Jim Bailey;215496 Wrote: > Why is FLAC preferred to AIFF? Is it becuase FLAC files are smaller but > still lossless? Or are there other reasons to use FLAC? I ask only > because iTunes will encode to AIFF but not FLAC (which makes the former > more convenient than the latter, albeit at the cost of some [a lot?] > disk space.
Actually to compare apples to apples (no pun intended) compare Apple Lossless, not AIFF, to FLAC. AIFF is an entirely uncompressed raw format, like WAV except that it supports tags. It will be lossless but uncompressed, so the files will be large and streams will take a lot of bandwidth. Apple Lossless is compressed but lossless, so the same streams take less hard drive space and less bandwidth, yet no sonic information is discarded. Note on the Squeezebox, Apple Lossless will be transcoded to WAV, so you will only be saving hard drive space, not bandwidth. AIFF will not be transcoded, so no space or bandwidth savings at all, but your server won't be transcoding. As to whether to choose Apple Lossless or FLAC, see what Pat says. -- Mark Lanctot 'Sean Adams' Response-O-Matic checklist, patent pending!' (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=200910&postcount=2) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mark Lanctot's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2071 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=36645 _______________________________________________ ripping mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/ripping
