is Apple Lossless truly lossless??

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by anikgol, Apr 29, 2004.

  1. anikgol macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2003
    #1
    if searched through the net and not found a definitive answer to this. being a grateful dead fan im interested to know it its truly lossless as FLAC and shn.

    ive heard that the bitrate is appr. 820 and it is much lower than wav/aif. but how can we test to see it this _truly_ is lossless and not just a AAC encoded at a high bitrate?? this is very important to many live music fans how trade music.
     
  2. porovaara macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2002
    Location:
    sf
    #2
    It is. Over on ars some people have already done comparisons with FLAC.
     
  3. redAPPLE macrumors 68030

    redAPPLE

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Location:
    2 Much Infinite Loops
    #3
    nice to know. but the better question is, does this have a future? how many ppl would use this?

    what i would love to know is, can i create a smart playlist with only lossless tunes? well you know, my 10 000 song ipod might only carry 800 after loading it with lossless music....
     
  4. anikgol thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2003
    #4
    redApple-- look i dotn think this is targeted at ipod users in general but i have theory that since itunes is going to make available Grateful dead (they are hard on lossless) this is targeted most at live recording material like Dead shows. this is great since there will be a definitive standard for itunes users how are into live music trading. i for myself will maybe use this alot. depends on how the file size is compared to FLAC.

    i also suspect that apple will make not only live dead material but other artists friendly to live material recordings, like Pearl Jam and Phish.
     
  5. anikgol thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2003
    #5
    where is "ars"? do you have a link for that page? artsdeca or something...?
     
  6. gekko513 macrumors 603

    gekko513

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    #7
    the fleshy part of the human body that you sit on :confused: no, wait, that has an 'e' ... I think he means arstechnica.com
     
  7. anikgol thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2003
    #8
    thanx a ton for the link.

    takker og bukker fra Trondheim gekko.
     
  8. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #9
    I've waited to rip my classical music due to the deficiencies of the existing formats. A lossless format would certainly be a great thing, especially using only half the storage of AIFF.
     
  9. MacManDan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    #10
    It won't necessarily be half the file size of the equivalent AIFF files. The Apple Lossless codec (part of the newly emerging AAC Lossless codec, see: http://www.nue.tu-berlin.de/forschung/projekte/lossless/mpeg4als.html) is actually variable bit rate. Some of the files I've encoded are 2/3 the size of AIFFs, as opposed to half. But still, the fact remains, it is lossless.
     
  10. anikgol thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2003
    #11
    why not use FLAC and shn? try shorten and xAct for shn and FLAC files.
     
  11. MacManDan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    #12
    FLAC is great (I use the now-dead MacAmp to listen to all of my FLACed files) .. but what's nice about the Apple Lossless is that it has a standard for metadata. FLAC has support for it, but it's not standard, and can be proprietarily added by different programs. Plus, this allows people to add lossless files to iTunes. I miss the elegance of iTunes when I use MacAmp, but since no QuickTime plugin yet exists for Flac, I'm still wondering if I should re-rip all of those CDs ....
     
  12. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #13
    Considering that all of my other music is encoded as 256 Kbps mp3 format, I suppose 66 percent isn't too bad for classical. I'll just have to try it and see what kind of results I get from it. My hard drive has been hurting ever since ripping my music so, I can't use that much more without ditching applications. :D
     
  13. jamdr macrumors 6502a

    jamdr

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #14
    People keep on saying "half the size of AIFF" or "two-third the size of AIFF." Well, I don't really know what that means. I'm interested in encoding my music in a lossless format, but how big is an average song going to be? Like a 4:00 minute song, for example, in my library is about 5.7 megs (192 kbps MP3). About how big would that song be in Apple Lossless? :confused:
     
  14. Rincewind42 macrumors 6502a

    Rincewind42

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2003
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #15
    AIFF is about 10MB/min. Assuming about the 50% compression rate on lossless, than means a 4 minute file will be about 20MB vs the AIFF at around 40MB.
     
  15. JordanNZ macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Location:
    Auckland, New Zealand
    #16
    Some of the files I encoded with this have been 2/3 the size of Aiff, and some have been 1/5 of the size! Very impressive.
     
  16. stoid macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #17
    There is an easy way to find out! Rip a song off of a CD at 192Kbps mp3 and again at 128Kbps AAC in iTunes. If you can't tell the difference, then one does not exist. ;)
     
  17. Rincewind42 macrumors 6502a

    Rincewind42

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2003
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #18
    It is generally accepted that 128 AAC is equivalent to at least 160 MP3, but for me, I went from 192 MP3 to 128 AAC, so that may vary by taste. Do your own test I think with some of your CDs. I'm sure that some people will come in here and tell you that nothing below 256 kbps AAC will do, but I know people (and I suspect this is typical) who have found that 128 and below AAC is absolutely fine for them.
     
  18. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #19
    ok well my personal favorite music is by this band called TOOL so i went ahead and tried to import one of thier cds at the lossless rate and this is what i got....anyone know why? is it because its a variable bit rate or what?
     

    Attached Files:

  19. Rincewind42 macrumors 6502a

    Rincewind42

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2003
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #20
    That would be it exactly.
     
  20. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #21
    ok i thought it was variable bit rate, but doesnt this make it lossy? or are the other formats just as variable?
     
  21. Rincewind42 macrumors 6502a

    Rincewind42

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2003
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #22
    No, VBR is common among all loss-less compression schemes. This is because there are some parts of the data stream that compress better than others. CBR encodings basically throw out data until they reach the target bit rate, but VBR encodings are free to alter their compression rate to preserve more data. Lossless is VBR that isn't allowed to throw any data away.
     
  22. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #23
    thank you very much i was wondering about this and your anwer helps to clear it all up for me, i appreciate it
     
  23. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #24
    I ripped one opera piece and it went from 100.2 MB on the CD to 39.3 MB in iTunes' lossless format. That's not bad and it sounded okay, as far as I could tell with my lousy speakers. :D
     
  24. MacManDan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    #25
    Very nice! Mileage does vary on song, of course .. so I'm not too surprised. As long as Apple's format meets the standard (which I'm sure it does) then your files should audibly be exact replicas of the CD, so even if you had a much better system you shouldn't be able to tell the difference ;)
     

Share This Page