Apple Lists FLAC Audio Playback Support for 4K Apple TV, iPhone 7, iPhone 8, iPhone X

[simonmet]

I re-ripped all my music to Apple Lossless years ago but would have preferred FLAC as my understanding is that's it's an open standard compared to AL. So is this going to be an option in iTunes from here forward (rip in FLAC) or have I misread/misunderstood?

Pretty sure Apple made ALAC open as well. And you’d always be able to convert to FLAC via AIFF if you set up a script to delete the intermediate and former files as you go.

But there’s no point. ALAC may give you better metadata features and compatibility with Apple software.

 

[bommai]

Not true. Even 16 bit 44khz flac craps all over AAC, MP3 or any lossy codec. Flac is lossless don't forget.

If you use ALAC for everything it is same as flac. Lossless. There is a xlc app that converts any audio format to something else. I convert flac to ALAC and import into iTunes.

 

[axp4654]

Am I missing something? If iPhone supports FLAC the only way to put those files on the device (at least using official Apple software) is from iTunes or through Apple Music. One iTunes doesn't supprt FLAC as far as I know and Apple Music is in 256 AAC so how can I get those files on my device? (again assuming I'm not using any third party apps)

 

[bommai]

This is bizarre, are you serious?! Isn't there an optical out?

I think you are a little out of touch. Optical is pretty much deprecated for surround sound because it cannot handle the codecs that are newer than Dolby digital and DTS. So if you want Dolby Digital + or Dolby TrueHD or DTS HD Master Audio or DTS HD HR or Dolby Atmos or DTS:X you need HDMI. Apple TV 4 has HDMI but they only advertise Dolby digital and Dolby digital + as supported codecs. Not even DTS. Most of the competing devices can play lossless surround audio. I have. 7.2.4 system in my theater room and I don't even dare bring the AppleTV there. I leave my AppleTV 4 in my family room which is a 5.1 setup and not as high end. We use it primarily for children's educational stuff streamed through plex. I gave up on iTunes because my wife had trouble with it every other day!

In my theater room I use a Sony x800 UHD player that can pretty much play any formats thrown at it including DSD, ALAC, DTS:X, Dolby Atmos, etc. it can play stuff directly connected through USB or through DLNA. It can play 4k bluray, regular blurays, DVD, cd, sacd, DVD-audio, etc. it even has two hdmi outputs for flexibility with receivers that don't support 4k pass through. All this for $250. I pair that with my Denon AVR X4300H and JBL Studio 5 speakers and I have a pretty good sound.

 

[[AUT] Thomas]

@kyjaotkb Thanks! You saved me a lot of arguments here...

I really don't understand why this amazing iPhone doesn't even support APT-X. Ironically, OSX does.
I'm glad Apple finally integrates FLAC, but, frankly, I'm not applauding. This should have been there from the beginning.
I think they're only doing it to make sure they can sell 512GB phones in the future...

Anyway, in reality, the major problem IMHO is getting good FLAC content. If the mastering was crappy, there's no point in FLAC. Let alone bad recording in first place.

To be honest, I don't hear the difference between a 256Kbit/s VBR MP3 and FLAC on most headphones -especially not most in-ears (that said, I don't spend money on expensive headphones), but the difference can get quite signifant on any decent HiFi or PA system (especially in the lows & highs). This why I think having FLAC on e.g. an iPhone is nice, but only a part of the chain. At least AirPlay is lossless, but capped at 44,1/16, which doesn't make sense these days either, as WiFi is so fast, that it could as well handle 192/24 without significantly impacting battery life (which is neglible in that scenario anyway). 192/24 may be overkill anyway, but I don't see a reason for the arbitrary cap at 44/16.

 

[Delgibbons]

I think you are a little out of touch. Optical is pretty much deprecated for surround sound because it cannot handle the codecs that are newer than Dolby digital and DTS. So if you want Dolby Digital + or Dolby TrueHD or DTS HD Master Audio or DTS HD HR or Dolby Atmos or DTS:X you need HDMI. Apple TV 4 has HDMI but they only advertise Dolby digital and Dolby digital + as supported codecs. Not even DTS. Most of the competing devices can play lossless surround audio. I have. 7.2.4 system in my theater room and I don't even dare bring the AppleTV there. I leave my AppleTV 4 in my family room which is a 5.1 setup and not as high end. We use it primarily for children's educational stuff streamed through plex. I gave up on iTunes because my wife had trouble with it every other day!

In my theater room I use a Sony x800 UHD player that can pretty much play any formats thrown at it including DSD, ALAC, DTS:X, Dolby Atmos, etc. it can play stuff directly connected through USB or through DLNA. It can play 4k bluray, regular blurays, DVD, cd, sacd, DVD-audio, etc. it even has two hdmi outputs for flexibility with receivers that don't support 4k pass through. All this for $250. I pair that with my Denon AVR X4300H and JBL Studio 5 speakers and I have a pretty good sound.

Ah yes you're right of course. Not to support more modern surround over HDMI is a travesty. Even my Playstation 3 did that....
[doublepost=1505479735][/doublepost]

If you use ALAC for everything it is same as flac. Lossless. There is a xlc app that converts any audio format to something else. I convert flac to ALAC and import into iTunes.

I didnt mention ALAC most HD audio suppliers I work with supply AIFF, ALAC, FLAC or WAV

 

[x-evil-x]

what does this mean for the camera connection kit and usb audio coming out of a 7 7+ and on iPhone? I currently have this setup in my car with a dac collecting usb audio from the phone and outputting it digitally to my dsp in my car. The dsp is capable of 24 96 I believe.

 

[mwd25]

Apple's support for the FLAC codec doesn't officially extend to the iPhone 6s or iPhone SE, which may be because an A10 processor is a minimum requirement for hardware decoding and Apple is not satisfied with the power consumption tradeoffs of FLAC software decoding.

Yet I can play FLAC files on Iphone6s+ through VLC. So which is it? Is VLC compressing FLAC (doubt it) or can Iphone6s actually play files fine but Apple has decided it uses too much power so doesnt support it. I dont find any increased battery drain playing FLAC vs Mp3. And if I did, let me make that call, dont block me from being able to play them. Having said that, Im glad they have allowed on 7-X at least and thank god for VLC.

 

[Delgibbons]

For reference my s7 edge built in audio player displays the uhq 24bit 192khz icon when playing back hi def audio

 

[kyjaotkb]

Yet I can play FLAC files on Iphone6s+ through VLC. So which is it? Is VLC compressing FLAC (doubt it) or can Iphone6s actually play files fine but Apple has decided it uses too much power so doesnt support it. I dont find any increased battery drain playing FLAC vs Mp3. And if I did, let me make that call, dont block me from being able to play them. Having said that, Im glad they have allowed on 7-X at least and thank god for VLC.

Yes, VLC has software FLAC decoding. The news is about native, hardware FLAC decoding in the new iPhones.
Your iPhone can indeed decode any format: Spotify, for instance, is in OGG Vorbis, a format not natively supported by the iPhone but decoded in software.
[doublepost=1505482217][/doublepost]

For reference my s7 edge built in audio player displays the uhq 24bit 192khz icon when playing back hi def audio View attachment 717943

What does UHQ mean? It's not a standard, is it?

 

[cube]

I have a 44.1kHz FLAC Qobuz subscription, now they also have Hi Res streaming without buying.

 

[Delgibbons]

Yes, VLC has software FLAC decoding. The news is about native, hardware FLAC decoding in the new iPhones.
Your iPhone can indeed decode any format: Spotify, for instance, is in OGG Vorbis, a format not natively supported by the iPhone but decoded in software.
[doublepost=1505482217][/doublepost]
What does UHQ mean? It's not a standard, is it?

Not at all no. Just Samsung's name for "I'm playing back hi-def" wish I had a Note 8 so I can whack my DSD orchestral stuff on my microsd too.

This John Williams album is FLAC. I have WAV and AIFF stuff too. I have a lot of hi def albums

 

[EightyTwenty]

FLAC or ALL takes up considerable space if you have a vast collection. Any where between 2 and 8 times larger thank HW MP3's. Can many of you hear the difference in FLAC audio over 320kbps MP3?

It's not 8 times larger. That is a silly comment.

Lossless ALAC should have been available in the iTunes Store 5 years ago.

Ideally, Apple would push the industry to a new 24-bit/60 kHz standard, but that ain't happening.

 

[Delgibbons]

It's not 8 times larger. That is a silly comment.

Lossless ALAC should have been available in the iTunes Store 5 years ago.

Logistically I can understand Apple holding back though. File size differences, especially for albums, are substantial....

Jacko. Man in the Mirror, one track, only 24 48 res....nearly 70mb

 

[[AUT] Thomas]

but Apple has decided it uses too much power so doesnt support it.

This. You can play anything on the CPU, even old MPEG2 or DIVX, but I think there's no hardware acceleration for FLAC, which means the CPU is awake more often. And since Apple is deciding if that is acceptable to the customer, they don't natively support it. Same goes for multi-tasking. There is no such thing as real (parallel) multi-tasking in iOS, as Apple decides the customer is too stupid to handle multiple open apps (and the associated battery drain and RAM usage).

 

[Glassed Silver]

Alas, over Bluetooth, an iPhone, which doesn't have Apt-X compatibility, will re-compress anything that's not AAC to SBC, which sounds like absolute crap. For instance, Spotify - even in "Extreme" 320kbps Ogg Vorbis, sounds vastly inferior to Apple Music @256kbps AAC, because the iPhone sends raw AAC over bluetooth to compatible headphones, whilst it recompresses the OGG on Spotify into SBC.

The only solution I've found to use my Spotify subscription over Bluetooth in a decent quality is to use a cheap Android phone with Apt-X...

By the way, all those Bluetooth 5 bells and whistles will change nothing.

But Android doesn't have a nice chip specially designed for wireless audio with a letter and a digit!

Apple must surely give customers what truly benefits them, no?

Glassed Silver:win

 

[cube]

Ideally, Apple would push the industry to a new 24-bit/60 kHz standard, but that ain't happening.

What for when an open lossless 24-bit/192kHz standard is already used?

 

[kyjaotkb]

what does this mean for the camera connection kit and usb audio coming out of a 7 7+ and on iPhone? I currently have this setup in my car with a dac collecting usb audio from the phone and outputting it digitally to my dsp in my car. The dsp is capable of 24 96 I believe.

If you are using the USB DSP with a Hi-Res compatible app (Qobuz, 7Digital...) then Bob's your uncle. You are not limited at all to what the iPhone can and cannot output.
Interestingly, the cheapest DSP you can find is Apple's own Lightning-to-headphone jack adaptor, which decodes 24-192:
http://www.qobuz.com/gb-en/info/hi-res-guide/bancs-d-essai/we-ve-tried-it-the-apple-lightning178666
otherwise there's a good overview of what does and doesn't work in Hi-Res on iOS here
http://www.qobuz.com/FR-fr/info/Hi-Fi/Les-cingles-de-la-Hi-Fi/Choisissez-votre-DAC-ou-votre179124

You will however need to resort to using the camera kit for USB DACs:
http://blogsv2.qobuz.com/qobuz-blog...-your-iphone-or-ipad-well-it-is-now-possible/

PS: love the Qobuz website (I am not affiliated to them!)

 

[jephrey]

I hope it extends to iTunes but if Apple were to offer any other format, it'd be Apple Lossless. I keep my collection in ALAC, many 24/96 files and do pretty much everything through iTunes. I'm not a fan of the 16/44.1 cap on airplay. I was patient - didn't get an ipod until apple came out with ALAC and I'm hopeful for higher bit-rate/sample-depth playback over airplay. I wouldn't think this would be a hardware issue - c'mon Apple, turn up the juice!

 

[EightyTwenty]

Not true. Even 16 bit 44khz flac craps all over AAC, MP3 or any lossy codec. Flac is lossless don't forget.

Not to mention that once you go past 60 kHz, audio actually sounds *worse*... or should I say "less accurate". Some people seem to enjoy the distortion caused by ultra high sample rates.

A 16-bit/48 kHz audio file is far better than many "hi-res" files that are 96 kHz or even 192 kHz (which is fairly ridiculous).

16/48 should have been the CD standard to begin with.

 

[kyjaotkb]

But Android doesn't have a nice chip specially designed for wireless audio with a letter and a digit!

Apple must surely give customers what truly benefits them, no?

Glassed Silver:win

To be fair, the W1 is an interesting hardware and software move, that allows:
- slightly longer range thanks to power optimizations
- syncing of pairing over iCloud

But it has nothing to do with throughput and the most important aspect for audio, which codecs are used...

 

[Delgibbons]

Nonsensical. Protools HD and studio masters all rendered out at 24 bit 96 or 24 bit 192. Except film where 24bit48khz is the standard. AVID recommend working internally at 32 bit for plugin rounding errors.

24 bit 96khz masters or better are often kept to ensure hardware downcoversion to anything can be achieved later.

Again, it depends on the material, how it's been handled, quality of encoding, hardware, engineer....blah blah

 

[EightyTwenty]

What for when an open lossless 24-bit/192kHz standard is already used?

1. 192 kHz is far too high a sample rate and causes distortion in the audible frequency range (which tops out at around 20 kHz for young humans) and degrades badly with age.

2. According to a famous white paper in the topic, around 60 kHz is the ideal sample rate (any higher and you cause distortion; any lower and you risk dithering effects in the audible range).

Honestly, 24-bit/48 kHz would be good enough and a fair improvement over CD.

 

[cube]

1. 192 kHz is far too high a sample rate and causes distortion in the audible frequency range (which tops out at around 20 kHz for young humans) and degrades badly with age.

2. According to a famous a white paper in the topic, around 60 kHz is the ideal sample rate (any higher and you cause distortion; any lower and you risk dithering effects in the audible range).

Honestly, 24-bit/48 kHz would be good enough and a fair improvement over CD.

I don't see much chance for a 60kHz format when most people are happy with MP3, and the ones that care already have 96kHz and 192kHz equipment and music.

 

[Delgibbons]

1. 192 kHz is far too high a sample rate and causes distortion in the audible frequency range (which tops out at around 20 kHz for young humans) and degrades badly with age.

2. According to a famous white paper in the topic, around 60 kHz is the ideal sample rate (any higher and you cause distortion; any lower and you risk dithering effects in the audible range).

Honestly, 24-bit/48 kHz would be good enough and a fair improvement over CD.

Remember, to get a PERFECT representation of an analog signal, you only need to sample at twice the highest frequency in that analog signal (the 'Nyquist Theorem'). This is nicely summarized in this document from a VERY trusted source: http://www.lavryengineering.com/docu...ing_Theory.pdf

BUT, the real benefit to 96kHz is not the increased resolution, but the MUCH shallower brickwall (anti-alias) filter afforded by the 48.1kHz Nyquist limit. With 44.1, you have to go from full signal acceptance at 20kHz, to ZERO acceptance at 22.05kHz (the Nyquist limit of a 44.1kHz sampling rate). That is, for a 24-bit signal, -144dB in about 1/10 of an octave (slightly less steep in practice). This is a VERY steep filter. For a 44.8kHz Nyquist limit, your filter goes from full acceptance at 20kHz to zero at 48.1kHz (MUCH less steep). This has REAL sonic benefits. BUT, you will have to downsample if you're distributing to CD, so the benefits might not last.