Robin Bowes;169133 Wrote:
tomjtx wrote:
[color=blue]
Max seems to be able to do it:
http://sbooth.org/Max/
R.
re: Max - I played around with it a few months ago and found that a
number of tags were lost when converting from ALAC to FLAC.
From memory, I think the ALAC
Interesting op-ed in the NY Times - Want an IPhone? Beware the
IHandcuffs:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/14/business/yourmoney/14digi.html
--
benthos
benthos's Profile:
Robin Bowes;169007 Wrote:
geraint smith wrote:
If only FLAC worked with iTunes (or vice versa), or else that there
were another music ripping/tagging/labelling all-in-one product for
Mac
OSX that was as easy, and worked as well as, iTunes. But it doesn't,
and
there isn't - or if
lafayette;169093 Wrote:
I am an attorney, and...logic matters to me.
Are you sure you're a lawyer? I've never heard one say that before. The
ones I know say logic can go hang provided that they win.
--
geraint smith
tomjtx;169120 Wrote:
even if I continue to use Itunes.
I really liked iTunes (especially as it was so much better than
MusicMatch, which my first iPod came with - what a shocker that was!).
However, its increasing focus on its music store (which I will never use
- DRM, low bitrate...) put me
I think the AppleTV has quite a bit of potential. The price here in the
UK is around the same as a wireless Squeezebox 3, which in my view
makes it pretty good value as it can do lots of other things too. It's
not a straight replacement, but (as someone said earlier in the thread)
it will have a
I stand corrected ; )
By the way, I think Apple TV has one serious disadvantage. Let's think
about those of use who have collections numbering in the thousands.
Browsing genres and scrolling, from the beginning of the alphabet,
isn't much of an option unless you're just noodling around. And
Robin Bowes;169133 Wrote:
tomjtx wrote:
Robin,
Do you have a way to easily convert ALAC to FLAC?
ALAC, I mean, alas no.
You may be able to do it with Foobar2000, but I suspect you're on a
Mac.
dbPoweramp can do it, but again, that's Pc-based.
tomjtx;169270 Wrote:
Yes , I have OS 10.4
Thanks for the info. I'll look at the links,
Tom
A me too, I'm afraid, but I really do want to thank Robin for that
Max link. Now I can have a little play with FLAC and find out for
myself what can and can't be done on the Mac with it. Thank you,
The problem is that iTunes does not support FLAC. As far as I know,
anyway. Otherwise, converting to FLAC would be nice -- the RW/FF
feature is, well, a good feature.
tomjtx;169270 Wrote:
Yes , I have OS 10.4
Thanks for the info. I'll look at the links,
Tom
--
lafayette
Sweet Home
lafayette;169399 Wrote:
The problem is that iTunes does not support FLAC. As far as I know,
anyway. Otherwise, converting to FLAC would be nice -- the RW/FF
feature is, well, a good feature.
http://playlistmag.com/news/2006/07/11/ogg/index.php
--
opaqueice
opaqueice;169401 Wrote:
http://playlistmag.com/news/2006/07/11/ogg/index.php
Cool, thanks for the link
--
tomjtx
tomjtx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7449
View this thread:
tomjtx wrote:
opaqueice;169401 Wrote:
http://playlistmag.com/news/2006/07/11/ogg/index.php
Cool, thanks for the link
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
opaqueice wrote:
lafayette;169399 Wrote:
The problem is that iTunes does not support FLAC. As far as I know,
anyway. Otherwise, converting to FLAC would be nice -- the RW/FF
feature is, well, a good feature.
http://playlistmag.com/news/2006/07/11/ogg/index.php
From the release notes:
Hey, this is really cool. I'm tempted to back-up my library (again),
convert the whole shebang, and give this a try.
opaqueice;169401 Wrote:
http://playlistmag.com/news/2006/07/11/ogg/index.php
--
lafayette
Sweet Home Alabama
Robin Bowes;169431 Wrote:
From the release notes:[/color]
FLAC - FLAC decoder and importer for Ogg FLAC (no support for native
FLAC file format yet);
So, close, but no cigar!
The difference seems to be a few bytes at the beginning of the file and
the .ogg extension on the file name.
ezkcdude;168698 Wrote:
I think both the TV and iPhone miss the mark. There are numerous
solutions that do what the AppleTV does, and the iPhone is way too
expensive for what it does. Although, I agree with the above poster
that a nice SlimServer skin would make it more appealing, in that it
lafayette wrote:
Pray, do expound upon how FLAC is superior to Apple Lossless (which is
not lossy)? Or AIFF, which is not lossy and uncompressed, for that
matter?
1. FLAC is open source, not proprietary
2. FLAC itakes up less space than AIFF,
One point people seem to be missing is this:
Robin Bowes;168860 Wrote:
1. FLAC is open source, not proprietary
Apologies for jumping into your discussion, but how does that affect
audio quality? It's more of a personal issue whether you care or not
about open source vs proprietary and it doesn't make either technically
superior to
CardinalFang wrote:
Robin Bowes;168860 Wrote:
1. FLAC is open source, not proprietary
Apologies for jumping into your discussion, but how does that affect
audio quality?
Who said anything about audio quality?
The original question was:
Pray, do expound upon how FLAC is superior to Apple
Robin Bowes;168892 Wrote:
CardinalFang wrote:
Robin Bowes;168860 Wrote:
1. FLAC is open source, not proprietary
Apologies for jumping into your discussion, but how does that affect
audio quality?
Who said anything about audio quality?
The original question was:
Pray, do
Robin Bowes;168892 Wrote:
Audio quality should be identical, given that all file formats under
discussion here are lossless.
R.
Exaxctly. They are audio file formats and the only way to judge
superiority is on their performance in that role.
Judgement based on Open Source vs Proprietary
CardinalFang wrote:
Robin Bowes;168892 Wrote:
Audio quality should be identical, given that all file formats under
discussion here are lossless.
R.
Exaxctly. They are audio file formats and the only way to judge
superiority is on their performance in that role.
No, that is *your* way to
tomjtx wrote:
Thanks , Robin for reiterating that ALAC should be auditorily
indistinguishable from FLAC. There seems to be some misconception
about that.
I suspect there is often confusion between ALAC (lossless) and AAC (lossy).
It seems that many more people have heard of AAC than ALAC.
Robin Bowes;168923 Wrote:
You seem to have unilaterally decided to define superior as
technically superior.
R.
Perhaps I did, but it's the most meaningful way to compare audio
formats within the context of the original discussion which was about
FLAC being genuinely lossless.
Anyway, the
Why on earth do people get upset about this stuff?
This is nonsense. The formats are perfectly equivalent when it comes
to audio output. If you are not an Apple user and do not want ALAC,
well, that's your business. But puffing up your chest about being
somehow superior is just, well, hot air.
lafayette wrote:
Why on earth do people get upset about this stuff?
This is nonsense. The formats are perfectly equivalent when it comes
to audio output. If you are not an Apple user and do not want ALAC,
well, that's your business. But puffing up your chest about being
somehow superior
Pat Farrell;168809 Wrote:
tomjtx wrote:
benthos;168790 Wrote:
That's where you and I part paths: it's about my property, not
Apple's,
or anyone else's.
I completely agree with you that it's my property once I buy it.
This
whole DRM thing should be a major consumer
Robin Bowes;168860 Wrote:
lafayette wrote:
[color=blue]
One point people seem to be missing is this: Apple has moved forward
with 802.11n. All these problems with Squeezebox/Transporter
drop-outs? History.
Nope. The microwave/phone/xmas tree will still affect the signal.
R.
CardinalFang;168872 Wrote:
Apologies for jumping into your discussion, but how does that affect
audio quality? It's more of a personal issue whether you care or not
about open source vs proprietary and it doesn't make either technically
superior to the other. They are both lossless and take
geraint smith wrote:
If only FLAC worked with iTunes (or vice versa), or else that there
were another music ripping/tagging/labelling all-in-one product for Mac
OSX that was as easy, and worked as well as, iTunes. But it doesn't, and
there isn't - or if there is one, I'd very much like to
Perhaps it is simply your manner or the way I interpreted an abrasive
and/or curt post.
Having said that, I am an attorney, and as open source matters to you,
logic matters to me.
You did not state an opinion. You stated something as a matter of
fact. As a matter of fact, in terms of audio,
Robin Bowes;169102 Wrote:
Nothing further to add, m'lud.
R.
Careful!
Anything you say can and most probably will be used against you! ;-D
P.S: What other merits are there to compare between two lossless
formats than the other aspects? That sort of goes without saying..
For long term storage
Robin Bowes;169007 Wrote:
geraint smith wrote:
If only FLAC worked with iTunes (or vice versa), or else that there
were another music ripping/tagging/labelling all-in-one product for
Mac
OSX that was as easy, and worked as well as, iTunes. But it doesn't,
and
there isn't - or if
tomjtx;169120 Wrote:
Robin,
Do you have a way to easily convert ALAC to FLAC?
I am very much plug and play re computers and I only know how to push
the button the software tells me to push.
I would like to try FLAC and I think it could be a good idea to have my
files backed up to FLAC
tomjtx wrote:
Robin,
Do you have a way to easily convert ALAC to FLAC?
ALAC, I mean, alas no.
You may be able to do it with Foobar2000, but I suspect you're on a Mac.
dbPoweramp can do it, but again, that's Pc-based.
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t49757.html
totoro;169128 Wrote:
DBPoweramp will do it for a whole tree. I recently did it. I _did_ have
a problem with some files that I ripped after my most recent itunes
update. Some of these I _was_ able to transcode using foobar's
converter. Others I had to re-rip. This makes me wonder a bit about
I'm on 7.0.2.16 now. Sorry, but I don't actually remember what version I
upgraded from.
The dbpoweramp problem was a little mysterious to me. I used the file
selector, started it up, saw it working ok, and went away. When I came
back and looked at the log file, I found that dbpoweramp had been
I bought a third generation iPod as soon as the product was released.
The experience put me off Apple for life. I am now almost
psychopathically averse to anything white with rounded corners (yes,
even my fridge gives me the shakes).
MC
--
ModelCitizen
Now what?
Transporter Naim NAP 250
and the iPhone looks neat. I wonder how the handheld or nokia skins
would work well on it?
--
Matt B
Matt
.flac - SlimServer 6.5.1 2 - Linux ClarkConnect 4.0 - Shuttle SK21G
- SB3 - Moth passive pre-amp monoblocs - ProAC Tablette II
Matt B;168668 Wrote:
and the iPhone looks neat. I wonder how the handheld or nokia skins
would work well on it?
They should work well - it's a full Web 2.0 browser.
Mind you $499 plus 2 year contract to Cingular for a remote is a bit
steep! (yes I know it does a lot more than that for the
The sooner Apple takes over the word the better...did anyone see Bill
Gates speech at the CES. That guy makes my skin crawl!!
--
Andyoz
Andyoz's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4864
View this
Andyoz;168671 Wrote:
The sooner Apple takes over the word the better...did anyone see Bill
Gates speech at the CES. That guy makes my skin crawl!!
Steve Jobs is as bad as Bill. But at least with Apple, you get great
design.
--
tomsi42
SB3, Rotel RC-1070/RB-1070, dynaBel Exact, Kimber
Since Apple refused to honor the warranty on my son's Ipod Nano, citing
external damage for a barely perceptible depression on the back of the
unit, there will be no more Apple for us. Based upon the numerous
apologies from the Apple CSR, it is clear that I am not alone. If the
device cannot
I think both the TV and iPhone miss the mark. There are numerous
solutions that do what the AppleTV does, and the iPhone is way too
expensive for what it does. Although, I agree with the above poster
that a nice SlimServer skin would make it more appealing, in that it
could be used as a Wi-Fi
I think it looks like it could be a pretty cool product. The real power
of it is in the easy syncing built in. I do have a couple of questions
that I want answered before I drop $300 for it:
1. Can you have video out the HDMI at the same time as audio out the
Optical connector? Most TVs only
But when you calm down, is it really good value? What does it do that a
£300 laptop won't - and that will be much more flexible.
What we need are home servers that work like blade servers, happy to
feed thin client devices. Get wifi thin clients around the house,
doing audio, video, games and
adamslim;168711 Wrote:
Given the lack of support for content in the way I want it - my
recordings from my PCTV card, my FLAC files and my games - I shan't be
bothering. It's nice, however, that Apple is going in this direction.
Agreed. When I first heard about Apple's new product, I
Pray, do expound upon how FLAC is superior to Apple Lossless (which is
not lossy)? Or AIFF, which is not lossy and uncompressed, for that
matter?
One point people seem to be missing is this: Apple has moved forward
with 802.11n. All these problems with Squeezebox/Transporter
drop-outs?
PS,
It galls me a bit that people complain about DRM protections and make
Apple out to be this corporate monster.
This is a matter of intellectual property rights. You know, just like
that the law that bars you from making copies of CDs and selling them
to your friends. Of course, there is
lafayette;168783 Wrote:
Pray, do expound upon how FLAC is superior to Apple Lossless (which is
not lossy)? Or AIFF, which is not lossy and uncompressed, for that
matter?
FLAC works on all major and most minor platforms. It is Free and Open.
Apple Lossless is not. (I say most because there
lafayette;168786 Wrote:
It galls me a bit that people complain about DRM protections and make
Apple out to be this corporate monster.
If the shoe fits, as they say..
This is a matter of intellectual property rights.
That's where you and I part paths: it's about my property, not
lafayette;168786 Wrote:
This is a matter of intellectual property rights. You know, just like
that the law that bars you from making copies of CDs and selling them
to your friends.
Your post started so well, but while I was hoping you were going to go
into a long winded speech about
ezkcdude;168698 Wrote:
I think both the TV and iPhone miss the mark. There are numerous
solutions that do what the AppleTV does, and the iPhone is way too
expensive for what it does. Although, I agree with the above poster
that a nice SlimServer skin would make it more appealing, in that it
benthos;168790 Wrote:
If the shoe fits, as they say..
That's where you and I part paths: it's about my property, not Apple's,
or anyone else's.
Goody for you. I like your solution though, as that's precisely what I
do. And when I say that FLAC is lossless, the only reason I
tomjtx wrote:
benthos;168790 Wrote:
That's where you and I part paths: it's about my property, not Apple's,
or anyone else's.
I completely agree with you that it's my property once I buy it. This
whole DRM thing should be a major consumer
concern...but most people seem to
56 matches
Mail list logo
