PDA

View Full Version : Original CD vs .aiff vs Apple Lossless difference on sound?




umbilical
Sep 14, 2009, 05:13 PM
hi, I have a tons of Original CDs that I want import to itunes... so a simple question:

any difference ON SOUND!!! (not mb space or something) between the Original CD, Aiff and Apple Lossless.

My idea is import to apple lossless, I think that final result is the same sound of the CD and minus space on mb. rigth?????? :confused:



Galley
Sep 14, 2009, 08:32 PM
There is no difference, as all three are lossless. Apple Lossless has two advantages: tagging support and smaller file sizes. Depending on the complexity of the music, and whether it's mono or stereo, bitrates can be anywhere between 300 and 1100Kbps. AIFF is always 1411KBps.

DoFoT9
Sep 14, 2009, 08:34 PM
they are all identical.. they will sound the same.. e.g. IDENTICAL. haha

umbilical
Sep 14, 2009, 09:16 PM
great! I go import all with apple lossless ;) thanks guys

DoFoT9
Sep 14, 2009, 09:17 PM
great! I go import all with apple lossless ;) thanks guys

all good, hope it works out for you :D happy converting (its a long process)

Teej guy
Sep 14, 2009, 11:35 PM
If you're bothering to import lossless files, I'd use XLD to rip, not iTunes. You know the saying...put crap in, get crap out. Not that the iTunes rips are going to sound crap...mainly just that XLD will do a better job, cross check with the Accurate Rip database and give you a proper log as to whether or not the rip went down correctly.

DoFoT9
Sep 14, 2009, 11:36 PM
If you're bothering to import lossless files, I'd use XLD to rip, not iTunes. You know the saying...put crap in, get crap out. Not that the iTunes rips are going to sound crap...mainly just that XLD will do a better job, cross check with the Accurate Rip database and give you a proper log as to whether or not the rip went down correctly.

now thats cool! but how can we trust them? lol

umbilical
Sep 15, 2009, 02:21 PM
If you're bothering to import lossless files, I'd use XLD to rip, not iTunes. You know the saying...put crap in, get crap out. Not that the iTunes rips are going to sound crap...mainly just that XLD will do a better job, cross check with the Accurate Rip database and give you a proper log as to whether or not the rip went down correctly.

ok first, yeah I have XLD is the twin of pc app users EAC (exact audio copy) to rip, and know accurate rip etc... but!!! really you think that itunes final rip sounds bad???? why??? apple vs a one guy! creator of XLD... why??? I want a technical explanation please... a thing like accurate rip I dont care, I just want the best end sound, for sell all my cds and dont loose sound.

thanks please open the dabate to XLD vs iTunes or XLD and iTunes vs EAC... see I ask that some months ago... A guy say that is the same result: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=664631

fernande-mac
Sep 15, 2009, 05:50 PM
Not that the iTunes rips are going to sound crap...mainly just that XLD will do a better job.

XLD will do a better job of what? Smaller file size, faster encoding, more encoding options?

A lossless compression is basically a compression scheme that allows you to reconstruct an exact replica of the original source data from the compressed output. If you do not get exactly the same thing that you put in, then the algorithm is broken.

So, to answer the OP's question: No. There should not be any difference in sound quality.

AIFF, WAV, Apple Lossless, FLAC, etc., all have the same basic claim. You will be able to reconstruct the original source (e.g., CD) without any loss for the playback. So, if the original recording was excellent, then you get exactly that. If the original recording was crap, then you get exactly that. ;)

If the iPod supports AIFF, WAV and Apple Lossless, then it does not matter how you created the compressed files, the reconstructed data should be exactly the same, assuming the compression algorithm was properly implemented.

DoFoT9
Sep 15, 2009, 05:56 PM
nice response :cool:



If the iPod supports AIFF, WAV and Apple Lossless, then it does not matter how you created the compressed files, the reconstructed data should be exactly the same, assuming the compression algorithm was properly implemented.

provided that the sound card on the device is capable of outputting that quality of course... (i.e. my 5G ipod can play AIFFs etc but the output quality is MUCH lower then say from my home computer).

Teej guy
Sep 15, 2009, 06:02 PM
XLD will do a better job of what? Smaller file size, faster encoding, more encoding options?

Sorry, maybe I didn't make it clear enough...I'm talking about the ripping, not the encoding. What I'm saying is you might as well be sure your ripping is going well if you're bothering to take up all the hard drive space required for a lossless collection. Doing it through XLD gives you a much better idea of if the bits you're ripping are exactly the same as what's on the CD, if error correction is going wild, or if there's a chance you've got a skip in your rip.

fernande-mac
Sep 15, 2009, 06:55 PM
provided that the sound card on the device is capable of outputting that quality of course

Good point there.

my 5G ipod can play AIFFs etc but the output quality is MUCH lower then say from my home computer

This is true only if you are listening to the signal from the amplified headphone jack directly.

If you are listening to the line out signal from your iPod 5G, then you should be capable of getting better sound quality from the externally amplified signal, e.g., car stereo, home stereo, headphone amplifier, etc.

Sorry, maybe I didn't make it clear enough...I'm talking about the ripping, not the encoding. What I'm saying is you might as well be sure your ripping is going well if you're bothering to take up all the hard drive space required for a lossless collection. Doing it through XLD gives you a much better idea of if the bits you're ripping are exactly the same as what's on the CD, if error correction is going wild, or if there's a chance you've got a skip in your rip.

I see. I understand. It is beneficial to have some real-time feedback of the ripping process for those cases where the original media is bad, the equipment is faulty, or there OS is overloaded.

DoFoT9
Sep 15, 2009, 07:01 PM
This is true only if you are listening to the signal from the amplified headphone jack directly.

If you are listening to the line out signal from your iPod 5G, then you should be capable of getting better sound quality from the externally amplified signal, e.g., car stereo, home stereo, headphone amplifier, etc.

i generally only listen to my ipod either with my IE6 headphones, or with my car stereo via a line-in (its decent, but not the best).

im somewhat confused by what your saying, do you mean to say that an AIFF/whatever file being played on an iPod will sound better once put through a stereo/reciever/etc as opposed to headphones? :confused:

umbilical
Sep 15, 2009, 09:43 PM
thanks for all feedbacks... well I go to rip with itunes my cds... to apple lossless :)

just one thing, I wait for a update to itunes, why? I dont know but I see some bugs, like this that I post http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=783090 that dont affect the rip, but! in the past I add a lot flac albums to toast... later mount... and later import to itunes with no problemas... at this time I make same with some albums and I find 2 songs that sound horrible! rare... I hear the original source flac and the songs are ok... I dont know why but happend on the new itunes, I think that convert the song too fast! and produce that... I dont know...

fernande-mac
Sep 16, 2009, 12:57 AM
im somewhat confused by what your saying, do you mean to say that an AIFF/whatever file being played on an iPod will sound better once put through a stereo/reciever/etc as opposed to headphones? :confused:

What I am saying is that there are two ways to get the sound signal from an iPod:

1) Through the headphone jack.

2) Through the line out from the dock connector.

The signal that comes out of 1) is already processed/amplified by the iPod internal components. It has been discussed in other threads that the quality of this signal varies from model to model and is usually worse in iPods compared to Sony Walkman, Zune HD, etc., because of the cheap components at the end of the chain that Apple puts in.

As you mentioned, playing lossless files in the iPod through the headphone jack will not really be any better than playing the same file in the computer. It does not matter if you connect the headphone jack to the car stereo, home stereo or high-end headphones. In this case you are bound to the capabilities of the iPod to produce good sound.

The signal that comes out of 2) in unprocessed. If should be similar in all iPod models and is basically the reconstructed signal from the losslessly compressed file.

If you put that signal through the car stereo, home stereo or headphone amplifier, you should get better quality as the processing is done by a higher-end equipment and not the iPod. In this case you are bound to the capabilities of the car stereo, home stereo or headphones amplifier.

Playing lossless files in the iPod through the line out will be similar to, better than, or worse than playing the same file in the computer depending on the quality of the equipment compared to the computer.

I hope this makes sense.