user-friendly. Not extra work :rolleyes: iTunes has been out there for many years, and through many upgrades, and it is still missing basic functions.

1. If you are already manually managing your music, just keep your library in lossless.

2. OS X is easy to use for almost everyone. There is always the hard core type who is not happy unless every potential use is covered by an application. Most users do not need that level of functionality. What do you think lead to Windoze bloat? Unfortunately, OS X seems to heading down the same road.

In blind listening tests, using decent equipment (as opposed to what 99% of iPod users listen with...) very few people could differentiate between ACC and Lossless audio files. Not to smack those who can, I am just suggesting that our buddies at Apple build for the tone deaf 99%, not the high end audio folks. .

rhett7660
Jun 26, 2009, 03:57 PM
Do you realize how time consuming and painstaking maintaining up to date multiple iTunes libraries are?:eek: It sucks. Especially if you are constantly adding new music, changing Music Folder locations, and backing up to disc... I'm so over it, but it's what I gotta do to keep the collection the way I want. iTunes could seriously use some help in this department. Their way overdue for it to add real multiple library support. Doug's got some scripts that help a bit, but most of it just a big pain in the a$$.



None I've found...



I would prefer iTunes just wisen up and handle it. It's far from impossible...


Yes I do.. I do it now. It isn't more time consuming then managing one. I have two right now that I manage. It is simple for me.

Maybe it has to do with your work flow?

For me it is one extra step. That step is ripping into mp3. Maybe post what you are doing that makes it seem more difficult?

If it is far from impossible, I am surprised other music players haven't done it already. :rolleyes:

erh
Jun 26, 2009, 04:22 PM
2. OS X is easy to use for almost everyone. There is always the hard core type who is not happy unless every potential use is covered by an application. Most users do not need that level of functionality. What do you think lead to Windoze bloat? Unfortunately, OS X seems to heading down the same road.

In blind listening tests, using decent equipment (as opposed to what 99% of iPod users listen with...) very few people could differentiate between ACC and Lossless audio files. Not to smack those who can, I am just suggesting that our buddies at Apple build for the tone deaf 99%, not the high end audio folks. .

You are properly right about the 99% (including me), but if everybody 50 years ago had been thinking like that, all our images, music and TV shows from the past had been in even lower res than they are now. Only because technicians knew that the viewing and listening equipment in the future would be of better quality, they kept the files in high res, even through the TV at the time, couldn't show the resolution.
The future will ask for better raw quality of any kind of file; music, image.

Tilpots
Jun 26, 2009, 04:29 PM
Yes I do.. I do it now. It isn't more time consuming then managing one. I have two right now that I manage. It is simple for me.

Maybe it has to do with your work flow?

For me it is one extra step. That step is ripping into mp3. Maybe post what you are doing that makes it seem more difficult?

If it is far from impossible, I am surprised other music players haven't done it already. :rolleyes:

Connect external HDD to MBP
Open iTunes and select lossless library
Change Import settings to Apple lossless
Change iTunes Music folder location to external's location
Insert and Rip CD in Apple lossless to external HDD

Close iTunes
Re-open iTunes and select lossy library
Change Import settings to AAC
Uncheck copy files to iTunes Music folder when adding to library
Add Apple lossless files to iTunes
Convert to AAC
Select Apple lossless files and delete links, not files

It's a PITA and iTunes and Apple can do better.

If other programs did it better, I'd use it in an instance. Apple's not perfect. There is room to improve...

erh
Jun 26, 2009, 04:41 PM
Do you realize how time consuming and painstaking maintaining up to date multiple iTunes libraries are?:eek: It sucks. Especially if you are constantly adding new music, changing Music Folder locations, and backing up to disc... I'm so over it, but it's what I gotta do to keep the collection the way I want. iTunes could seriously use some help in this department. Their way overdue for it to add real multiple library support. Doug's got some scripts that help a bit, but most of it just a big pain in the a$$.



None I've found...



I would prefer iTunes just wisen up and handle it. It's far from impossible...





I totally agree.

I just got a new MacBook Pro and installed a 500GB HD.
I choose to move my iTunes library from an external HD to my internal, out of conveniences. I don't want to use another 40-50GB storing the same music twice.

Synchronizing two libraries would be a pain. Ripping CDs into two libraries. What happens if some files only come in the mp3 format, should they live in both libraries, in order of keeping them synchronized?

This leads me to my second issue with iTunes. If I have 2 Macs, with to separate libraries that I want to keep synchronized, while I'm importing one CD on the one Mac, and another CD on the other Mac. There are no "working" solution for this. TuneRanger proclaim that they have the solution, but it does NOT work.

theBB
Jun 26, 2009, 04:50 PM
Why the hell would they offer it for the Shuffle and not the rest of the iPods? The functionality is there, it would probably require them to change 5 lines of code to enable it for all iPods.
Shuffle can hold at most 2GB of music, so conversion may not take forever, reducing the chance that users would call and complain that it is taking two whole days for their computer to transfer songs to their iPods.

STill, a well hidden check button should cut down on complaints while giving the users who know what they are doing the chance to do this. I for one would appreciate it a lot. Maybe I should look into Doubletwist. :)

rhett7660
Jun 26, 2009, 05:44 PM
Connect external HDD to MBP
Open iTunes and select lossless library
Change Import settings to Apple lossless
Change iTunes Music folder location to external's location
Insert and Rip CD in Apple lossless to external HDD

Close iTunes
Re-open iTunes and select lossy library
Change Import settings to AAC
Uncheck copy files to iTunes Music folder when adding to library
Add Apple lossless files to iTunes
Convert to AAC
Select Apple lossless files and delete links, not files

It's a PITA and iTunes and Apple can do better.

If other programs did it better, I'd use it in an instance. Apple's not perfect. There is room to improve...

Hmmm...

My flow goes something like this:

Rip cd to lossless via XLD into a folder structure:

Lossless>>Artist>>Album

I do this for the new cd's that I just picked up etc.

Using XLD again once I have ripped the music into lossless

I then switch two setting from Lossless to mp3 and directory to rip in.

Mp3>>Artist>>Album

I have a server setup, then I just copy the files into the appropriate director:

Lossless>>Artist etc...
Mp3>>Artist etc...

Then open up itunes and import the new mp3's or open up the other director and import lossless.

My appletv uses my lossless and my computer uses the mp3 folder.

I am not saying that apple can't improve what they have done. But to me, it isn't that hard to manage two library's.

I also have a backup that kicks off ever other day for backing up my library's.

esaleris
Jun 26, 2009, 06:02 PM
What posters are forgetting is that the original poster (or one of the earliest posts) talked about retaining metadata.

So let's say you're on your iPod, you give a song 4 stars and you've listened to it 2 times. That data will never feed back into the lossless version of the library you have on file, if you have a lossless library and a mp3/aac version on your iPod.

Likewise, if you keep two libraries, if you, say, change the genre of an artist on one library, the other one will have to be tracked manually. It's not to say it can't be done, but if you're having lots of changes, it's a pain in the rear. I use a genre system that looks like "Rock | Indie Rock" and have changes pretty often to make sure that my genres reflect music that really sound similar, or that I associate well in my head (I could use playlists, but go with me here).

So yes, it's easy to have two libraries that function. It's not easy to manage those libraries manually.

ADS
Jun 26, 2009, 07:57 PM
Hmmm...

My flow goes something like this:

Rip cd to lossless via XLD into a folder structure:

Lossless>>Artist>>Album

I do this for the new cd's that I just picked up etc.

Using XLD again once I have ripped the music into lossless

I then switch two setting from Lossless to mp3 and directory to rip in.

Mp3>>Artist>>Album

I have a server setup, then I just copy the files into the appropriate director:

Lossless>>Artist etc...
Mp3>>Artist etc...

Then open up itunes and import the new mp3's or open up the other director and import lossless.

My appletv uses my lossless and my computer uses the mp3 folder.

I am not saying that apple can't improve what they have done. But to me, it isn't that hard to manage two library's.

I also have a backup that kicks off ever other day for backing up my library's.

simple... :rolleyes:

rhett7660
Jun 26, 2009, 10:35 PM
Actually it is......

And if I ever want to re-rip a cd, I no longer have to go to my cd, I just rip it from my lossless file.

I actually got this idea from another poster on this board.....

But hey,,, if you have another way, by all means go for it. I have a work flow down and it works for me....

rhett7660
Jun 26, 2009, 10:37 PM
What posters are forgetting is that the original poster (or one of the earliest posts) talked about retaining metadata.

So let's say you're on your iPod, you give a song 4 stars and you've listened to it 2 times. That data will never feed back into the lossless version of the library you have on file, if you have a lossless library and a mp3/aac version on your iPod.

Likewise, if you keep two libraries, if you, say, change the genre of an artist on one library, the other one will have to be tracked manually. It's not to say it can't be done, but if you're having lots of changes, it's a pain in the rear. I use a genre system that looks like "Rock | Indie Rock" and have changes pretty often to make sure that my genres reflect music that really sound similar, or that I associate well in my head (I could use playlists, but go with me here).

So yes, it's easy to have two libraries that function. It's not easy to manage those libraries manually.

Well that is true.. but don't you think you should have this done in the beginning so you don't have to go back and do things over??

If you have a better solution by all means post it??????

Tilpots
Jun 27, 2009, 08:20 AM
Hmmm...

My flow goes something like this:

Rip cd to lossless via XLD into a folder structure:

Lossless>>Artist>>Album

I do this for the new cd's that I just picked up etc.

Using XLD again once I have ripped the music into lossless

I then switch two setting from Lossless to mp3 and directory to rip in.

Mp3>>Artist>>Album

I have a server setup, then I just copy the files into the appropriate director:

Lossless>>Artist etc...
Mp3>>Artist etc...

Then open up itunes and import the new mp3's or open up the other director and import lossless.

My appletv uses my lossless and my computer uses the mp3 folder.

I am not saying that apple can't improve what they have done. But to me, it isn't that hard to manage two library's.

I also have a backup that kicks off ever other day for backing up my library's.

Keeping a library on a server is a whole heck of a lot different than on a laptop and an ipod! Sheesh, no wonder you think it's easy. Let me just run out and by a dedicated home media server real quick...:rolleyes:

simple... :rolleyes:

Nice.:D

rhett7660
Jun 27, 2009, 09:46 AM
Because there is soooo much difference between an external hard drive setup and a server.......

You know... one external drive for lossless and one external drive for mp3's....... yeah huge difference.... Because you would never plug in two external drives at the same time.....or god forbid you have an external and an iPod plugged in.... I don't think that has ever been done before, Never, unheard of such thing... Please......

Keeping a library on a server is a whole heck of a lot different than on a laptop and an ipod! Sheesh, no wonder you think it's easy. Let me just run out and by a dedicated home media server real quick...

They are pretty darn cheap right now,, let me know if you need any help! :D

Yeah... good luck, with what ever you two do! :rolleyes:

Tilpots
Jun 27, 2009, 10:52 AM
Because there is soooo much difference between an external hard drive setup and a server.......

You know... one external drive for lossless and one external drive for mp3's....... yeah huge difference.... Because you would never plug in two external drives at the same time.....or god forbid you have an external and an iPod plugged in.... I don't think that has ever been done before, Never, unheard of such thing... Please......



They are pretty darn cheap right now,, let me know if you need any help! :D

Yeah... good luck, with what ever you two do! :rolleyes:

Lose the server than talk to me.:rolleyes:

It's a totally different situation. Thanks for the advice about a set up you don't understand.

rhett7660
Jun 27, 2009, 06:29 PM
Ummm... I started out with two hard drives before I made my server. So I think I have a little experience. But hey, take it for what it is worth.

Two external hard drives.
Two hard drives on another machine.

Yup I see a huge difference.

Best of luck to yeah!

steve-p
Jun 29, 2009, 08:11 AM
So yes, it's easy to have two libraries that function. It's not easy to manage those libraries manually.
I agree entirely - it's a pain, frankly. There are a lot of things I like about iTunes but this is one thing I really don't like. It really shouldn't be necessary to have two separate libraries with the same content just to use lossless for direct playback and syncing with Apple TV, and a lossy format for iPhone/iPod. Or duplicates of every song in the same library, in different formats. Apple should have considered that the "one size fits all" approach does not work in the era of syncing multiple devices with vastly differing capacities from the same library. In the (very) long term when the iPhone is up to 256GB or more then the problem will go away for me, as I can use lossless only. In the meantime I have two iPods, Apple TV and an iPhone to service from the same 10,000 song library, and it's not working very well for me.