PDA

View Full Version : FLAC to AAC problems.




gusious
Dec 5, 2009, 05:08 AM
Ok so basically i want to convert my FLAC music to AAC and then import it to iTunes. When i used Max.app i managed to export it but in iTunes the bitrate wasn't accurate. For example i exported my music at 256kbps but the most songs where in 255kbps. I know it is really stupid but it bugs me. So i used XLD. The problem with that app is that although the bitrate is accurate, it exports the songs in .m4u. From the little things i know, the actual extension for AAC is mp4 not m4u.

Do you know how to fix any of these problems?



MacUser2525
Dec 5, 2009, 04:49 PM
Ok so basically i want to convert my FLAC music to AAC and then import it to iTunes. When i used Max.app i managed to export it but in iTunes the bitrate wasn't accurate. For example i exported my music at 256kbps but the most songs where in 255kbps. I know it is really stupid but it bugs me. So i used XLD. The problem with that app is that although the bitrate is accurate, it exports the songs in .m4u. From the little things i know, the actual extension for AAC is mp4 not m4u.

Do you know how to fix any of these problems?

When I use XLD to convert FLAC to either the lossless or just regular lossy AAC files for my iPod it uses the .m4a extension, according to the Wikipedia either extension can be used.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4_Part_14#.MP4_versus_.M4A_file_extensions

J the Ninja
Dec 5, 2009, 05:26 PM
It's VBR (well, ABR), the bit rate won't match exactly. It's fine, don't worry about it. It dropped the bit rate at a point where it didn't need much data, and that brought your average down 1kbps. It doesn't mean a thing.

justaregularjoe
Dec 5, 2009, 05:29 PM
Silly rabbit! AAC is for Lossy files!

Seriously, rip to ALAC (the Apple Lossless Audio Codec.) This has the ".m4a" extension.

To get lossless ALAC, rip with iTunes if you have the original CD. If you do not have the original cd, use Max (note: i have no experience with max flac to alac, so youll need to get help from others, sorry) on a Mac, or use dbPoweramp on windows. I have extensive experience with dbPoweramp, so PM me if you need help on the windows side.

GermanSuplex
Dec 5, 2009, 06:16 PM
Silly rabbit! AAC is for Lossy files!

Seriously, rip to ALAC (the Apple Lossless Audio Codec.) This has the ".m4a" extension.

To get lossless ALAC, rip with iTunes if you have the original CD. If you do not have the original cd, use Max (note: i have no experience with max flac to alac, so youll need to get help from others, sorry) on a Mac, or use dbPoweramp on windows. I have extensive experience with dbPoweramp, so PM me if you need help on the windows side.

Actually, I would suggest NOT using iTunes to rip CD's. iTunes, even with error correction, is not a secure ripper. If you are going to go through the time and effort of ripping your CDs, you may as well do it right. Use EAC or dBpowerAMP's secure ripper. I suggest dBpowerAMP's secure ripper, as it can rip directly to ALAC. Make sure the "verify" option is ticked so you know you're getting a perfect rip. dBpowerAMP will attempt to correct any errors and also let you know if there were any errors with the rip.

gusious
Dec 6, 2009, 02:08 AM
Thanks a lot for your answers guys.

The only reason i'm not ripping to ALAC is because i don't have a good system to listen to my music. I prefer to have the original FLAC files in my library and use them by converting them to any format i might want.:)

Consultant
Dec 6, 2009, 03:27 AM
Actually, I would suggest NOT using iTunes to rip CD's. iTunes, even with error correction, is not a secure ripper. If you are going to go through the time and effort of ripping your CDs, you may as well do it right. Use EAC or dBpowerAMP's secure ripper. I suggest dBpowerAMP's secure ripper, as it can rip directly to ALAC. Make sure the "verify" option is ticked so you know you're getting a perfect rip. dBpowerAMP will attempt to correct any errors and also let you know if there were any errors with the rip.

If you buy your cds, and don't scratch them, then iTunes works perfectly.

People who care about sound quality usually don't scratch their cds.

GermanSuplex
Dec 6, 2009, 04:56 AM
If you buy your cds, and don't scratch them, then iTunes works perfectly.

People who care about sound quality usually don't scratch their cds.

People who care about sound quality don't scratch their cd's: they also use a secure ripper.

I've had brand new CD's out of the case with errors on them.

If you're going to rip the CD, why not do it right the first time and know for sure that you got an accurate rip?

DoFoT9
Dec 7, 2009, 12:04 AM
interesting thread :D i have learnt much.

lately i have been using Apple Lossless, seems pretty good to me.

Sol
Dec 7, 2009, 05:48 AM
People who care about sound quality don't scratch their cd's: they also use a secure ripper.

I've had brand new CD's out of the case with errors on them.

If you're going to rip the CD, why not do it right the first time and know for sure that you got an accurate rip?

Come on; how much difference will it make to use a "secure" ripper? Will it also slow down the importing process? Other than the rare skipping track, my iTunes-made CD rips have not exhibited any obvious compromise when played back on a myriad of systems. Any differences are negligible and should take nothing away from the pleasure of listening to music on your favourite system.

DoFoT9
Dec 7, 2009, 05:57 AM
Come on; how much difference will it make to use a "secure" ripper? Will it also slow down the importing process? Other than the rare skipping track, my iTunes-made CD rips have not exhibited any obvious compromise when played back on a myriad of systems. Any differences are negligible and should take nothing away from the pleasure of listening to music on your favourite system.

yes, im sure having 1 bit lost somewhere in a song isnt going to make that much of a difference at all..... as long as you can sleep at night ;)

GermanSuplex
Dec 7, 2009, 06:08 AM
Come on; how much difference will it make to use a "secure" ripper? Will it also slow down the importing process? Other than the rare skipping track, my iTunes-made CD rips have not exhibited any obvious compromise when played back on a myriad of systems. Any differences are negligible and should take nothing away from the pleasure of listening to music on your favourite system.

I'm not saying its an absolute must. Especially if you're going straight from CD to lossy. But if you want to archive your CD's in a lossless format like ALAC or FLAC, you may as well do it right. With Accurate Rip results (which both EAC and dBpowerAMP utilize), you can rip just as quickly as iTunes and then only re-rip tracks with errors in the slower modes.

Sol
Dec 7, 2009, 06:10 AM
yes, im sure having 1 bit lost somewhere in a song isnt going to make that much of a difference at all..... as long as you can sleep at night ;)

Yes, I sleep very well listening to my paltry 160 kbs AAC tracks played by the iPod Touch connected via dock line out to a CMoy headphone amplifier driving Grado SR 325is headphones. Good headphones or a dedicated headphone amplifier will make a bigger difference to sonic quality than any particular ripping process.

DoFoT9
Dec 7, 2009, 06:28 AM
Yes, I sleep very well listening to my paltry 160 kbs AAC tracks played by the iPod Touch connected via dock line out to a CMoy headphone amplifier driving Grado SR 325is headphones. Good headphones or a dedicated headphone amplifier will make a bigger difference to sonic quality than any particular ripping process.

hmmm not too sure about that. being a drummer, there is a MASSIVE difference in sound between the quality of the drums @160kb/s, @320kb/s & uncompressed. this is all using my iPod->IE6's.

GermanSuplex
Dec 7, 2009, 06:29 AM
Yes, I sleep very well listening to my paltry 160 kbs AAC tracks played by the iPod Touch connected via dock line out to a CMoy headphone amplifier driving Grado SR 325is headphones. Good headphones or a dedicated headphone amplifier will make a bigger difference to sonic quality than any particular ripping process.


I agree. I'm not saying you'll be able to tell the difference at all between an insecure rip and a secure rip. However, even on a good disc, using an insecure ripper there can be audible errors that won't be caught until you hear the problem on the song. This process can be eliminated with a secure ripper while also giving you the added benefit of knowing you have a perfect rip of your disc.

Running into these issues is why I switched to a secure ripper in the first place, and I haven't had the issue since. And, after all, sonic quality won't mean anything if you have an audible error on a track because of a faulty rip.

Tilpots
Dec 7, 2009, 12:07 PM
So say your using a scratched disc with a secure ripper and you get an error. What do you do then?

spacepower7
Dec 7, 2009, 01:03 PM
Use Rip on a Mac for Accuraterip

It's written by Stephen Booth www.sbooth.org the guy who wrote Max

alphaod
Dec 7, 2009, 01:42 PM
So say your using a scratched disc with a secure ripper and you get an error. What do you do then?

Time to buy new CDs. :p

GermanSuplex
Dec 7, 2009, 01:46 PM
So say your using a scratched disc with a secure ripper and you get an error. What do you do then?

The secure rippers have methods of re-reading the disc and trying their best to get a good rip. Sometimes it can take an hour or two to rip on track but every now and then it will get the track ripped correctly. If it fails after wiping the disc and trying again, it is time to buy a new disc. But I have had some severely scratched discs (sometimes I find a disc laying outside, or a friend will give me a badly scratched disc) and I've had success in getting them to rip properly. If dBpowerAMP can't do it, try EAC, and vice-versa.

mandoman
Dec 7, 2009, 02:23 PM
EAC and dbpoweramp are windows apps.

For a native osx app, I think Max is pretty good - it can use cdparanoia, while not as robust as EAC, it get's the job done and Max is very flexible on the output formats you can choose.

mandoman
Dec 7, 2009, 02:45 PM
Wow, sbooth's Rip looks pretty good, I will have to give it a try when I get home.

Tilpots
Dec 7, 2009, 02:48 PM
Use Rip on a Mac for Accuraterip

It's written by Stephen Booth www.sbooth.org the guy who wrote Max

Thanks for your help!

Time to buy new CDs. :p

Thanks for nothing.:D

If dBpowerAMP can't do it, try EAC, and vice-versa.

Appreciate your suggestions!

mandoman
Dec 7, 2009, 05:47 PM
Has anyone tried XLD for mac? That also uses Accuraterip.

Use Rip on a Mac for Accuraterip

It's written by Stephen Booth www.sbooth.org the guy who wrote Max

Sol
Dec 8, 2009, 03:00 AM
hmmm not too sure about that. being a drummer, there is a MASSIVE difference in sound between the quality of the drums @160kb/s, @320kb/s & uncompressed. this is all using my iPod->IE6's.

There are differences that I think most people can identify in listening tests. All I am saying is that unless you look for them, these compromises to audio purity do not matter in real-world usage of these files.

I will add that you are more familiar with the intricacies of drum sounds and can focus your hearing better than most people, just like a cinematographer who can spot inconsistencies and other flaws in films and videos.

DoFoT9
Dec 8, 2009, 03:15 AM
There are differences that I think most people can identify in listening tests. All I am saying is that unless you look for them, these compromises to audio purity do not matter in real-world usage of these files.
that is true. 95% of listeners are not interested in the quality most of the time. as long as they can hear it... space requirements would also come into play here.

I will add that you are more familiar with the intricacies of drum sounds and can focus your hearing better than most people, just like a cinematographer who can spot inconsistencies and other flaws in films and videos.
cant argue with that. thats the reason why i have been swapping to lossless audio lately, quite often even the high quality compressed stuff will still give some pretty terrible sounding drums - thus my "obsession" (i guess) with lossless audio now.

GermanSuplex
Dec 8, 2009, 01:44 PM
Is the lossless on just for home use or on the iPod too? Because I can't imagine a scenario where a lossy file wouldn't sound the same as a lossless in everyday listening, like on a plane, bus, in a car, etc.

gusious
Dec 8, 2009, 02:29 PM
I believe it's mostly for home use. Because lossless files tend to be quite big.

wywern209
Dec 8, 2009, 07:30 PM
I believe it's mostly for home use. Because lossless files tend to be quite big.

not if you have some high quality earbuds that can isolate the the sound.

GermanSuplex
Dec 8, 2009, 10:01 PM
not if you have some high quality earbuds that can isolate the the sound.

Unless you're listening in a room with dead silence and concentrating intensely on every split-second of audio, and then assuming you can even tell a difference, and the earbuds are in the several hundred dollar range, then it's probably best to just go with lossy over lossless.